INDISPUTABLE Rational Proof That God Exists (Or Existed)

[gnostic]

Your logic says that nothing could have exited before time.
Yet scientist agree that time came to existence and moreover that things did exist before it.

Sources, please?

Which scientist(s) say that?

I believed that you have seriously misunderstood the Big Bang model. The theory doesn't actually say that time didn't exist before the initial expansion (BB).

And BTW, I have only stated that ETERNITY can't exist without time. I didn't say the universe or god exist in eternity.

You seemed to be saying that are no time in eternity, which technically, is not true.

Let me clarify what I mean in post 196:

Trying to measure infinity or eternity would be futile and meaningless, because the number of years would never end. However, that doesn't mean time doesn't exist just because of eternity.

There is a huge difference between NO TIME and INFINITY amount of time (ie eternity).

Do you understand now?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If before existence was nothing, and God created existence, is God nothing?

 

[steeltoes]

Whether God is an all-knowing being, or a thoughtless being non-existent anymore, something had to start the first thing, the first science, and science cannot and will not ever explain the start of science, just as something cannot create itself. Before anything, there was nothing. Something transcendent, existent before anything, had to create the first something. That, we call God.

I decide if God exists or not, it is my decision regardless of what anyone else says.

 

[1robin]

Sources, please?

Which scientist(s) say that?

I believed that you have seriously misunderstood the Big Bang model. The theory doesn't actually say that time didn't exist before the initial expansion (BB).

And BTW, I have only stated that ETERNITY can't exist without time. I didn't say the universe or god exist in eternity.

You seemed to be saying that are no time in eternity, which technically, is not true.

Let me clarify what I mean in post 196:

Trying to measure infinity or eternity would be futile and meaningless, because the number of years would never end. However, that doesn't mean time doesn't exist just because of eternity.

There is a huge difference between NO TIME and INFINITY amount of time (ie eternity).

Do you understand now?

Let me lend F0uad a hand here. The idea of a finite universe is gaining more and more ground. Steady state is long deceased and multiverse or oscillating verses have no evidence or even any potential for any. As an example of what this idea relies upon I will give you the most prominent arguemnt in cosmology today.

Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin’s Past-Finite Universe


The debate about the universe and time is pretty much over and I would suggest you jump ship before it goes under completely. In addition to this I can provide inescapable philisophic and cosmological arguments that make an infinate universe impossible.

 

[1robin]

If before existence was nothing, and God created existence, is God nothing?

That was quite silly. There was nothing that resides within and is dependent on the universe that existed "before" the universe. Based on the latest cosmology no universe on the average expanding can be infinite. It must be finite. Therefor the universe (Time, matter, energy, and space) began at some point. Anything that has a beginning has a cause. This cause by necessity be omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, timeless, space less, non-material and personal. That only leaves abstract concepts and a disembodied mind. Abstract concepts are causally impotent. The number 3 never made anything. In fact natural law has never caused anything to exist. That leaves only a mind. The above characteristics were given for God in the Bible by men long long before they would have any idea what characteristics to invent to fake a God that explained the universe. In summary God is identical in description to whatever caused the universe. Your claim has no relevance or meaning. It is only a semantic shell game without any application beyond use as a paper shield against faith.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The debate about the universe and time is pretty much over and I would suggest you jump ship before it goes under completely. In addition to this I can provide inescapable philisophic and cosmological arguments that make an infinate universe impossible.

I used to know a guy who claimed he had proof that he was abducted by aliens on a regular basis.

 

[1robin]

I used to know a guy who claimed he had proof that he was abducted by aliens on a regular basis.

Cool, but what input does that have? I am too busy today making things science invented actually work, which is a full time effort, so I will not be able to respond sarcasm, red herrings or whatever this was. I only have time in between making oscillating rubidium atoms that are not oscillating change their mind so my lab will function, to answer posts that have a meaningfull impact on the issues.

 

[Ouroboros]

Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin’s Past-Finite Universe

Then you might be interested in this article: Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin’s Past-Finite Universe « Debunking William Lane Craig

The way I see it is that space-time and everything that exists is fractal.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Cool, but what input does that have? I am too busy today making things science invented actually work, which is a full time effort, so I will not be able to respond sarcasm, red herrings or whatever this was. I only have time in between making oscillating rubidium atoms that are not oscillating change their mind so my lab will function, to answer posts that have a meaningfull impact on the issues.

Your inability to see the relevance of my comment is unsurprising. But thanks for making a post letting me know you don't have time to make posts. It all fits quite nicely.

 

[Ouroboros]

...I only have time in between making oscillating rubidium atoms that are not oscillating change their mind so my lab will function...

If you have oscillating rubidium atoms, then you have time. Get it? LOL!

