I like this!!

[Barry Morris]

"If everything in the universe came into being, then the cause of the universe must be transcendent, not a part of this universe. "

https://jamesbishopblog.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/2782/

[Hans]

That is assumption, unless you have actual proof of that statement.

[Barry Morris]

That is assumption, unless you have actual proof of that statement.

Logic dictates that nothing can be created from within itself.

Unless you have actual proof of the opposite.

[dancingqueen]

Logic dictates that nothing can be created from within itself.

Unless you have actual proof of the opposite.

Actually you made the claim, and therefore the burden of proof is upon you.

[Barry Morris]

Actually you made the claim, and therefore the burden of proof is upon you.

I don't particularly care about providing such "proof".

You reject the logic because you reject the possibility of a Creator. I could ask you to prove something can come from nothing, but you wouldn't and couldn't.

[dancingqueen]

I don't particularly care about providing such "proof".

You reject the logic because you reject the possibility of a Creator. I could ask you to prove something can come from nothing, but you wouldn't and couldn't.

Actually I do not reject the possibility of a creator.
As for not caring to provide such proof, What is the purpose of this thread?

[Barry Morris]

Actually I do not reject the possibility of a creator.
As for not caring to provide such proof, What is the purpose of this thread?

Re: the creator, my apologies, I had forgotten that.

Purpose: To point out that others believe as I do.

[Barney Rubble]

That is assumption, unless you have actual proof of that statement.

Law Of Causality - To get an effect, you must have a cause...nothing comes from nothing!
Seeing that time, space & matter did not exist until the "big bang", what caused this? Obviously something but beyond the confinds of space, time & matter. We Christians call Him GOD!!

[Hans]

Law Of Causality - To get an effect, you must have a cause...nothing comes from nothing!
Seeing that time, space & matter did not exist until the "big bang", what caused this? Obviously something but beyond the confinds of space, time & matter. We Christians call Him GOD!!

Before big bang: universe in a state of non chaos.
After big bang: universe in a state of chaos.

Now as to your assertion about nothing: your "Creator" cannot come from nothing either, unless that Creator is above your assumption. In which case everything else can be above your assumption also.

[Hans]

http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

I trust this smart person more than a few people with some bible notion when it comes to the universe and the how of it all.

[Barry Morris]

http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

I trust this smart person more than a few people with some bible notion when it comes to the universe and the how of it all.

Indeed?? Why don't you give us a few select quotes from the lecture, supporting your point of view.

By the way, I did notice this: "There is no dynamical reason why the motion of bodies in the solar system can not be extrapolated back in time, far beyond four thousand and four BC, the date for the creation of the universe, according to the book of Genesis. "

I'm sorry Hans, but the book of Genesis says no such thing, and the idea of the young universe is not held by very many people.

[Barry Morris]

Before big bang: universe in a state of non chaos.
After big bang: universe in a state of chaos.

Now as to your assertion about nothing: your "Creator" cannot come from nothing either, unless that Creator is above your assumption. In which case everything else can be above your assumption also.

Hans, stop saying "come from". That implies the passage of time, and I suspect even Hawking know that time exists only in this universe, and that is flexible too!!

[Hans]

The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rather, the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 billion years ago. The beginning of real time, would have been a singularity, at which the laws of physics would have broken down. Nevertheless, the way the universe began would have been determined by the laws of physics, if the universe satisfied the no boundary condition. This says that in the imaginary time direction, space-time is finite in extent, but doesn't have any boundary or edge. The predictions of the no boundary proposal seem to agree with observation. The no boundary hypothesis also predicts that the universe will eventually collapse again. However, the contracting phase, will not have the opposite arrow of time, to the expanding phase. So we will keep on getting older, and we won't return to our youth. Because time is not going to go backwards, I think I better stop now.

[Hans]

Hans, stop saying "come from". That implies the passage of time, and I suspect even Hawking know that time exists only in this universe, and that is flexible too!!

Barry, do you have actual proof that time only exists in this universe, or is that one of your assumptions?

[RWGR]

Quite right

[Barry Morris]

Barry, do you have actual proof that time only exists in this universe, or is that one of your assumptions?

Science has found out many things about time. It's flexibility for one thing. If it were totally immutable, I think it might be reasonable to assume that it merely sits in place, never, ever changing, existing before the Big Bang and forever on.

But it is not.

Therefore, I do not think it is unreasonable to believe that time itself may have had a beginning. Furthermore, that it's source was something outside the universe.

And in spite of RWGR's useless comment/attack, I do not think it unreasonable to believe that intelligent design had something to do with it.

[RWGR]

Quite right

[Barney Rubble]

the universe began would have been determined by the laws of physics

If time, matter & space were created at the big bang, saying that the big bang happened because of the laws of physics is incorrect. there can not be any laws of physics if time, space, matter, gravity never existed.
Atheists accept that the big bang started everything (time, matter, space.gravity etc). Christians do nor refute that....but...something beyond the realm of our physical being must have started or caused the big bang.
If the laws of physics must be followed as you say, the law of causality (which is a law of physics and the second law of thermodynamics) must be true. Both support a big bang & both support a cause leading an effect. Something had to cause the big bang...something outside of our realm...why not a supreme being...why not GOD?
finally, "determined by the laws of physics"? Is this a absolute truth OR only a subjective truth? Meaning a truth according to how you see it. Just because you state that does not make it an absolute truth.

[Barney Rubble]

Another thing...
When Hawking says that the universe can come into existence without God in his book "Grand Design",, he says this on the basis that the laws of gravity are sufficient to produce our universe. But this begs the question…how did the laws of gravity get here? You see, when a Christian talks about the universe coming into being we mean that the universe came into existence out of non-being. What this means is that if the universe did not exist, the laws of gravity would not exist either…there would only be non-being. Literally nothing. No time, no matter, no energy, no space…and no laws of any sort (gravity included).

[Barney Rubble]

Barry, do you have actual proof that time only exists in this universe, or is that one of your assumptions?

Barry does not have to prove this!
Atheists and scientists all agree on it...even Hawkings...even Einstein!
Many believe that time is not a constant either! Time is at a different rate in space that here on earth...already proven with atomic clocks on earth & on the space station....gravity has an effect on time!