אז ככה
לא ידעתי שיש שם לטיעון שנתתי - ושהוא אפילו הטיעון החזק ביותר הקיים לקיומו של אלוקים - אני רואה זאת כמחמאה. א) שים לב מה עוד רשמו על טיעון ה- kalam "So, we have shown that the universe must have had a beginning and because it had a beginning, it must have had a cause. The cause of the universe, though, is what we're really interested in. It had to be immaterial, because matter as part of the universe had it's beginning with the universe. It must be something not tied to time at all, because time - as part of the universe - had to have a beginning. And it must have exercised some decision-making capability in order to create the universe at all. Therefore, we have a logical proof for the existence of God. While the Kalam argument is persuasive, it is limiting in the fact that it cannot tell us which God created the universe. It does, however, give the Christian worldview two steps up on the atheistic view. " בקשר לטיעון ההזוי בקישור שננת. הוא לא מוכיח ולא מפריך כלום - אלא סתם משאלות לב - פסאדו מדעיות.
לא ידעתי שיש שם לטיעון שנתתי - ושהוא אפילו הטיעון החזק ביותר הקיים לקיומו של אלוקים - אני רואה זאת כמחמאה. א) שים לב מה עוד רשמו על טיעון ה- kalam "So, we have shown that the universe must have had a beginning and because it had a beginning, it must have had a cause. The cause of the universe, though, is what we're really interested in. It had to be immaterial, because matter as part of the universe had it's beginning with the universe. It must be something not tied to time at all, because time - as part of the universe - had to have a beginning. And it must have exercised some decision-making capability in order to create the universe at all. Therefore, we have a logical proof for the existence of God. While the Kalam argument is persuasive, it is limiting in the fact that it cannot tell us which God created the universe. It does, however, give the Christian worldview two steps up on the atheistic view. " בקשר לטיעון ההזוי בקישור שננת. הוא לא מוכיח ולא מפריך כלום - אלא סתם משאלות לב - פסאדו מדעיות.