(April 26, 2016 at 9:59 am)Constable Dorfl Wrote: From what I can gather Steve's argument (roadrunner doesn't go so far to actually forward an arguments, he just snipes at other posters) ...
I made much the same arguments as Steve; I gave up, because I don't think that people want to understand or be able to even correctly state them even. And in spite the lack of knowledge of another poster these attributes of God where not made up Ad Hoc. Jews and Christians have believed them for millennia, as they where revealed in God's word throughout history. This is however separate from the evidence being talked about here. The evidence points to a beginning of the Universe. I would bet that most of the cosmologist mentioned in the thread so far, would agree with a ~14 Billion year age for the universe. The differences come in the theoretically based (not evidential at this time) views of if there was something prior. There are a number of different models, and you will see cosmologist speak pros and cons to different ones at different times. Most of them have issues, and people have their favorites. It's not new... many scientists have struggled to get around the consequences of the Universe having a beginning for quite some time.
There is a logical argument against an infinite regress of causes and a actual infinite. Therefore there is reason to surmise a first cause somewhere in the line. The Kalam Cosmological Argument simply states that the universe had a beginning, and therefore had a cause. The absurdity that follows in trying to avoid this, I think is both hilarious and sad.