Media

[bennyboy]

Harris Wrote:My question remains unchanged:
Were the scientific ideas conceivable without the universe?

bennyboy Wrote: Nope.

Is not the Cause of Universe greater than all scientific ideas?

You haven't shown the Universe to have been caused at all.

Indeed, Universe has come from “SOMEWHERE.” Is not it? Do you disagree?

Either everything that exists must have a cause, or some things do not need to have been caused. You say the Universe must come from "SOMEWHERE," but you do not demand that God must come from "SOMEWHERE." Therefore, it is possible that something may exist which does not come from "SOMEWHERE."

If something may be said to exist without needing to be created, then I would argue that conservation of energy/mass/etc. itself is a prime rule, and that the Universe doesn't come from somewhere.

POINT ONE:
According to the most credible cosmological model of physics “The Big Bang Model,” Universe has a BEGINNING. Physicists have developed this model based on the concept that Universe is EXPANDING which Hubble has discovered by means of “Redshift method” for which he earned a Nobel prize. On top of that the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation put the BEGINNING concept on an unequivocal empirical footing. So, Science says that Universe has a BEGINNING and Logic says that anything that has a BEGINNING has a CAUSE so Universe has a CAUSE and it is not UNCAUSED. LOGIC also says anything that has a BEGINNING has an END therefore, Universe is not ETERNAL either.

1) CAPS ARE ANNOYING. I can read-- you don't have to HIGHLIGHT the KEYWORDS for me.
2) The Big Bang singularity was timeless, in the same way that Allah is. Note this: Allah is not eternal, since eternity relies on a framework with infinite time. But if you want to call timelessness "eternity," then the Big Bang is still a better fit for cosmogony than Allah is. I predict you will special plead: "But who MADE the Big Bang singularity?" And I'll say "But who MADE Allah." And you'll go on about how Allah doesn't need to be made.

Get this. . . it doesn't matter what model of reality you want to favor or contest. Your causal argument fails to special pleading-- the idea that everything must be caused, but not God. So. . . not everything DOES need to be created, and the argument is self-defeating.

Didn't read the rest of your text wall. I'll go back to some of it later if I have a lot of free time.