Conversion

[LukeMC]

By studying and collecting knowledge about the nature of the universe and natural phenomena, we can deduce logical conclusions and understand conceptual realities (e.g. as done in physics). Ultimately, this makes it possible to verify the existence of a necessary being after the effect, such as in the case of the argument from potentiality/actuality in my thread, which depends on empirical knowledge of the universe, or in the case of the Kalam cosmological argument (which someone else mentioned).

Okay, I've finally forced myself to drudge through those 3 pages on your thread. I now understand what you consider evidence.

Your actuality/potentiality argument misses a very important point. Nobody in the scientific community (or at least in physics) is proposing that the universe came into existence/was created/has a cause/etc. Nobody is proposing that causality was responsible for the universe coming into being. Causality can be seen merely as a property springing forth from this uncreated universe- the pure actuality. Time, causality, logic, truth and everything else you speak of could just as easily have sprung forth from the uncaused universe as from the uncaused god. The universe's uncreated existence alone could perfectly suit your argument without invoking a sentient creator who inspires authors and gives favours to football teams.

I dread to think what I've overlooked.