Im bored. No sports for me to bet on. How about a religion thread?

1. You mention the universe expanding and contracting, here you are sighting a theory of what is known as an oscilating universe. This is not physically possible and violates every law of physics as we know it.

Even if this were true, it would still create a scenario of infinite regress which is NOT pysically possible.

Let me lay this out again clearly.

To the ATHEISTS, everyone is saying that us Theists have an "imaginary friend in the sky",

If you want to put it this way, i dont think you realise what your atheistic beliefs are and how absurd they are.

1. The UNIVERSE began to exist. If you try to debunk this, you will have to debunk the following. Einsteins theory of relativity and Edwin Hubble have shown that the universe is EXPANDING and came from a point of singularity (the big bang) Furthermore, it was common belief and the atheists number 1 argument was that the universe was eternal (static), ie,ALWAYS existed. We now know this is not true.

Now, if the universe began to exist, IT MUST HAVE A CAUSE. If you can prove that ANYTHING CAN EXIST WITHOUT A CAUSE, THEN SHOW ME. There is no such thing.

When the universe began to exist, time, space and matter began to exist. Therefore the cause of the universe MUST be something outside of time, space and matter, ie Eternal, materialess.

Therefore, THE ATHEIST HAS BEEN BACKED INTO A CORNER IN BELIEVING THAT THE UNIVERSE CAME INTO EXISTENCE BY NOTHING, FROM NOTHING. Effectively, the atheist must believe that something can come from nothing.

And the atheist thinks the theist has an imaginary friend in the sky.........

If you want to claim that something can come from nothing, then oh boy, go ahead and believe that, but dont you for one minute think theists are deluded cause you dont know how you sound.

EVEN after Einstein researched he came to the conclusion that a God exists, even though he didnt believe it was a personal one.

Furthermore, Einstein in a formulae he developed INTENTIONALLY added a zero to it cause he couldnt face the fact that his research found a very strong sigb post to God. mathematicians later debunked his forumale and he admitted that he misleadingly added the zero to avoid God.

2. The fine tuning is a massive massive topic. Please take some time to look at this link. Please view it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYLHxcqJmoM

I dare you to watch this series, u will change your mind

For my last post in this thread.....

Rostos - you have done it again.  You go down a road of debate, present some "facts", and then draw a conclusion you present as the only conclusion - except it is logically incorrect.

If the universe came from nothing as you say, then how do you make the huge leap in to saying this proves the existence of god - and then further say YOUR god?  An atheist would say "we dont have the answer right now, but there are millions of possibilities, one of them being a creator, but we are not able with our current knowledge to say what the answer is".

None of us are saying something came from nothing, although that has as much credence as a god story.  It is one of many possible answers.  We say "I dont know".  100 years ago we didnt know a cellphone could exist, now we do.   1000 years ago we didnt know that the discovery of DNA could help solve some historical lineage details, now we do.  Obviously we do not have the knowledge of how the earth was formed, but maybe one day we will, and maybe we wont.

It is also the concept of probability and degree - just because your god story is one of the possibilities, it doesnt mean that it is the best possibility.  You make the incorrect assumption that it is the ONLY possibility.  Atheists subscribe to the thought that the most likely possibility is that your god story is incorrect, and it is more likely that we just dont know yet.

But none of this proves that atheists are wrong or that the god story is wrong.  But I am sure you are going to repeat yourself for the 50th time in this thread, the floor is yours.

In the interest of fact checking, please source the above.

atheist + rostos

in the matter of the first cause + primary begining. all parties are talking about the same identical force under two different names.

the person must have an a' to z' which after that, it is beyond clarity. you need to have a stopping point and that is, the z'. its impossible to have a logical discussion point unless all think between two objectives.

all power, all motion, all energy, are the result of degeneration. in the entire universe the opposite process is never seen. no where in physics do we see a natural tendency to build up from the simple to the complex.

no matter what any ones theory on creation maybe in the thread, you have to start with a universe already charged with a high grade energy, like a clock that has been wound up + started, and has been running down ever since.

if you dont believe that, you are denying the fundermental law of this universe. the logical question is who or what wound up the clock?

