RE: Proving God Existence
March 27, 2013 at 3:29 am
(This post was last modified: March 27, 2013 at 3:43 am by Muslim Scholar.)
(March 26, 2013 at 10:23 am)MysticKnight Wrote: MuslimScholar....You are confusing yourself
If universe was static for a period of time, then I would say it does need an external force.
If it was however only not changing at time zero, but changed as soon as it got passed time zero, then why can't it be something internal to the universe that caused it to change? Why can't it be set to change at time zero...so it as if it's already in motion/changing, just that time zero of course would be it's initial state.
Simply repeating your premises doesn't make sense. You have to explain why the other explanation is not logical.
forget about the scientific meaning of time
1-The Universe was not changing
2- The universe is changing
It cannot change by itself unless it is always changing
Your statement is just playing with words, the creation of time itself can be the trigger which means the same thing.
(March 26, 2013 at 7:41 am)pocaracas Wrote:God(March 26, 2013 at 7:15 am)Muslim Scholar Wrote: The answer is very simple, just include that empty space (or whatever) in UTalk about moving goalposts!!
then U(including empty space) had a start as well
An external force must start this empty space to change.
Empty space had a start? What was there before there was nothing?
If there was nothing, it will remain like that forever
Existence is the opposite of Non-Existence
Existence must be valid before and after
However the Universe itself can be valid or not
but to change its state an external force (withing existence) must change it.
Let's add a statement (or another view)
The number of events (any event) must be finite (just use the same proof)
So there must be a first event
This event (whatever is it) will need an "eventer" (doer)
This doer is the creator of the first event and he must be external to the universe ............................
The whole proof is based on the definition of Paradox or "Mutually exclusive propositions" or "disjoint"
If you are going to refuse this only premises, you need to prove it!
Or just assume that this proof is not for you!!!!!!!!!!!!