Why Can't Something Come from Nothing?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 авг 2022
- For more information visit: www.reasonablefaith.org
Alex J. O'Connor, aka. (The) Cosmic Skeptic, questions Dr. Craig on the first premise of the kalam cosmological argument for God's existence.
You can watch the entire interview here: • Cosmic Skeptic & Dr. C...
#Time #Cosmology #Kalam #WilliamLaneCraig #CosmicSkeptic
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/
Be sure to also visit Reasonable Faith's other channel which contains many full-length videos, debates, and lectures: / reasonablefaithorg
Follow Reasonable Faith On Twitter: / rfupdates
Like the Reasonable Faith Facebook Page: / reasonablefaithorg
Any ability in which to create something would itself be something rather than nothing, so to suggest something being created by nothing is a self-contradicting concept.
Yes it's addressed in Acquinas 3rd way, from nothing, which is an absurdity that there is nothing now, to what is necessary to exist, hence what is necessary would or could cause things to exist or something. Summa Theologia paraphrase
Very good response bro
“He was despised and rejected- a man of sorrows, acquainted with deepest grief. We turned our backs on him and looked the other way. He was despised, and we did not care. Yet it was our weaknesses he carried; it was our sorrows that weighed him down. And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God, a punishment for his own sins! But he was pierced for our rebellion, crushed for our sins. He was beaten so we could be whole. He was whipped so we could be healed. All of us, like sheep, have strayed away. We have left God’s paths to follow our own. Yet the Lord laid on him the sins of us all. He was oppressed and treated harshly, yet he never said a word. He was led like a lamb to the slaughter. And as a sheep is silent before the shearers, he did not open his mouth. Unjustly condemned, he was led away. No one cared that he died without descendants, that his life was cut short in midstream. But he was struck down for the rebellion of my people. He had done no wrong and had never deceived anyone. But he was buried like a criminal; he was put in a rich man’s grave. But it was the Lord’s good plan to crush him and cause him grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have many descendants. He will enjoy a long life, and the Lord’s good plan will prosper in his hands. When he sees all that is accomplished by his anguish, he will be satisfied. And because of his experience, my righteous servant will make it possible for many to be counted righteous, for he will bear all their sins. I will give him the honors of a victorious soldier, because he exposed himself to death. He was counted among the rebels. He bore the sins of many and interceded for rebels.”
Isaiah 53:3-12 NLT
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16
God loves you so much and showed that by sending His Son to die for us so that we may inherit eternal life. We deserve hell but He gave us heaven through faith in Jesus. He took the punishment we deserved and by putting our faith in Him we can be saved. The Key To Eternal Life:
ruclips.net/video/uZdv-TtiMkg/видео.html
For evidence for Christianity and answered questions, check out
ruclips.net/user/drcraigvideos
and ruclips.net/user/CrossExamined
because if Jesus really rose from the dead it is the most important fact ever!
God bless y’all!
Amen 🙏
Amen!
I absolutely loved this discussion. These two Gentlemen are brilliant.
The only way to quantify nothing is to specify its relationship to something.
Given that nothing is always dependant on something, you can't say that nothing was the cause of something.
Nothing isn't something you can measure or weigh, stop trying to philosophically and theologically the question of nothing has been understood as the complete absence of anything. Nothing isn't matter or energy but rather the absence of it.
@@omarenriqueberrios8043
*"Nothing isn't something you can measure or weigh, ... the question of nothing has been understood as the complete absence of anything. Nothing isn't matter or energy but rather the absence of it."*
You are correct. But it is a mystery as why you think this true statement of yours qualifies as a counterargument to what I'm saying.
The only explanation is that you're not really grasping the validity of the logical progression in my argument.
@@omarenriqueberrios8043
*"...stop trying to philosophically and theologically the question...[sic]"*
Also, it's pretty obvious that you don't like the theological implications of my argument, and that this is the stumbling block that resulted in your poorly argued knee-jerk reaction.
@@firecloud77 By all means explain the validity of your argument and how nothing depends on the relationship to something.
