<p>heh,</p>
<p>im not going to bother with anything else on this site…its gotten OFF TOPIC.</p>
<p>JUST like in a Dr. Criag debate, EVERYONE is avoiding the Kalam argument and trying to get me to investigate theirs.</p>
<p>Im not moving forward until i hear a response…i made the SECOND post on this site and I HAVE YET TO HEAR A RESPONSE PEOPLE!!!</p>
<p>I personally think that one of the main reasons why we need to embrace Christianity, not just accept it is because it offers the definition of what ethics are. Although Thomas Paine tried to argue that most of our ethics are common sense, I think differently. The things that are naturally supposed to make sense without any outside influence is for individual fitness. Ethics might be corelated, but does not directly benefit a person. Ethics–something that is centered around not the individual, but the people–is something very new, or even irrational, to how life works, since natural selection always affects the individual, not the society. Society changes due to the individual, but natural selection does not directly act upon it.</p>
<p>You are the one refusing to address other people’s responses Bass, you’re only capable of telling people to go read other people’s arguments. </p>
<p>I have already addressed the Kalam argument in more than one way.</p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - The Case Against Atheism - Dr. William Lane Craig](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObduxqZMXfg&feature=related]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObduxqZMXfg&feature=related)</p>
<p>This is dr william lane craig. hes an EXPERT. he teaches at my school BIOLA UNIVERSITY.</p>
<p>LISTEN to him.</p>
<p>No, YOU need to defend YOUR argument, not Dr. William Lane Craig.</p>
<p>bass,
The Kalam argument is quickly refuted by tearing down the notion of the uncaused cause. The entire argument is held up by the notion that causality MUST exist, then goes to assume, again, that there is a divine, uncaused being. So your Kalam argument was already addressed by the people who asked: what caused God?</p>
<p>cuasality must exist is NOT a “notion” ok. its a FACT. </p>
<p>are you SERIOUS? i dnt even know where to START with you man if you dont know the principle of cause and effect. WOW.</p>
<ol>
<li>Whatever begins to exist has a cause.</li>
<li>The universe began to exist.</li>
<li>Therefore, the universe has a cause.</li>
</ol>
<p>Do you seriously think that the cosmological argument is some kind of QED for God and arminian theology? I’ll answer the challenge if you really like, but you give me the awful impression that you’ve never read any of the arguments against your position ever.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>What’s your justification for this? We can probably reasonably say that about most things in time and space. We’re talking about the apparent birth of time and space. I’m not sure that we can even talk coherently about it, much less describe some sort of absolute property about it. We’ve also seen some evidence in the quantum layer that there are things that appear to be uncaused.</p></li>
<li><p>Maybe, maybe not. Again, I’m not even sure we can talk coherently about it. We have literally no idea.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Your argument is obviously logically valid, but it’s rather far from being sound.</p>
<p>kkiijii,or whatever,</p>
<p>im done.</p>
<p>And just to add on, the causality argument is extremely intriguing to me, since the first time I heard it, but I still think this “uncaused cause” may one day be described by Physics. Until then, we are at a stalemate and you know it.</p>
<p>Bass: It is only a fact given that time and space exists. If time and space were to be crushed into a singularity, causality is no longer applicable. </p>
<p>Also, if determinism is fallible through quantum uncertainty, causality also does not apply.</p>
<p>Facts are subsets of notions you *<strong><em>ing ■■■■■■. *</em></strong> you, youre ignorant. Just like all religious zealots, you can’t argue without getting emotional.</p>
<p>is anyone watching the video i posted???</p>
<p>If watching the video will acknowledge your own inability to participate in a philosophical debate, then yes, I’ll watch it.</p>
<p>im not getting emotional grey, seriously dude, i just get sick of this crap. NOONE knows what im talking about and i get sick of answering what seems to EXPERTS to be solved problems.</p>
<p>Yeah, I’m out. Thought this was going to be a decent conversation, not just a “<link to=”" video=“”>" “IS ANYONE WATCHING IT?” “OMG WILLIAM LANE CRAIG IS AN EXPERT” 80-thousand post spamthread.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Yeah, right, you’re linking to videos because you’re sick of answering. I think the real issue is that you are incapable of answering and must resort to expert help. If not, prove me wrong by actually defending your arguments.</p>
<p>everyone, huh, kkijhijijki, everyone…</p>
<p>seriously this is just lame…hahaha i mean this is why im going to be an apologist, to do this in the public square with a moderator…</p>
<p>the concept of fact is simply a theory…</p>