So I’m an atheist and I find her arguments to be flawed. Saying things must have a beginning and somehow a magical god is exempt from this rule because “magic” isn’t very convincing.
Science says that the universe had a beginning. Philosophy says that any beginning has to have a pre-existing cause. Since there was no space, time, or matter before the beginning of the universe, the cause had to be outside of all three. We choose to call that cause God.
That is the proof of the existence of God. Only that, not anything else about God.
But the answer of “we don’t really know” to me is a much more honest answer.
Call it God if you want, but that it doesn’t tell us anything about “god”.
Still begs the question, what created “god”. It’s an unanswerable question. Everything needs a beginning except for something we say doesn’t because again “magic” of some sort. I can come up with a different theory about how the universe expands and contracts and upon contracting that resets the universe and it’s been doing this “forever”. It doesn’t mean that this is at all true or accurate and that’s why I like the answer of “we don’t know”.
Here is the logic:
The universe had a beginning, as evidenced by the detection of the Big Bang.
Anything that begins to exist must have a cause.
Therefore, something caused the Big Bang. (and thus the universe)
Abstract things like numbers may be unchangeable and eternally the same, but they can't create anything. Only a personality can
If God is uncaused, (exists by nature), and is a personality
then God is eternal, timeless. and the creator.
You can read more about the logical steps here in William Lane Craig's book, On Guard.
So I’m an atheist and I find her arguments to be flawed. Saying things must have a beginning and somehow a magical god is exempt from this rule because “magic” isn’t very convincing.
Science says that the universe had a beginning. Philosophy says that any beginning has to have a pre-existing cause. Since there was no space, time, or matter before the beginning of the universe, the cause had to be outside of all three. We choose to call that cause God.
That is the proof of the existence of God. Only that, not anything else about God.
But the answer of “we don’t really know” to me is a much more honest answer.
Call it God if you want, but that it doesn’t tell us anything about “god”.
Still begs the question, what created “god”. It’s an unanswerable question. Everything needs a beginning except for something we say doesn’t because again “magic” of some sort. I can come up with a different theory about how the universe expands and contracts and upon contracting that resets the universe and it’s been doing this “forever”. It doesn’t mean that this is at all true or accurate and that’s why I like the answer of “we don’t know”.
It's confirmation bias and religion is full of it. They can't explain something so it must be their deity is an argument of convenience.
Here is the logic: The universe had a beginning, as evidenced by the detection of the Big Bang. Anything that begins to exist must have a cause. Therefore, something caused the Big Bang. (and thus the universe) Abstract things like numbers may be unchangeable and eternally the same, but they can't create anything. Only a personality can If God is uncaused, (exists by nature), and is a personality then God is eternal, timeless. and the creator.
You can read more about the logical steps here in William Lane Craig's book, On Guard.
She appears to be a thinker...and thinkers aren't parrots.
Sounds like you have buyer’s remorse and a lump in your throat. Why don’t you tell us what you think instead of being passive aggressive?