@@omarenriqueberrios8043
By all means explain why you believe that nothing, *by itself,* can cause an action.
praise the only true living LORD and GOD bless you all glory be to the HOLY TRINITY forever and ever amen 💖✝✝✝
👍👍 merci depuis la France 🇫🇷
Dr. Craig please come to South Africa
"we never come across things coming into being uncaused" We never come across things coming into being at all. Everything in science is about things that already exist, like, say, a chair, for example. Obviously, the chair didn't come into existence uncaused; someone built it. But the particles that make up the chair have existed before the guy turned it into a chair. So, no, that doesn't count as something coming into being with a cause; it's something changing with a cause. We have no evidence that something cannot come into being without a cause since we have not observed something come into being at all, except for, of course, the Big Bang. But we don't know what or if anything caused the Big Bang.
WLC has been and is being used by God so mightily, and he would be the first to give God the credit.
Presup is the way to go. Evidentiary apologetics, such as the type WLC does, is not Biblical & also demonstrably incorrect.
Christians don't realize this because they like that the conclusion is true. But the form of apologetics is wrong because it makes the fundamental error of granting the unbeliever their false worldview as if it's the correct system of presuppositions to start with, then try to reason to a conclusion of "therefore, God exists." That's wrong, and will never convince any atheist, because once you've granted them that any non-theistic worldview is true it's impossible to prove God within that system.
I couldn't come to see you because of working!!
In some wild guess, er, I mean mathematical models, the beginning of the universe was the beginning of time and there was no before, so there was never a time when there was nothing. Since there was never nothing, something from nothing is unnecessary.
@@No_bread-and-circuses
I don't think Chuck is advocating what you're opposing.
I think he's agreeing that atheist idiots have a model that avoids the beginning by defining it away, which doesn't answer the question.
merci
It doesn't have to be a proven counter-example to show that the argument being presented is on shaky foundations.
Rusty, what is your position?
It seems like you don't know shit but you're sure that God isn't the cause of the universe?
Is that about it?
Plus “indeterminacy” does not mean “without a cause”.
Actually yes, it does. It doesn’t necessarily imply that it lacks an explanation, but the outcome of a truly indeterministic event cannot in any intelligible sense have been ‘caused’, as in that case the outcome would be determined by the antecedent causal factors.
@@fanghur Any event would require that something goes from potency to act, and it requires something already in act to actualize that potentiality. Not all causes are deterministic. In the case of indeterminate events there is no deterministic cause but there is a probabilistic cause, that is whatever gives the nature of indeterminacy and whatever triggers the event acting in such a way. If you get rid of cause and effect you cease to have science.
@@jorgeramos597 but the exact outcome is uncaused.
@@fanghur the outcome is the effect, which requires a cause, otherwise undetermined events would be magic and no science would be able to study it.
@@jorgeramos597 no, the outcome is what *specifically* happened. If you flip the switch on a quantum random number generator, and the number ‘948’ appears on a screen, you might be said to have ‘caused’ a number to appear. But nothing caused that specific number rather than any other; the specific outcome was uncaused.
If something comes from nothing. Then we must re-define nothing is something.
Do you know what nothing means in physics? It doesn't mean absolutely nothing
@@TacTicVa4a Good ! Then we all agree something can not come from absolutely nothing. And ultimately, something Eternal outside the realm of physics that we can not fully comprehend. Must be Eternal to begin something.
@@ldan1788so nothing isn't real?
@@tqdark Indicating the absence of anything perceptible; nothingness. indicating the absence of meaning, value, worth, etc: to amount to nothing. zero quantity; nought. That's the general consensus. Unless you believe in the scientific impossibility everything came from nothing.
@@tqdarka plenun that looks as nothing.
Dr Craig's is a logical argument: Given certain premises one can reach a particular conclusion. A premise is a statement which can either be true or false. The statement that everything that begins to exist has a cause has a premise. Beyond appealing to ordinary experience there is no proof given that this premise is necessarily true. It could very well be false. The true relevance of QM is not the Copenhagen interpretation but it's insistence that reality is quite different from what we humans experience. Therefore Dr. Craig's conclusion that there must be a creator is not proven since it rests on an unproven premise.
Maybe, but he gives philosophical reasons why the premise is true, not really appealing to science.
I would love to hear a counter-resoonse to the response by SkyDiveMike, in the second documentary, from Dr Craig.
There were some elements in that second docu that seemed to be reinforcing or extending the explanations given by all the scientists in the first docu.
I would also love to see Dr Craig back in England sometime - I had the pleasure of meeting him during the university presentations he did in 2019, when he did a talk in Oxford Town Hall, I believe. That would be super!
