Big Bang Theory

[Edwardo Piet]

Yes, non-existence cannot exist.

So we agree there.

Yet the physical Universe had an absolute physical beginning to it's existence.

Unless existence has always been physical?

Therefore, something non-physical (Immaterial, Timeless, and spaceless existed) as the prime causal agency.

I agree that non-physicality is possible, but I don't see why it is necessary. I agree that spacelessness may be possible but I also don't see why that is necessary either.

As for something timeless, I believe that that is nonsensical. Timelessness never exists. If timelessness ever exists then there is a time that it exists and it is therefore time itself and not timelessness.

The entire physical Universe began. Science has fully established this.

Materialism is not the same as physicality. Matter had a beginning but that's different to physicality according to science, last I checked. Matter had a beginning but energy itself may not have had a beginning, and energy itself isn't the same as matter but it's still physical.

Anyway, let's assume you're right about physicality necessarily coming from non-physicality anyway, rather than physicality always existing. Well, non-physicality exists, but so what? That just means that the physical sciences, and therefore almost certainly all sciences (unless somehow in the far future a branch of science that can detect non-physicality is developed) cannot detect this non-physicality. Well, once again: So what? Science can't detect this non-physicality but that doesn't mean anything supernatural, spiritual, miraculous or godly exists.

Atheists are in denial to deny the absolute physical beginning verified by Big Bang - or pretend it has no relevance in evidence.

If the big bang really does necessarily mean the creation of physicality, how does that do anything for the supernatural?