Ok here comes my refutation of the first point.
First, God is said to have knowledge of the future which then becomes more then potential infinite but a real infinite.
2ndly, going to the room example, if there is infinite amount of universes, but each universe is finite, then you can remove a finite number of people from a universe, but over all still have infinite.
I would however off another proof against infinite regress. Suppose there was an infinite amount of robots next to each other, and none would move, unless the one beside it moved. The truth of the matter, is that none of them would start unless one started already.
Now cause and effect, it's as if everything is saying "I will not move unless there is something other then me in my current state that will move me" (this metaphoric).
So we can say there must be a first cause. However, I would say Hamza has a leap of faith to what that first cause is. It can very well be the universe at time zero.
The state of the universe at time zero can very well be the cause that will cause motion.
I feel Kraus meant to say that when he said there doesn't need to be a cause at time zero, but really, there needs to be a cause, and it's possibly the universe at time zero, and you can't go before time zero.
Now this refutes the crux of his argument.
As for Quran. Yes it's unique. But it doesn't mean it's derived from other then Arabic because it's a different type of Arabic. And even if it was, it would not prove it was Divine.
Therefore unique implies it's divine, has not been proven.
I myself realize Quran is unique because I speak Arabic (unlike Hamza) from direct experience and not just based on authority, but, I also know there is contradictions and logical problems in the Quran.
First, God is said to have knowledge of the future which then becomes more then potential infinite but a real infinite.
2ndly, going to the room example, if there is infinite amount of universes, but each universe is finite, then you can remove a finite number of people from a universe, but over all still have infinite.
I would however off another proof against infinite regress. Suppose there was an infinite amount of robots next to each other, and none would move, unless the one beside it moved. The truth of the matter, is that none of them would start unless one started already.
Now cause and effect, it's as if everything is saying "I will not move unless there is something other then me in my current state that will move me" (this metaphoric).
So we can say there must be a first cause. However, I would say Hamza has a leap of faith to what that first cause is. It can very well be the universe at time zero.
The state of the universe at time zero can very well be the cause that will cause motion.
I feel Kraus meant to say that when he said there doesn't need to be a cause at time zero, but really, there needs to be a cause, and it's possibly the universe at time zero, and you can't go before time zero.
Now this refutes the crux of his argument.
As for Quran. Yes it's unique. But it doesn't mean it's derived from other then Arabic because it's a different type of Arabic. And even if it was, it would not prove it was Divine.
Therefore unique implies it's divine, has not been proven.
I myself realize Quran is unique because I speak Arabic (unlike Hamza) from direct experience and not just based on authority, but, I also know there is contradictions and logical problems in the Quran.