I think you mean douchebag "Skydive Phil" although there may be an imitator by "...Mike" as well
Something can't come from nothing as the origin point of all of this because any way you would describe that is a something already. You can never work your way backwards far enough to reach a state of true nothingness and describe what we have now. That is because nothingness is devoid of all, but most importantly change. Without change, nothingness is dead forever and the transition into something can never occur. That must mean something always existed.
Dr. Craig points out that his argument is worded in such a way so as not to assert that every event has a cause; however, that is precisely what I _would_ assert because although there are some quantum events that are indeterminate in nature, indeterminacy does not equate to acausality; probabilistic causality _is_ *causality.* We have countless examples of events that adhere to the principle of causation, this is what conforms to reality, and thus, this qualifies as truth according to the correspondence theory of truth. And, while, I suppose one _could_ argue that we don't objectively "know" this to be the case, because we have precisely zero examples of an event confirmed to have occurred without _any_ cause (deterministic or probabilistic), we have no good reason to entertain that possibility; we only have wishful thinking.
Why can't the impossibility of nothing be the cause?
Because then the universe would have always existed and we know that isn't the case
Something cant come from nothing. I agree. Or at least it seems that is the case. But this argument doesn't leave room for what that first something is. For all we know the first something could be an eternal rock. Or all atoms could have always existed. This argument does not entail specific characteristics of the first something. Wether it is intelligent, good, evil etc. So even if we agree with the premise that something cannot come from nothing, we are no closer to a deity of any specificity.
Yes we are. If we take the principles of this line of reasoning to their conclusions, the thing that caused the universe obviously cant be bound by the universe itself, because that would mean retro causality, something that isn't even seen in QM. So an eternal "rock" could not be the creator of the universe because a rock has no causal power in itself, and besides, it is made of matter and you cannot conceive of a rock which isn't made of matter. The kind of "rock" you are talking about would have to not take up space, not be bound by time, and be powerful enough to cause the universe. That kind of sounds like a god to me...
@@cadenorris4009 My rock is actually not bound by the universe and it makes matter. My rock always existed and is morally perfect.
@@Kaputnik11 that's not a rock. By definition it is not a rock
@@cadenorris4009 Sure it is. My rock is just special. And it created the universe.
I'm hoping to see a pie P.I.E. (Pop Into Existence) Nothing yet.
"Why can't something come from nothing?" Uh duh.😳
infinite regress
What did God create the universe out of?
Nothing😂
What an absurd question! 🙊
It is true that something cannot come from nothing if not even nothing itself exist. We must remember that "nothing" is actually a something in the case of change. We see such a result when someone says nothing happened which means there was no change and the status quo remains.
However, there is away around a state of nothingness as well as a state where nothingness itself do not exist. The way around a state of nothingness is having a state of Infinity.
Infinity has no beginning, end or middle. This means Infinity is unaffected by a change in the direction of continuation. Infinity points backwards as well as forward because Infinity has no spatial barrier of containment. Change is a subset of Infinity.
In order to show this relationship we have to come to know what is a number. And the more important understanding we get in this endeavor is what is the origin of all numbers.
What is a number? A Mathematical Breakthrough
God is the designer of our universe, and He is eternal.
The proof is in the math.
Here is that proof: Infinity = 1/x(delta) + 1.
This equation says a number, any number is a set-in space that change with space.
In physics this equation reads: Gravity is matter changing with space. It combines Relativity or fractured space with Quantum mechanics or spatial expansion.
How dose God fit into this equation?
This equation is God's mathematical name.
God's name in this equation reads: God's Mind Is Man Changed With God.
Again: A NUMBER IS A SET-IN SPACE THAT CHANGES WITH SPACE.
Breakdown: God's mind is infinite. In math this measure out as the set of infinity
In math (1/x) represents a fraction of a whole. Any child is a fraction of a parent and man according to the Bible is God's child. Therefore, man is a fraction of God
Change in math is represented by the Greek letter (delta) and it denotes a difference of some kind.
Plus (+) in math means: “with” the addition of
There is only one God. In mathematics the number “1” represents a single entity.
Spelled out: God's Mind (Infinity) is (=) Man (1/x) Changed (delta) With (+) God (1).
Scientific Method
Step 1 Observation: Math can deliver unbreakable truths such as 2+2 will always = 4
Step 2 Question: Do math and Divinity share a common truth?
