Being can come from non-being

[Mister Agenda]

Prove me wrong...
I don't think there's a coherent deductive argument that can be made to prove this assertion false. Of course, it is far from clear what exactly is meant by being or non-being, but I wager that for any ontologically interesting definition of these terms, there is no way to show the statement to be fallacious.

So you mean like the big bang? (not the TV show but the cosmological event?) IE something/universe from nothing

Pretty sure we've been over the Big Bang theory not being the theory that the universe came from nothing; it's the theory that (like it says in the intro song to the show) the whole universe was in a hot, dense, state; then something happened (the initial rapid expansion). Where the 'hot dense state' came from is not addressed by the BBT. The theory works whether the previous state of the universe was eternal or 'popped out of nowhere'.

It's kind of like the theory of biological evolution in that respect; which explains how life evolved, however it started, not the origin of the first life form.