 

[1robin]

If you have oscillating rubidium atoms, then you have time. Get it? LOL!

Yep, not bad. I was goin to say they only indicate time but that would not be correct. If they are moving then duration exists. They at this time are not doing anything. I think their oven is broken or in revolt.

 

[1robin]

Then you might be interested in this article: Borde, Guth, and Vilenkin’s Past-Finite Universe « Debunking William Lane Craig

The way I see it is that space-time and everything that exists is fractal.

It is not Craig's science. I have read that site before and it is an argument against what craig uses the theory for, not the theory. In fact the theory is so profound simply because it by passes all the areas where traditional arguments occur. It is still true no matter what answers to those contentions turn out to be. It is one elegant and well founded idea with almost no weakness.

 

[Ouroboros]

Yep, not bad. I was goin to say they only indicate time but that would not be correct. If they are moving then duration exists. They at this time are not doing anything. I think their oven is broken or in revolt.

Maybe they're just tired and need a little motivation.

 

[gnostic]

Let me lend F0uad a hand here. The idea of a finite universe is gaining more and more ground. Steady state is long deceased and multiverse or oscillating verses have no evidence or even any potential for any.

What make you think that I accept or support either the Steady State model or the Multiverse or Oscillating Verse model?

I simply stated that f0uad don't understand the Big Bang theory nor understand my question of how eternity is related to time. So your reply is just attack on the straw-man.

My question to f0uad is only about his definition on "eternity" only, don't match up any definition that I''ve come across.

 

[1robin]

What make you think that I accept or support either the Steady State model or the Multiverse or Oscillating Verse model?

I didn't, but those are the two other options people that reject a finite universe normally fall in. It was a general comment on the issue not you.

I simply stated that f0uad don't understand the Big Bang theory nor understand my question of how eternity is related to time. So your reply is just attack on the straw-man.

Big bang theory is irrelevant to the God debate given the theory I presented. That was it's purpose, to reliably indicate whether the universe is eternal or finite despite most of the things fought over. It is sort of like knowing that life only comes from life so Godless evolution is not even an option given the truth of that. I do not care what happened in the Big Bang, that iron clad theory only needs a universe that is expanding on average to be true. It gets the debate out of the weeds. If you prefer the weeds then ignore the theory.

My question to f0uad is only about his definition on "eternity" only, don't match up any definition that I''ve come across.

I thought it was about the character of the universe. If you are discussing something else then ignore my post.

 

[1robin]

Maybe they're just tired and need a little motivation.

So do I. I do not know what the problem was they just began to cooperate. They clock everything else so when they sit it out nothing works. Technology, got to love it.

 

[Ouroboros]

Technology, got to love it.

Yeah. I know. I've had so many problems with computers, internet, tv, phone, you name it that last two years. More than I ever had in the previous ten. Urgh.

Maybe I'm being punished by God...:sad:

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah. I know. I've had so many problems with computers, internet, tv, phone, you name it that last two years. More than I ever had in the previous ten. Urgh.
Maybe I'm being punished by God...:sad:

Or the robot devil....

 

[1robin]

Yeah. I know. I've had so many problems with computers, internet, tv, phone, you name it that last two years. More than I ever had in the previous ten. Urgh.

Maybe I'm being punished by God...:sad:

Why do consumers only tolerate a high rate of malfunction in computer related equipment? Blender better work, weed whacker better work, lighter better work, tv better work but the computer not working is just accepted. I got a half million dollar radar computer controlled proccesor meant for an F-15 the other day to replace a defunct one and it did not work either. I called our AF guy and he said that was normal. What?

 

[gnostic]

I didn't, but those are the two other options people that reject a finite universe normally fall in.

I don't reject a finite universe. And even it was the case, it doesn't mean I have to accept Steady State model or the Multiverse model(s).

The Steady State model has been refuted as early as the mid-60s with the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), so I don't know why you even bother bringing up the Steady State theory.

Multiverse theory/theories are nothing more than hypotheses - all of which, are unverified conjectures - hence not really a theory. At best, the Multiverse models fall under the realm of theoretical physics, but at worse, some of these models are nothing more than science fiction. Again, I don't know why you would bring this up.

As to the oscillating universe or cyclic theory, nicknamed as the Big Bounce, is nothing more than theoretical model, also unverified (no evidences).

Although I like to keep an open mind, I'll only accept theory that are supported by evidences, and it is more than theoretical model. (Theoretical physics are fields that largely only based on mathematical models, not on evidences.)

Currently, astronomers & astrophysicists only have the technology to see 13.7 billion light year of the finite universe from now. They can't see beyond that horizon, so astrophysicists can only speculate or formulate hypotheses, but they don't know.