Step 3 Hypothesis: If God exist, He should be found in the house of mathematics.
Step 4 Prediction: God's Mind Is Man Change With God is an equation
Step 5 Test: Any number (Infinity) is (=) a set-in space (1/x) that change (x^2) with (+) space (1))
Note: "X" describes any set, (1) describes any kind of space physical or otherwise
This equation tells us why 2 feet is not the same as 2 inches. Both distances are measured out as 2 units of space but there is a change or difference between both units. They are each sets in a space of distance, but they represent changes in their measurement of distance.
Step 6 Iterate: New look at what makes up reality. Reality consists of 3 domains of space.
a. Fractured space or matter b. spatial expansion a.k.a time and energy c. Complete or unbroken space/information
Step 7 Conclusion: We now know Infinity is real therefore the value in enumeration demand God exists otherwise the domain for enumeration would be incomplete. We know the domain for enumeration is complete because we can count. God must be able to count too all the way to Infinity because His mathematical name tells us what is any number.
Cantor's Mistake
George Cantor known as the father of set theory was wrong. There are no sets of numbers larger than Infinity.
Cantor's mistake was he did not see that "change" is a subset within Infinity.
Cantors one on one correspondence between sets of numbers is wrong. Cantor used only one description of a number from one set to match out or with a number from a different number set.
Example. Cantor said the whole number set was smaller than the integer number set. This is how he made his measurement.
Take the integers 2.1 and match it with the whole number 1. Then match 2.11 with the whole number 2. Then match 2.111 with the whole number 3 and so forth. In this view we would run out of whole numbers when we get to the integer 3.1.
This is Cantor's big mistake!
A correct set correspondence method
Here is a better way to measure these two number sets.
Match 2.1 with say 2. In the next sequence match for 2.1 we could match this integer with 4/2 or 5-3 or the square root of 100 divided by the square root of 25. The point being we can match any description for the number 2 to continue this [integer- whole] number matching sequence forever. In this way we could then match the integer 3.1 with 9/3 or 7- 4. Again, if Cantor had understood that change describes what any number looks like he would have known there can be no numbers larger than Infinity.
Now that we have the knowledge of what is a number. My question is why now? Throughout all of man's conceptual use and beneficial outcomes from using numbers why is it we did not see the anatomy of a number until today? How is it possible that we have been unable to see that numbers do more than describe our physical reality, but they also describe our existence outside our perceived notion of reality. Numbers like truths don't lie.
Yes, we are creatures of the cosmos and whatever makes up the cosmos is in many ways our inheritance. Learning is a part of our cosmos and we do know great discovery comes about over time. There is not always a discovery that changes the world, yet this equation is fundamental to all of existence and it comes from the creator of this existence. So, again why has this knowledge been away from us so long?
Here is my thinking. Mind you my thought in asking then trying to understand this event is not based in math or science but in faith.
We have been blessed, but I also believe we should be concerned for what is coming.
Very highly speculative: Infinite gravity suggest we may be living inside a black hole that is internally expanding. 1/x(delta) may explain why inflation happened. The case maybe that inside a black hole space is cracked and stretched due to the compression and pulling of space by the difference in layer spatial collapsing. Outside space coexisting with points of space already consumed into an infinitesimal boundary create symmetry and this symmetry get to spread evenly as matter. Our universe becomes virtual and expanding. Zero in this context equals the difference in symmetry. A zero field is in this case a field of opposites. One field is collapsing while its opposite is expanding.
This speculation does not rule out God. If it is how our universe happened as it is evolving this scenario maybe best understood as a tool used to do the work needed to fashion existence and life. We should not be afraid of knowing God's working regardless as to how He choose to do those works. Whether it be evolution or any other methodology in His works the truth is we are here to learn and practice those learnings.
If doubt remain then please answer this question. What is a number? Google it if you need help. Infinity says a number is both qualitatively and quantitatively a set-in space that change with space. Isn't this what we do when we count or measure anything at all. Yes, this is exactly what we do when we measure or count anything.
In counting we take a memory or a something we name and put that something into an order of some kind in the space of our mind. We can arrange that something into least to greatest or whatever meets our satisfaction but the fact that we put anything into an ordered sequence is in effect making a change happen.
So, there we have it. A set in the space of our mind changes with the mind. At one moment the set is 1 and at the next moment it is 2 then 3, 4, 5 and so on.
