You asked me on my interpretation. I lack a belief in a god, and lack the belief a god created the universe. You are the one claiming a god created the universe, I do not.
Note, I did not deny, I just stated I lacked belief because of a lack of evidence. If you can prove a god exists, then prove a god created this universe, then I will change my position.
But so far, you have offered zero evidence.
No, you are not. You are continually making assertions without offering any proof. Many of us are responding and offering explanations. But you are a broken record, just going over and over the same old cliches.
Yes, your right that I’m going over things that I’ve said.
Yes, a design does imply a designer.
And a load of old bollocks does imply a load of stupidity spouting it.
So from what I’m understanding from this model is that the universe would collapse at some point?
I’m confused, what do you mean?
No, I do not believe you are “confused”. You are sadly misled, and delusional if you think you can “logic” or “reason” your “First Cause/creator/Insert-god-title-here” into existence.
You are, however evidencing certain characteristics of that annoying, rather stupid species, the theist troll.
If you have anything other than thin, specious argumentum ad ignorantiam do please bring them forth, with, of course, your Nobel for solving the ultimate mystery of existence, with evidence, peer reviewed papers and a note from your Mum allowing you out after 7pm.
I’m actually confused by what you meant by that. And lol what theist troll I actually wanna know, I don’t like being compared to trolls, I’m not trolling you.
That first sentence of mine conveys exactly the same sort of message that your multiple postings have done on this thread. You seem to have comprehension difficulties. A simple sentence like “I don’t know” seems to have you tied in knots spouting bullshit. Here is another: YOU. DON’T. KNOW. YOU DO NOT KNOW the future of the observable universe. YOU DO NOT KNOW whether the observable universe is a product of creation, 3 blind mice or an oily rag left on the floor of an old garage in Aldeberan IV.
The Kalam argument, Like Aquinas’s, have been chewed to death on these forums, yet here we are with another pre pubertal theist, full of spunk and vigor, spouting nonsensical phrases, so full of bollocks that their ears are blocked by the amount of crud they accumulated from Youtube and their pastor.
YOU DON’T KNOW. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE. YOU ARE A POSEUR.
Wow, you really are assuming allot of things about me.
Not half as many as you are assuming about your “god”
I am sure however when it comes to the origins of our observable universe YOU DO NOT KNOW the answer.
Just wondering if you acknowledge that the universe had a beginning? Scientists tell us that the universe began from a singularity about 14 billion years ago. And yes I’m repeating the same thing because your a new atheist that I’m talking to. So I want to ask you. Also you don’t always need to observe things to come to a conclusion, you can use your rationality.
Examples.
The observable universe is a product of the Expansion point. Beyond that WE DON"T KNOW. NOBODY KNOWS.
Not a hard concept. Do tell if it is just too hard for you to comprehend.
And no, I don’t fall for silly word games and “aha” moments. They are intellectually dishonest.
So do you believe that the universe began?
What part of the first statement do you not understand? Would your prefer Gaelic (Gaidhlig)? Urdu? French? Just tell me the words you are having difficulty with.
So the expansion point is what started the observable universe?
Collapse, but not completely. More like a spring extending, then collapsing, and so on. The entire cosmos (all of everything) would not reach a zero state (no mass, no time, no energy).
Are you really having this much trouble with a simple statement? If really is too hard for you ask your grade school teacher, I am sure she can sort you out.
What does the expansion point contain?