Why are they like this
Why are they like this
Carson Nelson
Eli Harris
based honestly, SUBHANALLAH!!
Charles Adams
Imagine having to find scientific explanations for God when you could just believe the Holy Book instead
Bentley Ross
>no peer-reviewed scientific publications since 1999
>only apologetic publications since
Matthew Evans
The universe exists, right? So something had to make it. Meaning everything that exists has to have been created or had some kind of origin outside itself.
There are two explanations as to why the universe exists: the big bang and god. But both those explanations are logically equivalent because supposing nothing can create itself neither of those things should be able to exist.
So either way you slice it you admit that it is possible for things to create themselves, or to have origins that appear unexplainable to human perception and defy intuition. Moreover we observe in the quantum realm that particles spontaneously come into and out of existence all the time.
So we’re left once again with our original choice: god or the big bang. Since we’ve established both explanations are basically equivalent, we have to narrow down the options by applying Occams Razor, and the explanation that the universe is a natural phenomenon involves fewer assumptions and is more substantiated by evidence than theory that a god created us.
Samuel Anderson
>The universe exists, right? So something had to make it.
If God exists, what made him?
>But both those explanations are logically equivalent because supposing nothing can create itself neither of those things should be able to exist.
Logical syllogisms really doesn't have any bearings when it comes to the physical universe.
>Since we’ve established both explanations are basically equivalent,
They're not equivalent, only one of them are backed by observable evidence.
Your conclusion is sane, but your reasoning is flawed. The Big Bang is a misnomer; it's actually more of a rapid expansion. The universe may have always existed, just in a different state (pre-bang).
Adam James
wypipo moment
David Gonzalez
imagine trying to think when you can just be a drone
Ethan Hall
>compelling scientific evidence that a God beyond space and time must have created the universe
>evidence from within space and time proves the existence of a being from outside of space and time
double digit IQ moment
Mason Cruz
White people cringefest 101
Juan James
kek, this
Grayson Russell
bruh someone gotta take the internet away from wypipo on god
Kayden Gutierrez
>The universe exists, right?
yes
>So something had to make it
that's a bold logical jump, provide a further explaination to that since everything else in your post hands on this assumption
Samuel Evans
brownoid /sci/talian tried to be like wypipo but failed
Brayden Ramirez
>Logical syllogisms really doesn't have any bearings when it comes to the physical universe.
How?
>They're not equivalent
They are in the sense that they both presuppose that it’s possible for things to be beginningless.
>but your reasoning is flawed.
How?
>The Big Bang is a misnomer; it's actually more of a rapid expansion. The universe may have always existed, just in a different state (pre-bang).
What does any of that have to do with my reasoning? I never said the big bang was itself the catalyst for all existence, just that it appears to be what created our universe.
Colton Nelson
athiests see a skyscraper and be like "well maybe it was just always there" LMAOOOO
Jack Green
>The universe may have always existed, just in a different state (pre-bang)
that's the same state you've been since forever LMAO
Jeremiah Roberts
So we are living in a simulation, aren't we?
Leo Collins
btfo'd beyond repair
Jace White
Funnily it was always there, but when you take it at a reference at one point in time, does it come into your plane of existence.
you wouldn't get it bro
Benjamin Ross
ayo...
Jordan Price
HOLY BASED
Josiah Hill
Imagine being the bricklayer who has to finish the last floors.
Zachary Wood
>How?
What are you even asking? You can be an armchair logician as much as you want, but that really doesn't matter when trying to explain a physical universe. This is why shit like the Kalam cosmological argument is a massive waste of time, it's all just philosophical drivel.
At best, logical syllogisms can only prove whether something makes sense logically, but logic remains an invention of the mind. Reality exists outside of the mind, hence you should look for your understanding of it also outside your mind instead of using intellectual navel gazing like so many neo-apologetics do too.
>They are in the sense that they both presuppose that it’s possible for things to be beginningless.
Fair enough
>How?
Because, as I've already pointed out above, deducing how the universe came to be using logic alone is nonsensical.
>just that it appears to be what created our universe.
It didn't "create" the universe; the universe already existed. It was merely a transitioning of state, conceptually similar to how energy can transform to matter and vice versa.
ouch ;_;
Jayden White
pseud thread
Eli Edwards
hey cocksucker who built this house?
James Rodriguez
Read the rest of the post, I was only trying to follow the train of human intuition to demonstrate why it can’t be accurate here, since a lot of creationists like to evoke nihil ex nihilo.
Jace Peterson
Clattered battered and splattered
Kevin Myers
>muh clockmaker argument
Complexity does not imply a designer.
Daniel Brown
>Reality exists outside of the mind, hence you should look for your understanding of it also outside your mind instead of using intellectual navel gazing like so many neo-apologetics do too.
Yeah that’s fair. I doubt we’re even capable of understanding the true nature of reality beyond (or undergirding) our perceptible universe. I was just trying to demonstrate how human intuition and our logic cannot account for the universe one way or the other and ultimately why nihil ex nihilo is a fallacious argument.
Joseph White
who built the house nigger?
Landon Butler
>I was just trying to demonstrate how human intuition and our logic cannot account for the universe one way or the other and ultimately why nihil ex nihilo is a fallacious argument.
I see. I agree with this.
Eli Turner
Are you looking for a specific name or what? You don't know either. To take your analogy even further, you even claim to know which God made the universe and most likely use a specific name for him too.
Hunter Stewart
> To take your analogy even further, you even claim to know which God made the universe and most likely use a specific name for him too.
WRONG
you wont answer the question
who built the house
Kayden Price
based
Lucas Gonzalez
A man obviously built the house, how does that have anything to do with the topic at hand?