I actually think his first statement was correct. I did put forth a false dichotomy.
I don't think it was, though I was commenting on his ''sh'' word more than anything.
I had said there were only two options, and of course, if we were to speculate, not having a shred of evidence to support the concept, the universe very well might have been expanding and contracting for all eternity. However, that would not be any sort of indication that God is non-existent.
In fact that would solve a problem I have with "creation", which is, if God created the universe, whether it be 6,000 or 15 billion years ago, what was He doing for the previous eternity of His existence?
For me it is either intelligence or no intelligence; and if it is none, then it is luck and magic. The word 'eternal' actually means an ''aeon'' or ''age''. Though if we stop with the modern way of thinking, it would not be possible. I agree with some that everything complex comes from something more simple, and that is God, the development of what we think of as God. This is shown in the universe coming from the big bang; it is singular and simple compared with what is after it.
If you are saying that it is possible that the universe comes from something simple, then why would it ever bring about life? Chaos, no matter how many times you bring it about, brings about chaos. It does not bring about order. If you throw a pile of bricks out of a plane they will not at some point assemble into a house; no matter how many times you do it. We fool ourselves if we think it would; there has to be intelligence involved to have complex things. That is what we see in everything.
This is partly the reason that some like the multiverse (as I) as it improves the odds. Dawkins for example, does not seem to think that it needs to be infinite as a multiverse, only 'just enough'. The problem with an infinite universes doing an infinite amount of things is that one of them could have a God in it! Big problem. So he sticks with the slightly smaller model. And the other problem is, as God can be anywhere, he could be in this universe (as he could in any) and we see evidence of him in this one.
So the universe/multiverse cannot be expanding from something complex only something simple.
But whether many or one, why does it form into something complex that works? That makes no sense, how something that is chaos and random, becomes something that is not chaotic and is non-random. Yes chaos does in fact have patterns within it, but we have to ask, why? Again even chaos seems to want to order. why?
Everything is evolving-consciousness and works in replicative fractal patterns. This again is why we see the singularity of the big bang.
What God was doing before creation was evolving himself. What we see here is the physical side of that evolution that appears in physical terms, but is also in error. That consciousness is us, we are part of it, are it. God is the highest part of that, the highest part of us.
Even the universe itself has within it this self-organise principle. This is because it is trying to find its own Self. Once it is found, we see what we see, just a we are what we are. Without consciousness being involved, you have some form of energy that changes, and changes over and over again, and somehow, through sheer luck, turns into certain things, one of which is this universe and us. It is not logical (Mr Spock) to think that it would do that without intelligence. Why would energy (if I can call it that) change into something else incredibly diverse and complex? Consciousness developing in the mind first would make more sense, and then the ''word became flesh''.
God just IS. He has a simple side and a complex side, and this evolves from the simple. We return to this and become this, so we do the same.
Either way, it is something with or without intelligence. So it is intelligence of luck.
I will shut now eh.
I bet that is hard to swallow eh?