3 ms·

I understand that many people believe that, but I don't take it that there is broad consensus-- or any consensus-- that the Big Bang represents the beginning of

I understand that many people believe that, but I don't take it that there is broad consensus-- or any consensus-- that the Big Bang represents the beginning of anything save our the beginning of what we can reasonably infer and observe. I think most self-respecting astrophysicists would respond to the question "Was there anything prior to the Big Bang?" with an "I don't know". Regardless, P1 is still required to make Craig's KCA work, because P2 is compatible with the universe just happening. Editing to account for your later comments: >There is nothing that comes into existence without a cause. From your innermost creative thoughts to a spot of mold on bread, to a new leaf on a tree, to the seemingly random emergence of a rain storm - all have a beginning and all have a cause. That isn't quite the same scenario. The sort of causation we observe (which is actually compatible with no causation, a la Hume) is more like shuffling around of existing matter and does not translate to direct evidence for or against the hypothesis that something can come into existence uncaused.

joshuamcginnis 2y ago
No one is claiming to know what happened prior to the Big Bang. Whatever existed before time had to be infinite. If you read my logic carefully, I believe I make a perfectly reasonable case for 1. the universe existing (which I think most people would agree, we are living in an existence) and 2. that existence having a start (e.g. the universe is expanding, light gets redder the longer it travels, etc) 3. Anything that comes into existence has a cause. I think when you combine the scientific evidence with the logic and continue down that line, you can make a good faith argument for an intelligent creator.
- vjerancrnjak 2y ago
  If you take general relativity and evidence for it then you’d have to accept there is no beginning or end, there’s spacetime. No time is passing and all events are embedded in timeless spacetime. If you take quantum field theory, all reality spawns somehow out of immaterial fields without any cause. Others from Advaita stream of thought have arrived at a place where the absolute is not God at all and don’t need physics to reason about that. In their terms we are all God with a problem of mistaken identity. Reality is already timeless, deathless.

joshuamcginnis 2y ago

No one is claiming to know what happened prior to the Big Bang. Whatever existed before time had to be infinite. If you read my logic carefully, I believe I make a perfectly reasonable case for 1. the universe existing (which I think most people would agree, we are living in an existence) and 2. that existence having a start (e.g. the universe is expanding, light gets redder the longer it travels, etc) 3. Anything that comes into existence has a cause. I think when you combine the scientific evidence with the logic and continue down that line, you can make a good faith argument for an intelligent creator.

vjerancrnjak 2y ago
If you take general relativity and evidence for it then you’d have to accept there is no beginning or end, there’s spacetime. No time is passing and all events are embedded in timeless spacetime. If you take quantum field theory, all reality spawns somehow out of immaterial fields without any cause. Others from Advaita stream of thought have arrived at a place where the absolute is not God at all and don’t need physics to reason about that. In their terms we are all God with a problem of mistaken identity. Reality is already timeless, deathless.