Conclusion why would God give us his love scientifically and mathematically if he did not want us to better know HIM?
In conclusion. Fighting over whether Creationism or Evolution is the right answer as to why we are here is the wrong picture both have a place with God.
william.mabon@yahoo.com
I'M WITH YOU 100% GOD EXISTS❤
@@tqdark Thank you for your support to our joint humanity. Recognizing God is our gift from God.
@@williammabon6430 and nothing doesnt even exist at all its like akin asking whats south of south pole and everything needs a cause plus even if u were to ask who baked the baker the answer is no one because baker cannot be baked and god is eternal THANK YOU FOR INCREASING MY FAITH
@@williammabon6430 Excuse me but one question what do you mean with a word you said when someone says nothing happend there was no change and the status quo remains what do you mean with that Quo remains?
@@tqdark When anything happens there comes about difference. If no difference happens then change has no existence for that situation or space. The probability of a change where a difference is absent for that specific change occurrence is zero.
The concept of "Nothing" represented by the number "0" (zero) did not exist in the beginning. The number "0" (zero) is a relatively recent human innovation in mathematics. But, there has always been "1" (one). The fact that one (1) exists and can generate the position/concept of "nothing" (0) shows that there first exists one (1). Thus, nothing (0) does not truly exist alone: One (1) must first exist that can generate the position/concept of nothing (0). Mathematically, Absolute nothing "could be" expressed as 0 to the power of 0, which can equal 1. "Nothing" IS "Something"; because, it comes from "Something". Moreover, since Nothing (perceived) is not Nothing (actual), then it is possible for Something to come from Nothing (actual). Because, Something (1) is inherently pre-existing within Nothing (actual), hence, 0 to the power of 0 can equal 1. Simply put, Something (1) exists before Nothing (0) can exist. In the beginning, there was Singularity (1).
That was the biggest twisted line of nonsense that I've ever read.
What makes google so dangerous is that anyone can find anything to agree with, and support, their ideas.
Take you for example -
You weren't quite honest with 0 to the power of 0 equals 1. An honest person would say: 0 to the power of 0 is undefined; but, because you want to prove: god, you decided to go with an answer to support your idea.
1) The mathematical zero, and the philosophical notion of nothingness (Ain-Soph), are not the same. However, because, you needed to make a point, you decided (on your own) to corelate nothingness with the mathematical 0.
2) Numbers were invented by man to try and explain the finite universe we live in and you are trying to use numbers to explain God who can't be explained.
3) Problems arise when people bend numbers to solve an idea..
Example - we use numbers, to build rockets, to take us into space; but, it is impossible to ride on numbers, in order to, take us into space and that is what you are trying to do.
This doesn't really work unfortunately. There is no logical connection between the development of our notation for zero, and the reality that notation describes. This is the difference between epistemology of zero, and ontology of zero. If zero exists, it exists independent of human notation of it, if zero does not exist then what does our notation point to?
Definitely a delusional and rebellious argument from cosmic skeptic.
Isn’t it proven that energy is created out of nothing? For instance quantum flunctuations
No, energy can NOT be created nor destroyed, only transferred.
@@iffymarashi7700 Yes, *within* the universe
No, quantum fluctuations aren't "nothing" and there isn't an infinite supply of them. When there is a quantum fluctuation, the field that fluctuated reaches a lower energy state, and there's no way for the former higher state to arise again.
@@iffymarashi7700 Stars create energy out of matter, and matter is destroyed irrevocably in the process, so it really isn't true that matter can't be created.
It IS true that matter can't be created, apparently.
@@20july1944 huh? I’m talking about energy
What a surprise, yet another video of this Alex kid getting undue attention from an actual scholar. #SHOCKING
He's a theology graduate. It's hardly fair to dismiss him as "a kid."
that 'Alex kid' is made in God's image and we are to love him as ourselves
@@mrhandman4543 I have a quibble with that:
Jesus told us to love OUR enemies, but He never told us to love HIS enemies. He definitely hated the Pharisees, for example.
Alex has freely chosen to be Jesus's enemy by mocking theism in all forms -- it is irrational on his part and he's currently seeking to cause harm in that way.
In fairness to Alex (whom I despise) he is continuing to think and evolve his thinking and he's not the strident atheist punk he was a few years ago.
