---

The Conservation of Energy: Matter/energy can neither be created or destroyed.

This seems to disprove divine creation.

---

It had to come from somewhere.  It had to have a beginning.  If God doesn't exist, there had to be a point where something had to come from nothing.  If the Law of Conservation of Energy is true, then God, who is not made of matter or energy, had to be there to create matter.

---

Quote: from Moridin at 12:36 am on July 9, 2008

---

The Conservation of Energy: Matter/energy can neither be created or destroyed.  

 This seems to disprove divine creation.

---

It had to come from somewhere.  It had to have a beginning.  If God doesn't exist, there had to be a point where something had to come from nothing.  If the Law of Conservation of Energy is true, then God, who is not made of matter or energy, had to be there to create matter.

---

Then "god" itself needed to come from somewhere!

If the conservation of energy is true, energy could not have, by definition, been created, since it can neither be created or destroyed.

-------
"The larger the island of knowledge, the longer the
shoreline of wonder" (Ralph W. Sockman)

---

Yes that law is just one of the many things that shows there is no god

---

Post edited at 1:06 pm on July 10, 2008 by Forever Angel

-------
"God does not play dice" - Albert Einstein
"God does play dice" - Stephen Hawking

Pectus Pectoris Memor

---

I agree with the Law, however, you still cannot account for the expansion without a presumption of existence beforehand.  Is merely presuming something existed beforehand considered proper, cold, hard scientifically proven fact?

---

Existence exists axiomatically. Is that so hard to grasp. Furthermore, as a theist, you presuppose an ever more improbable existence, namely god.

-------
"The larger the island of knowledge, the longer the
shoreline of wonder" (Ralph W. Sockman)

---

Quote: from Soren Kierkegaard at 10:48 pm on July 10, 2008

---

I agree with the Law, however, you still cannot account for the expansion without a presumption of existence beforehand.  Is merely presuming something existed beforehand considered proper, cold, hard scientifically proven fact?

---

Existence exists axiomatically. Is that so hard to grasp. Furthermore, as a theist, you presuppose an ever more improbable existence, namely god.

---

---

That a magical, omnipotent, transcendent and infinitely complex god some how exists is completely implausible. No one is arguing that nature is infinitely old. It may very well be finite, yet without beginning.

---

---

Quote: from Moridin at 12:37 pm on July 11, 2008

---

That a magical, omnipotent, transcendent and infinitely complex god some how exists is completely implausible. No one is arguing that nature is infinitely old. It may very well be finite, yet without beginning.

---

Completely implausible is not synonymous with impossible or even close.

---

Pretty close.

-------
"The larger the island of knowledge, the longer the
shoreline of wonder" (Ralph W. Sockman)

---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 9:00 pm on July 11, 2008

---

Quote: from Moridin at 12:37 pm on July 11, 2008

---

That a magical, omnipotent, transcendent and infinitely complex god some how exists is completely implausible. No one is arguing that nature is infinitely old. It may very well be finite, yet without beginning.

---

Completely implausible is not synonymous with impossible or even close.

---

Pretty close.

---

I see you've accepted at least a part of the definition of 'eternal', though.

-------
"God does not play dice" - Albert Einstein
"God does play dice" - Stephen Hawking

Pectus Pectoris Memor