KingEbukasBlog:


Let's hope Dalaman does not evade the question

KingEbukasBlog:
I don't understand the taciturnity of the atheists here I need their contributions . Its second page already and its been untenable arguments from them

KingEbukasBlog:



Let's address this logically , no need for all this .

So please answer these questions

1. If "A" causes or brings "B" into existence , is "A" the creator of "B" ?

If yes :

2. Can we deduce the properties of A from the observation of B ?

If no

Why ?

Please I need a perspicuous response .

Muafrika2:
Atheists can't answer that. They are programed to ask

felixomor:


You refered to something u can "point to" if i am not mistaking?

Or is your "point to" metaphorical/literal?

KingEbukasBlog:
I don't understand the taciturnity of the atheists here I need their contributions . Its second page already and its been untenable arguments from them

KingEbukasBlog:


Dalaman

If life on earth should be obliterated , how can we tell that intelligent life existed on earth ?

dalaman:


A car produces fumes from its exhaust. But can we deduce the properties of a car from. The exhaust fumes?

I want direct evidence for God. Everything I know has direct evidence on one way or the other. Why not God. Why is there no direct incontrovertible and objective evidence for God?

It can also tell you IF THE AIR FILTER IS CLOGGED OR IF THERE IS A FAULT IN YOUR SENSORS OR FUEL INJECTORS OR FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR.

It can also tell you IF YOU ARE USING A TURBO CHARGED ENGINE AND IF THE TURBO CHARGER HAS GONE BAD e.t.c

All that from just a cars exhaust fume

I am sure you know that a car that has a turbo charger is a high end vehicle and high end vehicles are usually fitted with comfort enhancing gizmos...


Dalaman...Next....

KingEbukasBlog:


Please note that the

a. Universe creating itself is a logical absurdity .

b. Infinite regress of causes is illogical and impossible

With that sorted out here's the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God

1. Whatever begins to exist must have a cause

2. The universe began to exist

3. Therefore , the universe has a cause

Do you agree that this is a tenable argument for the existence of God ?

dalaman:


A car produces fumes from its exhaust. But can we deduce the properties of a car from. The exhaust fumes?

I want direct evidence for God. Everything I know has direct evidence on one way or the other. Why not God. Why is there no direct incontrovertible and objective evidence for God?

dalaman:


Based on evidence left behind that will indicate that intelligent life once existed. Like skeletons.

taurus25:


Absurdity based on how you understand things?....or a conclusively proven fact?

taurus25:
True to an extent....but not entirely correct.

taurus25:
As far as we know.

taurus25:
This would be true if and only if cause and effect holds both at the most fundamental level of existence and the observed level of existence, and apparently current scientific knowledge suggests that cause and effect do not hold at all levels.

taurus25:
These are not in any way sufficient for assumption of a deity, save for confirmation that one does exist

dalaman:


"Point to" isn't literal.

4everGod:


They are huddling now. Trying to decide on the best manner of approach while others are sifting through google at this point

felixomor:
Even the best atheist professors have not been able to demonstrate how logic gave birth to atheism.

KingEbukasBlog:


Please note that the

a. Universe creating itself is a logical absurdity .

b. Infinite regress of causes is illogical and impossible

c. Smolin’s Evolutionary Cosmology is mere speculation

With that sorted out here's the Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God

1. Whatever begins to exist must have a cause

2. The universe began to exist

3. Therefore , the universe has cause

Do you agree that this is a tenable argument for the existence of God ?

KingEbukasBlog:


To the best of my knowledge it was hedonism , ignorance , rebellion , deceit and ignorance that gave birth to atheism .

jimmyjenseng:


The Cosmological Arguments which is one of Thomas Aquinas' Proofs is baseless and vacuous.

The above argument relies upon the idea of a regress and invoke God to terminate it. It makes the entirely assumptions that God himself is immune to the regress.

It's more el cheapo to conjure up, say, a "big bang singularity", or some physical concept as yet unknown. Calling it God is at best unhelpful and at worst noxiously misleading.

jimmyjenseng:


The Cosmological Arguments which is one of Thomas Aquinas' Proofs is baseless and vacuous.

The above argument relies upon the idea of a regress and invoke God to terminate it. It makes the entirely assumptions that God himself is immune to the regress.

KingEbukasBlog:


Why is it not entirely correct .

How can you confirm that a creator does not exist based on conjectures ?

DoctorAlien:


Infinite regress is logically impossible.

Moreover, GOD created the universe, which is made up of matter, space and time. Before the universe, time did not exist.

GOD must necessarily be uncreated because to suggest that He was created is to suggest that a time difference exists between the beginning of His existence and the beginning of the existence of His Creator. But time began with the universe. Therefore GOD is uncaused.

felixomor:


So you mean physical "point to" ?

Vanceastro:

And for God to create the universe there must be a TIME difference between the CAUSE(God) and the EFFECT(The Universe), and since there was no time before the universe... :|

DoctorAlien:


Time is a component of the universe - what the universe came with.

Before the universe came to be, it did not exist. It began to exist only when GOD brought the universe into existence.

So, essentially, GOD exists outside the universe(matter, space and time). Therefore He is eternal.

taurus25:


Everything is essentially a cause and an effect.
If we say for example that the horn from a car caused an accident, then the motion of everything everywhere is also a part of it. Everything leading to a final event can be classified as a cause. For example, lets say computers began to exist at a time. At what point in time or which action can we precisely say caused computers, because you have to break down every component that makes a computer and account for their causes.

At quatum mechanics, cause and effect as humans generally understand is completely obliterated. Experiment proves, incontrovertibly, that exact ideas of place and time required to make causation work simply do not exist. We can point to the physical effects which, taken as an aggregate, yield causation as an approximation, but only as an approximation. It works in common but simplified cases, not all cases.

The exact same way you can confirm a creator exits because of conjectures

Vanceastro:

Look at this man.
In your previous post you claimed that God could not have been caused because CAUSALITY requires TIME which didn't exist before the universe.
In the same way the universe could not have been caused because CAUSALITY requires TIME which didn't exist before the universe.

KingEbukasBlog:
DeSepiero

I see you .

Oya come ooo

Table your arguments to prove atheism is not illogical

dalaman:


When they say something isn't literal what does it mean?

KingEbukasBlog:


God is timeless without the universe and time comes into being at the moment He creates the universe. This is simple