It would be lovely if he repents and surrenders.
@@20july1944 Romans 5:10
For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.
"while we were enemies" that includes me, you, alex and the rest of humanity. this is not up to debate. if Jesus died for his enemies, you dont get to go around hating atheists like alex.
Matthew 5: 43-48
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
@@mrhandman4543 Did Jesus love the Pharisees?
In a sense He did, hoping they would repent, but in a sense He didn't because He called them vipers and was 100% ready to punish them if they died in rebellion.
Same is true of Alex, in fact Alex is worse in that he has contempt for Father and Son while the Pharisees had a problem with Jesus only.
"begins to exist"
Who said the universe began? Did it? How do you know?
what kind of question is that. universe is literaly made out of matter and is filled with things that have a lifespan and are not eternal. Also ask every scientist and he will tell you universe began to exist at singularity
Is there any information/research that suggests that the universe is finite?
If it had a beginning, then something/someone set it all into motion as the laws of physics evidence, if it was set into motion and has continued for this long and allows for life and the application of science and reason because of it's uniformity/fine-tuning with regard to the laws of nature and many other precise settings for our very existence, then it follows that there is an infinitely wise mind who is the law giver and prime mover for the whole of existence. That's just some evidence pointing to a creator in regards to the beginning and laws of nature and our very ability to reason.
Have you ever looked into the moral law argument? Do you believe that there is absolute truth and ultimately right and wrong exist? Or is everything relative and right and wrong are merely opinions?
There is a God. The alternative is nihilism which removes all instrinsic value from life and makes everything meaningless, including your own questions, because, how can you trust your reasoning? And, what gives?...
@@IZZY404_ Nope. That's not how the Big Bang works. No cosmologist would say that.
@@Jay_in_Japan
Re-read your original comment , and realise that your logic can also be applied against you, by anyone with an opposing view...
What I'm trying to say is you're clearly ignorant and have a lot of learning to do. I mean no offence but it's the truth.
@@IZZY404_ Here's a short from an interview with cosmologist Brian Cox explaining this point: ruclips.net/user/shortsj5oU1dE88Yc
Nothing brings nothing 😅😅😅😅😅
Simple 😅
Not so simple. You need to have a logical proof that this is not a possibilty.
@@nmh75556 😅😅😅😅😅. Yeah u need logical proof that u r real of Ur father.perhaps u say DNA but there is also probability that it can be wrong.
You need to bring proof of Ur mental health bcz it is 100 💯 Ur mentally unstable
U need to also bring proof that ur wife doesn't such other dick😅😅😅
U need to bring also proof that may what u written it is only u write not other may be unr living in illusion 😅😅😅😅
@@nmh75556 just for ur common sense if we assume that from nothing can come something then if we apply any cause that brings from nothing to something then that is not nothing that is something.if u even not apply any cause or agent then where is the question of existence
Plz go to mental doctor I can suggest hope God make u well soon
@@hifzushaikhshaikh7511what is wrong with you
@@Hi-cu2vx 🤣🤣 this question I should ask to.u what is wrong with u and this new blind fool religion called atheism
Some quantum events involve things coming into being, though. For example, in beta minus decay, a neutron turns into a proton and an electron, so an electron comes into being. If it is an undetermined event, then there is no sufficient cause of the electron coming into being.
that is not something coming into existence from nothing, but rather the neutron being split into a Proton and an Elektron. So the splitting of the neutron is the cause for the proton and electron "coming into existence".
@@simonfalkner1682 truth.
They're equivocating terms. The "nothing" quantum physicists refer to is actually "something" rather than "no-thing", which is the common understanding of the word. They aren't referring to bits of matter and energy coming into existence where it had not before.
Think about it; if we had scientific evidence of something coming into existence from truly nothing then the first law of thermodynamics would have been proven false and therefore have been publicly rejected by the scientific community.
@@simonfalkner1682 Craig was defending a broader claim then something coming into existence out of nothing, though. He was defending the premise that ANYTHING that comes into existence has a cause, whether it came into existence out of nothing or pre-existing material. Since the splitting of the neutron and the coming into being of the electron are one and the same event, one cannot be the cause of the other.
