Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Proof

@kellyjay said
Proof is God showing up ending the debate, but when the author steps on stage the play is over.

You get to see the universe and everything in it, to draw your own conclusions. If you choose to ignore what is before you, that’s on you.

That is not extraordinary proof.
Please provide extraordinary proof for your extraordinary claim.

@eladar said
False assumption.

Then please provide extraordinary proof for your extraordinary claim.

@caissad4 said
That is not extraordinary proof.
Please provide extraordinary proof for your extraordinary claim.

Well the universe is here, you have some form of logic that says it could come from nothing? You have any idea at all how it got here in the form it did? We can move on to life after a few rounds of this.

@kellyjay said
Well the universe is here, you have some form of logic that says it could come from nothing? You have any idea at all how it got here in the form it did? We can move on to life after a few rounds of this.

I have no proof as to how the universe got here in the form it did.
You have made the extraordinary claim that you know.
Please provide extraordinary proof of your extraordinary claim.

@caissad4 said
Your statement is not extraordinary proof for your extraordinary claim.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Please provide extraordinary proof for your extraordinary claim.

Oh my....... Open your eyes and look past your nose maybe? Not that you'll look but if your not afraid, here ya go.....

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201403/untold-story-of-creation/

@rajk999 said
Of course. It does not apply to me and others who have made no extraordinary claims.. Eg
- I have the Holy Spirit
- I have eternal life
- Non-Christians will be tormented for eternity
No such thing have I ever claimed

Err no. I was referring to your accusations of Christians being lazy greedy and selfish, and how they should be letting their light shine etc and so forth. Except you, who are none of the negatives traits which you spout, and all of the positive ones. You don’t present well in here as being that which you claim others should aspire to.

@caissad4 said
I have no proof as to how the universe got here in the form it did.
You have made the extraordinary claim that you know.
Please provide extraordinary proof of your extraordinary claim.

The reason you don't have proof how it got here is because the reason it is here, the cause, transcends the universe itself. There is no cause within the universe to explain it, it resides outside of it's boundaries. Yet, He makes Himself known to those that seek Him with all their hearts.

@galveston75 said
Oh my....... Open your eyes and look past your nose maybe? Not that you'll look but if your not afraid, here ya go.....

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201403/untold-story-of-creation/

That is not extraordinary proof.
Please provide extraordinary proof for your extraordinary claim.

@kellyjay said
The reason you don't have proof how it got here is because the reason it is here, the cause, transcends the universe itself. There is no cause within the universe to explain it, it resides outside of it's boundaries. Yet, He makes Himself known to those that seek Him with all their hearts.

That is not extraordinary proof.

@caissad4 said
That is not extraordinary proof.

I'm not overly concern with your desire to see something you cannot fathom.

@kellyjay said
Really I think you are avoiding one of the most important questions of them all! To know the beginning reveals a vast amount of errors in how the universe should be viewed. I have no doubt that question just because of that is avoided many who see the answer as bursting of their world views.

How the universe "should" be viewed? In what sense "should"?

I have no doubt that you cannot doubt that origins have deep meaning. This is not because origins have deep meaning; it is because of the religion you happen to accept. The fixation on origins is a peculiarity of the religions which grew up around the Mediterranean. Buddhism says the origin is undefined; it does not matter whether the universe had a beginning or no beginning.

There is a certain scientific interest in finding out whatever we can about the very early history of the universe, based on laws of physics. In this sense, how the universe should be viewed is: based on evidence.

Based on the evidence: even if the atheist camp grants that some sort of unmoved mover is required to get the universe going initially, it does not follow that that unmoved mover is God or a god or anything remotely like a God with intentions or purposes and a message for man, much less that it is equivalent to your God and the God of Abraham, much less that that God died on the cross at Calvary. There is no evidence of divine intelligent design, even if we grant the supposition of in an unmoved mover to answer a spurious question "Where did everything come from?" Any mindless force external to the universe suffices, like a match which ignites a fuse and then burns out just before the Big Inflation.

If any world views end up being burst by this, it will be the literalist interpretation of Genesis which bites the dust. Mainstream Christians have already abandoned that interpretation anyway; only certain Protestants in the American Bible belt seem hell-bent on trying to keep that interpretation afloat.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

God created the universe out of nothing, and God is the irreducible beginning point.

Of course, this has to be accepted on faith.

it is completely rational to believe this.

There are reasonable arguments either way. But it does seem ridiculous to think of matter, which we know decays, is uncreated, and that the laws which govern existnece possess a unique structure that facilitates life... But only life in one known place. To date, no other planet really seems to be a good candidate for intelligent life.

@caissad4 said
I have no proof as to how the universe got here in the form it did.
You have made the extraordinary claim that you know.
Please provide extraordinary proof of your extraordinary claim.

The thing is... most things, at some point, have to be taken on faith, unless it is hopelessly mundane and worldly.

I guess we could prove something silly like "Jaeyuk deopbab exists and it is pretty good," "my shoes are black," etc.

But for things with actual meaning -- the rightness and wrongness of a thing, beauty, love, etc., faith is always required. This is because meaning itself is abstract.

@moonbus said
How the universe "should" be viewed? In what sense "should"?

I have no doubt that you cannot doubt that origins have deep meaning. This is not because origins have deep meaning; it is because of the religion you happen to accept. The fixation on origins is a peculiarity of the religions which grew up around the Mediterranean. Buddhism says the origin is undefined; i ...[text shortened]... Protestants in the American Bible belt seem hell-bent on trying to keep that interpretation afloat.

But even with proof in hand of how the universe came to be, this would not actually invalidate God.

Everyone involved in the debate would benefit from taking a step back and realizing that proof cannot be made either way. The exercise IS beneficial in understanding the viewpoint of the other side. We can realize that we are all human and that this does not somehow grant us providence to be able to present any kind of unassailable "proof" regardless of the direction of our belief.

Even-steven. Tied up. 0 all. No one has the "upper hand" in this debate. And in this regard, we are exactly the same. Nothing to fight about. Just humans, looking for answers, even if we cannot find them. The ones demanding proof for one side will end up just as disappointed as those looking for proof for the other side.

@moonbus said
How the universe "should" be viewed? In what sense "should"?

I have no doubt that you cannot doubt that origins have deep meaning. This is not because origins have deep meaning; it is because of the religion you happen to accept. The fixation on origins is a peculiarity of the religions which grew up around the Mediterranean. Buddhism says the origin is undefined; i ...[text shortened]... Protestants in the American Bible belt seem hell-bent on trying to keep that interpretation afloat.

If you knew the universe was here because of no reason, or it is here with a cause and purpose you think it should be viewed the same way? You think human life is here for no reasons other than due to an accident of time, chance, and the material laying around the earth, than life human life is of any importance than a blade of grass which came up the same way? If human life was created for cause with love at the center of it by our Creator, doesn't each life now take on an importance greater than the rest of life? The attempts of redefining human life through any means including feelings would then be at odds our origin. All attempts to redefine values in life and actions would be at revealed as rubbish.

Dismissing the beginning is allowing anything for any purpose to have an equal say in all value judgments. Pick any belief system, you think their origins matter if someone just made it up, or some revelation occurred from a God that transcends the universe itself?