Q. in all the world how many different kinds of things are there?

A. the answer is the sum of all the elements on the periodic table.

take for example salt, which is two things... somebody took a piece a metal called sodium + a piece of gas called chloride + mixed the two together to produce the chemistry term sodium chloride. though, its common name is salt.

in water, a force put two pieces of gas called hydrogen, one piece of a gas called oxygen, mixed them together, thus made water.

air is always three things. seventy-nine pieces of a gas called nitrogen mixed with twenty-one pieces of a gas called oxygen with a tiny, tiny portion of carbonic gas, make up the simplest kind of air.

the whole world of mathematics revolves itself in two divisons. first we have the factors, that men call numerals. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 (9 factors in the whole world of mathematics). the factors have added to them the zero (0) for the convenience of multiplication.

with these ten-factors, combined with intelligence, we can slove all the problems of mathmatics. even the most intricate of problems.

mathematics are then predicated first upon factors, + secondly, intelligence to manipulate those factors. the science of figures is impossible without intelligence of a high order capable of making absolutely numeral combinations of the few factors.

the universe then... is a combination of factors on purely mathematical formula. these factors number the total you recieved in the sum of the elements on the periodic table.

factors alone cant be resolved into mathmatics, intelligence is more important in the arranging + juggerling these factors. the entire physical creation is a solved problem in mathematics. for these elements are combined in different proportions, to make up all the intricacy of the physical creation.

the same is true in the world of literature. twenty-six letters in the english alphabet. when these twenty-six letters are manipulated by intelligence of a sufficiently high order, literature is the result.

the twenty-six factors by themself remain dead. when they are combined with intelligence into orderly sequences, they then become a post #511 in vanzacks thread.

no matter what the expression or text of literature, there can be no literature untill there is intelligence directed to the manipulations of the factors.

the creator/ force has at the basis of his mathematics, the element figures sum total instead of 10. these things maybe arranged around again + again, into all of the marvelous + ponderable structures we call the universe. or, the creator has as his alphabet of creation, the sum total of all the elements in the form of letters at his disposal. as will be the case in the following exercise.

using four factors: r,t,s,a

we can arrange them into s.t.a.r  to create a massive luminous ball of plasma.

we can arrange them into r.a.t.s to create a long-tailed rodent.

the same set of factors but, extreme contrast. though, expressed with intelligence through a sequence of a single set of factors.

again we can arrange them into a.r.t.s to create a subdivision of culture.

whilst again into t.a.r.s to create modified pitch.

so with the factors r,t,s,a; we created star, rats, arts + tars by the use of the same identical factors we may express widely diverse conceptions.

the creator, who rostos gives witness to as god of the holy bible, took the elements of the periodic chart, the basic buliding blocks, and arranged them in various ways in order to create the manifestation of his wisdom that we call the universe.

You cant look at the arguments such as origins of the universe in isolation, but rather added in a collection of arguments.

The issue is this,

Our universe (or even if you want to show multi verses) cannot have an INFINTE regress. There is no such thing as infinity. This is mathemtacially proven, what is infinity minus infinity? Thats why infinity is a delusion.

You have to come to a point where there was NOTHING, i mean NOTHING (it is very hard to comprehend), but i mean, no space, time, matter and energy. We know these came into being when the universe began. THEREFORE something outside of these MUST be the cause. It cant be anything in terms of what we know to have caused it because you will then end up with an infinite regress.

The cause must be timeless, space, changeless, materialess.

You can describe that whatever you want, but when i add this argument in collection with the others, it shows a creator WHEN combined with other arguments.

2nd request.

Are you going to source this, or are we to assume you post things as facts that cant be sourced?

We have been through this.

Something cant come from nothing in this physical universe. The NATURALIST which is effectively what you are cannot prove that something comes from absolutely nothing.

Gods realm is in the supernatural (4th dimension) What do we know about the properties of the universe. You are effectively trying to apply a physical property or premise.

Look, at the end of the day, these 500 odd posts all count for nothing, cause

WE CANNOT PROVE PHYSICALLY OR DISPROVE PHYSICALLY GODS existence.

FACT.

But u better hope u made the right decision.