@@LawlessNate I agree with all of that, but the first premise of the Kalam says, "Whatever comes into being has a cause." It does not say, "Whatever comes into being OUT OF NOTHING has a cause." So Craig is defending a broader claim than that something can't come into being out of nothing. If he were strictly talking about coming into being out of nothing, then of course radioactive decay (and quantum physics in general) would be irrelevant. But he clearly thinks it's relevant, which is why he makes a distinction between beings (like electrons) and events (like decay reactions).
The problem is the argument lacks a substantive logical argument to show that "something cannot come from nothing". What we need is a logical argument that shows such an absurdity could never occur. Possibly contingency is the something that needs to be added to the argument??
Do you think something can come from nothing?
Die in sin and unbelief in Jesus and to Hell you go forever. Accept the free gift of salvation right now and repent of your sins. Jesus said his yoke is easy and his burden is light. We need to trust him.
You're delusional
Lots of comments about NOTHING and maths. Next thing some wise guy will be trying to prove God with mathematics ! 🤣
existence of god is obvious, but it does not have to be abrahamic god
Obvious?!? How so?
@@theoskeptomai2535 Did you create yourself? Maybe your parents created themselves? Or grandparents? Who started the evolution? There should be first reason without a reason.
@@matterasmachine Wait. I asked you a straightforward question and you ignore it to ask three questions of your own?!?
@@theoskeptomai2535 No. He gave you an answer in the form of a question. More speseficaly, he refered to the idea of there needing to have been a first unmoved mover as primary cause. Which is what we call God.
@Theo Skeptomai There cannot be a natural cause for nature (the universe) otherwise nature would have to pre-exist itself in order to create itself. The cause therefore has to be beyond nature or supernatural.
So; sonething can't cone from nothing; but god came from nothing! ???? Riiiigggghhhhttt😂
The god we can't feel, hear, see; and can't prove! Riiiigggghhhhtttt! 😅😅😅
The Gospel:
Plain and
Simple
“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent
beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your
minds should be corrupted from the simplicity
that is in Christ.” - 2 Corithians 11:3
Ask someone today if they are saved and
you will most likely hear responses like these:
“I have accepted Jesus into my heart.” Or “I
have made him Lord of my life.” “I’ve been
baptized.” “I said a prayer.” Sounds all good
and churchy don’t it; but it is difficult to de-termine whether or not a person actually
knows the gospel that saves them. These useless phrases don’t describe a thing about what
the gospel is and has left a devastating effect
of people not knowing what it is that they are
saved from nor how they are saved; which
leaves a more serious effect of people questioning their salvation.
Let’s not muddy the simplicity of salvation that is in Christ with vague church
sounding phrases that do not communicate
anything. But rather present God’s word with
clarity and assuredness. So here is the gospel:
plain and simple.
Sin was passed upon all men by one man
Adam, and death is a consequence of this sin
(Rom 5:12). Mankind has an eternal destiny of
condemnation and wrath - Hell - because of
this sin (Rom 6:23). No matter what good
works one might do we are still found sinners
in the sight of our Creator God. And all unrighteousness and those who follow get indignation and wrath. We cannot be found
righteous for by God’s law we are found sinners (Rom 3:19-20). If we have broken even
one law we are found guilty.
It is for this reason of not being able to
create our own righteousness and being born
in a sinful flesh that we need a savior (Titus
3:5). Christ is that Savior, God manifested in
the flesh, sinless, died in our place on a cross
2000 years ago. Taking upon him the wrath
and judgement that was intended for us sinners. And it is through his bloodshed, burial,
and resurrection on our behalf that we are
able to have peace with God and forgiveness
of our sins (1 Cor 15:1-4, Col 3:14). This good
news is unto all but only those that believe in
it are made righteous in Christ (Romans
3:22).
It is then after we have heard this good
news of Christ’s righteousness available to us freely, that we are sealed with the Holy Spirit
and we are now part of Christ’s body the
church (Eph 1:13)
There is nothing that we need to do, no
good works that are required, and no bad
works that can separate us from our new position in Christ (Romans 8:35-39).
Faith and belief in this information from
God’s word is the gospel.
The gospel is not accepting Jesus into your
heart. The gospel is not making him lord of
your life, it is not saying a prayer and it is not
being baptized with water.
So next time someone asks you if you are
saved. Give them the clear assured answer
“Yes! And let me tell you why!”
Find more free resources at:
www.graceambassadors.com
I don't understand a single concept of quantum mechanics lol... Googled it. Different interpretations of quantum mechanics en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics