That something begins doesn't imply a causer.
Why don't we see things beginning now without causes? If they are unnecessary for beginnings, we should be able to see many examples of this.
the universe can be observed to be expanding.. an expanding universe must have had a beginning.
whatever begins to exist had a cause.
therefore the universe had a cause.
That something begins doesn't imply a causer.
Why don't we see things beginning now without causes? If they are unnecessary for beginnings, we should be able to see many examples of this.
the universe can be observed to be expanding.. an expanding universe must have had a beginning.
whatever begins to exist had a cause.
therefore the universe had a cause.
I agree Fisherman. "Eternity" or timelessness (are they different?) must have always been posited somewhere. We can clearly discern that from the things that we can see - a beginning.
His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made - Romans 1: 20
the universe can be observed to be expanding.. an expanding universe must have had a beginning.
whatever begins to exist had a cause.
therefore the universe had a cause.
The problem is more whether the concept of 'before a beginning' is even useful, and it certainly doesn't imply a 'causer'.
Doesn't imply a Causer? What kind of a beginning doesn't have a cause?
the universe can be observed to be expanding.. an expanding universe must have had a beginning.
whatever begins to exist had a cause.
therefore the universe had a cause.
Which is more extreme?
A. Imagining things coming into existence without a cause
B. Imagining a first cause existing beyond our cause and effect (space/time) universe
the universe can be observed to be expanding.. an expanding universe must have had a beginning.
whatever begins to exist had a cause.
therefore the universe had a cause.
Know ye that the Lord he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves - Ps. 100:3
what caused the Causer to exist?
The Causer that caused the Space-Time Universe to exist must by necessity exist apart from space-time. Otherwise if he was part of the space-time system, then he would have had a beginning and would also have need of a cause.
Existing outside of the space-time universe solves the problem of needing a first-cause for our observable existence, while at the same time providing insight into the uniqueness of this first cause.
Isaiah 45:5-6 - I am the Lord, and there is none else, there is no God beside me.... from the rising of the sun, and from the west, there is none beside me. I am the Lord, and there is none else.
the universe can be observed to be expanding.. an expanding universe must have had a beginning.
whatever begins to exist had a cause.
therefore the universe had a cause.
The universe can be observed to be expanding.
An expanding universe must have had a beginning.
Whatever begins to exist had a cause.
Therefore the universe was caused by something.
What Caused the Universe to exist?
naturally leads to the question of god.
why does man need god?
why does man create god?
Why does man need God?
Man needs God because, left to himself man serves his fallen flesh, which is a cruel master. God is a wonderful alternative.
The bomb is tickng.
i hear my wife say to me " we are the only religion that does the will of god , and that is to preach door to door, and speak about gods kingdom" and in one sense she is correct, i know there are others that preach door to door, but then someone told me door to door, does not literally mean door to door in modern times.
i was confused, has anyone ever heard of this before?
Exactly Vanderhoven.
Jesus was once asked a similar question:
John 6 - What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst....
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life I am that bread of life. ... I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
Unfortunately, Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe Jesus when he said to eat and drink the emblems of the New Covenant.
Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins - Mt. 26: 27-28Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the New Covenant (Testament) is for rulership positions in the Millennium reign and not for the "remission of sins" as Jesus clearly stated.
Whom we believe determines our destiny, just as it always has... since Eden. This is the eternal standard of governance for free moral agents. God honors our choices.
for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. - Gal. 2: 16
Hi Ryan,
Glad to have you on board.
Someone once said, "When you are going through a rough time, keep going".
- Perry