[Craig, previously] > Basically there are only 2 choices: a) the universe always existed or > b) it came into existence from nothing. We have no better evidence > for a) than for b).
[Micah] > We have evidence of A - the universe exists. We have absolutely > no evidence of B - [nothingness] exists. You would be right if the question were whether we had better evidence for a.1) the universe existing or b,1) nothingness existing. But the question is whether we have better evidence for a.2) the universe having ALWAYS existed or b.2) nothingness having ever existed. We have no better evidence for a.2) than for b.2). [dmb] > [Basically there are only 2 choices: a) the universe always existed or > b) it came into existence from nothing] strikes me as a theological > construction. I mean, why couldn't the universe come into existence > from something rather than nothing? Why couldn't the universe come into existence from something other than the universe? Now that's a "theological construction". Craig Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
