You have no Case for Christ until you can Prove God exists

[brandx1138]

Instead of quibbling over scripture and when, where or if Jesus said what, let's start at the beginning. Christians claim that Jesus is God, but who is this "God"? It means nothing to say that Jesus is God if you cannot define, locate, detect or explain God. So who would like to be the first to answer this call:

Prove God exists.

First you must do that, then we can talk about Jesus. If God cannot be proven to exist, then this whole forum is a waste of everyone's time.

[chibiq]

To use the method someone used early with the grandpa thing, we get this:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe had a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

If you disagree with this, I question your sanity, because I personally can't remember the last time a universe began out of nothing in my living room.

I question my own sanity all the time, but apart from that, how do you know those premises are true?

If the universe was infinitely old (which would have to be the case if it had no beginning), everything would have happened already, which includes the paradox that indeed everything would have ended already also.

If there's no beginning, there's no limit to the past (a limit would be a beginning), and that sir, just does not fly.

[Beto]

To use the method someone used early with the grandpa thing, we get this:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe had a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

If you disagree with this, I question your sanity, because I personally can't remember the last time a universe began out of nothing in my living room.

I question my own sanity all the time, but apart from that, how do you know those premises are true?

If the universe was infinitely old (which would have to be the case if it had no beginning), everything would have happened already, which includes the paradox that indeed everything would have ended already also.

If there's no beginning, there's no limit to the past (a limit would be a beginning), and that sir, just does not fly.

Saying the universe had no beginning is not the same as saying "it has always been". The first just says "time" is irrelevant. "Time" might have no meaning outside the experience of the concious mind. There is no "time" below the Planck scale. The universe is everything, including below the Planck scale, right? How does that figure into your reasoning?

[McCulloch]

The modern scientific consensus agrees that the universe had a beginning (see: Big Bang Theory).

To use the method someone used early with the grandpa thing, we get this:

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe had a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

If you disagree with this, I question your sanity, because I personally can't remember the last time a universe began out of nothing in my living room.

In other words, if it can happen, if it takes no ingredients, why doesn't it happen all the time?

How do you know that it does not? Each universe would contain its own spacetime continuum and not interfere with the other universes.

So what do we have.. an effect (the universe). And the cause?

And from this argument, what can you know about this first cause? How do you make the jump from this amorphous first cause to the God of the Christians?

[Hawkins]

It makes no difference to ask Isaac Newton to define what gravity is before he started his research. That approach is totally uncalled for. As a matter of fact, Newton discovered his laws of gravity before he knew what gravity actually is, which remains unknown even at this moment.

Most scientific results are from your sense of the possibility by observations and speculations to start with, carried on by faith during the research till fruitful results are obtained. Sciense is more fruitful in that the subjects of research is physical.



So it's no wrong to assume that God exists, then seek Him out with your faith.


Second, actually it's no need to prove that God exist at all,

Don't prove physically that God exists

that almost sums up what the whole Bible would like to say, think about that (indepth wisdom is required).

[ken1burton]

Time? There is no such thing as outside time, Let alone a hundred different times. At any given moment, all matter, regardless of what Universe you want to put it in, have events or movements. Everything what changes now sets up the events to change from that point, then to the next point, all movement keeps going. To the next moment no matter how quick you want the next one counted.

And God also is stuck with us on this. He is not outside time either. He can move a sundial back, But it went to 12, then after that went backwards to 11:45 (how fast was not calculated, but does have figures) and then the second time went from 11:45 to 12.

All the events to all movement everywhere did not get removed from today, to yesterday noon to start again from there, having what had already come to pass, just disappear.

It is as dumb as no time in a black hole? Is not things changing? Is not more Matter falling in? Is not it’s mass increasing, every moment?

Ken

[bernee51]

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe had a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

If you disagree with this, I question your sanity, because I personally can't remember the last time a universe began out of nothing in my living room.

I disagree with this. And I question your sanity if you expect a universe to pop up in your lounge room.

There is no reason why the universe, in some form or another, has not always and will always exist. The BB theory posits an explanation for the presence of the universe as we perceive it. Nothing more nothing less. You Premise 2. is unproved and unprovable - ergo your conclusion is fallacious.

In other words, if it can happen, if it takes no ingredients, why doesn't it happen all the time?

It would appear that the BB happened in the space of a Planck second (i.e pretty darn quickly) Unless the conditions are right this event would not result in the manifestation of a universe. IOW it could be happening all the time and we don't even notice it.

Now imagine me doing the same a million times (ignore the time restraint), and you still wouldn't get our universe. The universe is a 1 in 10.. to the power of 10123. To put that number in perspective, you can't write it on paper. There wouldn't be enough trees, and it wouldn't fit in the universe. Considering the number of atoms there are thought to be in the universe (10 to the power of 78), there aren't even enough atoms in the universe to write this number out on!

I love these attempts at the probability of the universe, life and everything.

I assume you are 'here' i.e. you exist. What is the probability of you, the exact genetic you existing. Lets see. I assume for this you had a mother and a father. The average woman has 3000 ova in her lifetime. The average number of sperm in an ejaculation is some 300 million. As a result of the process of meiosis all sperm are not identical. So for just that one ejaculation the chances of you being you are around 1 x 10^11. Yet you ar ehere...isn't that amazing!

The odds get even worse when if you were to take into account all the time you dad ejaculated and didn't produce 'you'.

Forgetting that it had to have a cause, how could a blindfolded singularity shoot an arrow made of JUST the right materials in JUST the right order in JUST the right amount of time to set forth the universe as it is now?

I could have happened an infinite number of times before it got it right.

My answer? To go back to the coin thing, I believe the universe is rigged, just like the coin more than likely was (except the universe is, to put it mildly, more likely to be rigged than the coin is).

But not quite as 'rigged' as 'you ' existing?

[chibiq]

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe had a beginning.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.

If you disagree with this, I question your sanity, because I personally can't remember the last time a universe began out of nothing in my living room.

I disagree with this. And I question your sanity if you expect a universe to pop up in your lounge room.

There is no reason why the universe, in some form or another, has not always and will always exist. The BB theory posits an explanation for the presence of the universe as we perceive it. Nothing more nothing less. You Premise 2. is unproved and unprovable - ergo your conclusion is fallacious.

In other words, if it can happen, if it takes no ingredients, why doesn't it happen all the time?

It would appear that the BB happened in the space of a Planck second (i.e pretty darn quickly) Unless the conditions are right this event would not result in the manifestation of a universe. IOW it could be happening all the time and we don't even notice it.

Now imagine me doing the same a million times (ignore the time restraint), and you still wouldn't get our universe. The universe is a 1 in 10.. to the power of 10123. To put that number in perspective, you can't write it on paper. There wouldn't be enough trees, and it wouldn't fit in the universe. Considering the number of atoms there are thought to be in the universe (10 to the power of 78), there aren't even enough atoms in the universe to write this number out on!

I love these attempts at the probability of the universe, life and everything.

I assume you are 'here' i.e. you exist. What is the probability of you, the exact genetic you existing. Lets see. I assume for this you had a mother and a father. The average woman has 3000 ova in her lifetime. The average number of sperm in an ejaculation is some 300 million. As a result of the process of meiosis all sperm are not identical. So for just that one ejaculation the chances of you being you are around 1 x 10^11. Yet you ar ehere...isn't that amazing!

The odds get even worse when if you were to take into account all the time you dad ejaculated and didn't produce 'you'.

Forgetting that it had to have a cause, how could a blindfolded singularity shoot an arrow made of JUST the right materials in JUST the right order in JUST the right amount of time to set forth the universe as it is now?

I could have happened an infinite number of times before it got it right.

My answer? To go back to the coin thing, I believe the universe is rigged, just like the coin more than likely was (except the universe is, to put it mildly, more likely to be rigged than the coin is).

But not quite as 'rigged' as 'you ' existing?

I've said before, in order for the universe to be eternally old, everything possible would've had to have happened by now, because if it didn't, there would be a timeline, and a timeline needs a beginning. And it couldnt've happened "an infinite number of times before it got it right", because if it happened an infinite number of times, there would be no "before" because it would've taken "forever" to reach the time it got it right, and apparently "forever" hasn't happened yet because things are still happening.

[Beto]

I've said before, in order for the universe to be eternally old, everything possible would've had to have happened by now, because if it didn't, there would be a timeline, and a timeline needs a beginning.

I tried to address that in post 42, but you haven't answered. I'd like your opinion on it.

[chibiq]

I've said before, in order for the universe to be eternally old, everything possible would've had to have happened by now, because if it didn't, there would be a timeline, and a timeline needs a beginning.

I tried to address that in post 42, but you haven't answered. I'd like your opinion on it.

Saying the universe had no beginning is not the same as saying "it has always been". The first just says "time" is irrelevant. "Time" might have no meaning outside the experience of the concious mind. There is no "time" below the Planck scale. The universe is everything, including below the Planck scale, right? How does that figure into your reasoning?

Planck scale, planck time, a dimension that's so small that time itself ceases to exist as we know it, right? I've read a few theories about it, and as far as I can tell, nothing I've read about it says that there's no beginning. As a matter of fact, there's a unit of time that's actually made just for it, called "Planck Time". It is theorized to be the smallest unit of measurement of time that's possible, even in principle (in other words, by definition, it's absolutely the shortest unit of time, regardless if someone tries to make a shorter unit).

Taking all that into account, since it too has a time frame, there had to be a beginning to it, else eternity would be the rule and everything (including the end of everything) would've happened by now.



Just a little edit to clear something up, I believe this discussion is to give a case for a creator/God. I'm trying to start from the beginning. Here's a list of requirements that I think we could all agree on for the need of an ambiguous God:

1. A need for a beginning of everything
2. A need for a cause of this beginning
3. A need for this cause to be a creator with a consciousness
4. A need for this creator to be intelligent (not a kid that accidentally kicked his paints over and created the Mona Lisa)

[Beto]

Taking all that into account, since it too has a time frame, there had to be a beginning to it, else eternity would be the rule and everything (including the end of everything) would've happened by now.

You insist on this point because you fail (refuse?) to acknowledge that whether a quantum event happened, and when it happened, are fundamentally different, and arguing about the beginning of a Universe that, hypothetically, emerges from a quantum field, becomes much more complicated.

Just a little edit to clear something up, I believe this discussion is to give a case for a creator/God. I'm trying to start from the beginning. Here's a list of requirements that I think we could all agree on for the need of an ambiguous God:

1. A need for a beginning of everything
2. A need for a cause of this beginning
3. A need for this cause to be a creator with a consciousness
4. A need for this creator to be intelligent (not a kid that accidentally kicked his paints over and created the Mona Lisa)

To me this seems to be what you think you need to feel confortable.