The "something can't come from nothing" argument

[Dirty Penguin]

The real question is...what does any of this have to do with the "something can't come from nothing" argument....?

 

[Thief]

I know what faith's burden is. It is only that it lacks a defeater. You can believe X is true as long as X is not proven untrue. You do not have to have evidence for X.


However your faith is not persuasive in a debate. This is a debate forum not a pulpit.

I have found that in most cases your claims are not scientific. That does not mean they are untrue. It means they have no common ground by which they can persuade a non-theist.


This is what I mean. Saying God first is not going to convince anyone. I agree he was first but I always include the philosophical and scientific reasons why he is first. You will almost never find me saying God is first in a debate without explaining why.




I agree.

And this is a religious debate.....not a podium.
That we agree science is a means to understand God is nice.

Spirit first?...or substance?
It's one or the other......choose.

 

[ArtieE]

I was not talking about what a person needs for faith in his own mind. I was discussing what official burden a faith claim has in a debate.

Suppose a Christian debated with a Hindu about the validity of their faith in their different gods and holy scriptures. What official burden do their faith claims have?

 

[Thief]

Suppose a Christian debated with a Hindu about the validity of their faith in their different gods and holy scriptures. What official burden do their faith claims have?

allow me....

Peace first.
Do unto others as you would them have do unto you.

I think that should be enough.

 

[allfoak]

You may hold to whatever position you wish. My point is that your view has no relevance to scholarship or theology (at least mine). I am not sure if your right that mind as physics examines it, is not ours. It is either a mind as in God, or ours, or both. I think they mainly make general claims about both. That perception is what produces what is perceived. Not I share that exact position. Mine is that God's mind explains everything that we perceive and pre-existed it, necessarily

Scholarship and theology are funny things, they don't seem to have any relevance to those that have had a near death experience.

 

[allfoak]

What does a pair-of-ducks have anything to do with this?

With out a pair-of- ducks you get no little ducks.

 

[allfoak]

That is not the Christian position (nor even the philosophical or physics position). Our position (meaning Christianity plus the philosophers and physics guys who grant a mind individuality model) believe mind is primary to everything else and is not being created and was never created. It is an eternal brute fact, in Christianity.

Physics and Christianity are not terribly important to the truth.

 

[Thief]

Scholarship and theology are funny things, they don't seem to have any relevance to those that have had a near death experience.

excuse me.....

 

[Thief]

Physics and Christianity are not terribly important to the truth.

So you are using what?....as a litmus test.

 

[1robin]

Scholarship and theology are funny things, they don't seem to have any relevance to those that have had a near death experience.

I imagine they are relevant to those who had NDEs. I think theology may be far more relative to them. I think what you meant to say is an NDE would surpass any theology or scholarship that contradicted them. Is that what you meant?

 

[1robin]

Physics and Christianity are not terribly important to the truth.

Then why do we spend trillions of dollars struggling to learn them? Any institution who must spend money efficiently will hire them when Chemical or Physics truth is required. How many modern wonder drugs you think would be helping people without chemistry?

 

[Thief]

Then why do we spend trillions of dollars struggling to learn them? Any institution who must spend money efficiently will hire them when Chemical or Physics truth is required. How many modern wonder drugs you think would be helping people without chemistry?

You do listen to the list of side effects as they offer the new pills for what ails you?

Trade your skin condition for lymphoma.....
Now THAT"s an offer!

 

[1robin]

You do listen to the list of side effects as they offer the new pills for what ails you?

Can't listen to a label. In what way do side effects challenge what I said. I said much of what we find most valuable in this world is chemistry and physics.

Trade your skin condition for lymphoma.....
Now THAT"s an offer!

I got a better one. When you are screaming in pain from thyroid cancer you can just refuse pain killers because they have side effects, and see what happens. Almost everything you do every day needs chemistry and physics plus a whole host of sciences to work. I don't even know what your argument is.

 

[Thief]

Can't listen to a label. In what way do side effects challenge what I said. I said much of what we find most valuable in this world is chemistry and physics.

I got a better one. When you are screaming in pain from thyroid cancer you can just refuse pain killers because they have side effects, and see what happens. Almost everything you do every day needs chemistry and physics plus a whole host of sciences to work. I don't even know what your argument is.

Trusting in the chemistry as distributed by your fellow man?

Pain killers are one thing.
Snake oil is something else.

and we have digressed sharply from the 'beginning'.

I think we were never meant to live forever in the flesh.
Breathing is inherently fatal.

 

[NulliuSINverba]

Premise: Something cannot arise from nothing.

Q. - Is God something or is God nothing?