Evidence for God from Science

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal - it MUST have a source! Of course, one can speculate with all manner of theoreticals. And the energy that originally propelled the elements within the Big Bang had to be applied to such elements with great specificity. And the energy we observe is being used up. Stars burn out, etc.

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:
Possibly, but what do YOU think my idea of God is?

The God of Christianity.

Ken

And who and what is that?
I am honestly asking Ken, who and what do you think MY idea of God is?

Creator of the Universe; all that exists, the person who will judge who goes to Heaven, & Hell after death, the God of the bible. If this doesn't answer your question, perhaps you can describe the type of answer you are looking for

Ken

PaulSacramento wrote:That isn't really what we are talking about on THIS thread though.

You commented that I myself was making a leap by suggesting that everything came into being except my idea of God and that is a fair statement to make.
Except that, I didn't suggest that.

PaulSacramento wrote:I suggest that everything that comes into being (not everything) has a cause, everything that is moved, has a mover and that, since we can't have infinite regression, we MUST logically and reasonably arrive at something that is UNCAUSED and UNMOVING or at LEAST, the FIRST Cause and FIRST mover.

PaulSacramento wrote:And that something must be God because of who God is defined and because of how He MUST be if He IS God.
You understand this part, yes?

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal - it MUST have a source! Of course, one can speculate with all manner of theoreticals. And the energy that originally propelled the elements within the Big Bang had to be applied to such elements with great specificity. And the energy we observe is being used up. Stars burn out, etc.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal - it MUST have a source! Of course, one can speculate with all manner of theoreticals. And the energy that originally propelled the elements within the Big Bang had to be applied to such elements with great specificity. And the energy we observe is being used up. Stars burn out, etc.

Point is Philip, even if energy was eternal, it wouldn't make a difference to the argument.

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal -

Audie wrote:

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal - it MUST have a source! Of course, one can speculate with all manner of theoreticals. And the energy that originally propelled the elements within the Big Bang had to be applied to such elements with great specificity. And the energy we observe is being used up. Stars burn out, etc.

As in my original objection to ca; assumed premises. Seems to me you are just saying things, assertions you've no way to demonstrate.

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal - it MUST have a source! Of course, one can speculate with all manner of theoreticals. And the energy that originally propelled the elements within the Big Bang had to be applied to such elements with great specificity. And the energy we observe is being used up. Stars burn out, etc.

Point is Philip, even if energy was eternal, it wouldn't make a difference to the argument.

Energy is not intelligent, all good, all knowing, and everything else that is attributed to God

Ken

Byblos wrote:

Audie wrote:

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal - it MUST have a source! Of course, one can speculate with all manner of theoreticals. And the energy that originally propelled the elements within the Big Bang had to be applied to such elements with great specificity. And the energy we observe is being used up. Stars burn out, etc.

As in my original objection to ca; assumed premises. Seems to me you are just saying things, assertions you've no way to demonstrate.

If you think CA has anything to do with time then the assumed premises are from your side, not CA's.

CA has to do with essentially ordered causal series (simultaneous in the here-and-now). It has nothing to do with accidentally ordered causal series (hierarchical, sequential, time-dependent, etc.)

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal - it MUST have a source! Of course, one can speculate with all manner of theoreticals. And the energy that originally propelled the elements within the Big Bang had to be applied to such elements with great specificity. And the energy we observe is being used up. Stars burn out, etc.

Point is Philip, even if energy was eternal, it wouldn't make a difference to the argument.

Energy is not intelligent, all good, all knowing, and everything else that is attributed to God

Ken

No one is saying that ken.
Even if energy was eternal, it won't matter to the cosmological argument.

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Philip wrote:Energy cannot be eternal - it MUST have a source! Of course, one can speculate with all manner of theoreticals. And the energy that originally propelled the elements within the Big Bang had to be applied to such elements with great specificity. And the energy we observe is being used up. Stars burn out, etc.

Point is Philip, even if energy was eternal, it wouldn't make a difference to the argument.

Energy is not intelligent, all good, all knowing, and everything else that is attributed to God

Ken

No one is saying that ken.
Even if energy was eternal, it won't matter to the cosmological argument.

So are you saying the Cosmological argument was never intended to be used to prove God?

Ken

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Kenny wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote: Point is Philip, even if energy was eternal, it wouldn't make a difference to the argument.

Energy is not intelligent, all good, all knowing, and everything else that is attributed to God

Ken

No one is saying that ken.
Even if energy was eternal, it won't matter to the cosmological argument.

So are you saying the Cosmological argument was never intended to be used to prove God?

Ken

Are you equating energy with God ??

Audie wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Audie wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Audie wrote:
Prease explain

Audie, Jac provided the explanation....

Jac3510 wrote: I'd ask you not to make such assumptions about me. You should know all about that. You said you didn't accept the premises. My assumption was that there are some that you accept (e.g., that some things are in motion) and some that you don't. I don't know what those assumptions you don't accept are, so I asked.

I had no interest in pressing the matter with you. I might have wanted to know why you rejected or didn't assume any particular premise, but the idea of debating the CA with you is about as interesting to me as giving a crocodile a root canal. But as someone who is interested in the CA and how it is perceived by those who haven't studied it, I was (again, emphasizing was) interested in your perception of it.

It's the same reason I read news from liberal media outlets that I tend to disagree with. I want to know their perspective. I was curious in yours. And you couldn't even provide that. Instead, you ask if I'm going to ask you to justify it and play in "my" court.

Get over yourself. For someone who doesn't take too kindly to bullying, you do a lot of it yourself. And it's frankly depressing, because you show the sparks of intellectual honesty, and I feel like I could actually learn something from discussing these things with you. And then you go pull stunts like this. It's disheartening and shameful. I may as well waste my time arguing with ACB.

You'd have to show this poor esl student wherein my response matches anything in the dictionary about "evasion".

Here you go...

Evasion
As quted and defined from Dictionary.com
Synonyms Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
an act or instance of escaping, avoiding, or shirking something:

2.
the avoiding of an argument, accusation, question, or the like, as by a subterfuge:
The old political boss was notorious for his practice of evasion.

3.
a means of evading; subterfuge; an excuse or trick to avoid or get around something:
Her polite agreement was an evasion concealing what she really felt.

4.
physical or mental escape.

-
-
-

I asked for a match

PaulSacramento wrote:Ken, what is your point??
No one here is saying that energy is God, the Cosmological argument doesn't say that either.

B. W. wrote:

Audie wrote:

B. W. wrote:

Audie wrote:

B. W. wrote:
Audie, Jac provided the explanation....

You'd have to show this poor esl student wherein my response matches anything in the dictionary about "evasion".

Here you go...

Evasion
As quted and defined from Dictionary.com
Synonyms Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
an act or instance of escaping, avoiding, or shirking something:

2.
the avoiding of an argument, accusation, question, or the like, as by a subterfuge:
The old political boss was notorious for his practice of evasion.

3.
a means of evading; subterfuge; an excuse or trick to avoid or get around something:
Her polite agreement was an evasion concealing what she really felt.

4.
physical or mental escape.

-
-
-

I asked for a match

There ya go...