Re: TamaNewb @ YouTube

Quote Originally Posted by TamaNewb
The universe was spawn naturally, there is no need for a god, like i already stated everything is explained in string theory. There is NO non-existence which the universe came from. there IS existence beyond our universe. Just because something is unknown or unknowable doesn't make it impossible. "since god cant be less then us": Why cant a creator create something greater then itself? The Resurrection is and will never be proven. Physical evidence is needed, which doesnt exist.
To spawn naturally needs a cause from something. It can't just happen all by itself like puff the magic dragon. Since you agree the universe can't come from non-existence then you should agree with this point. And since there can't be an infinite regress of cause and effects because you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so, we know nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated. This is whom we call God the uncreated Creator.

Since God is proven yet to reject God and His Son, the Bible is clear: "If anyone does not love the Lord, that person is cursed. Our Lord, come!" (1 Cor. 16.22).

Since God can't be less than us, He is personal and reveals Himself. The lesser can never create the greater. Non-sentience can't produce sentient life. Since you can't create a being greater than you and you can't get non-life to turn into life, you provide this evidence yourself atheism is a lie.

Only in Christianity does God enter His creation. Since the resurrection is proven, this proves Jesus is God for man can't resurrect Himself. Science and physical evidence agree only God could do that. If you don't think the resurrection is proven then come up with a PHYSICAL naturalistic explanation for the origin of the disciples' beliefs and their eyewitness testimony that has been physically documented. People don't willingly die for what they know is a lie-this is a physical fact-and group hallucinations are impossible which is also a physical fact.

You previously mentioned something about the moon splitting by Muhammad. How many writings of original eyewitnesses do you have for this alleged splitting of the moon? Who was there to see it? How many centuries later was it written? Why discount a natural phenomenon like something in the atmosphere crossing it's path to cause it to appear to split? Why did nobody else see it in the world which you would expect for such a massive event, including massive tidal waves that scientists say would occur?

Whereas multiple attestation in various group settings are substantial testimony in the case of the disciples up close and personal. They didn't willingly die for a lie, so they truly believed it, yet group hallucinations are impossible.

You really can't ask for a better physical proof than this proof of the physical resurrection of Jesus that is testified to physically and physically recorded on papyri and physically communicated from one generation to the next, e.g. Polycarp was a student of John and Clement of Rome was friends with Peter as physically recorded by these second generation Apostles.