Physical reality (all spacetime) began to exist.
• [Big Bang] Gravity equations yield a past-bound singularity.
• [BGV theorem] Any average-expanding space has a beginning.
• [2nd Law] Total entropic decay has not arrived yet.
• [General 2nd Law] Total generalized entropy is not maxed.
• [Philosophy] Logically, prior events cannot number to infinity.
• [See full debate: Did physical reality (all-space-time) begin to exist?]
• …a beginningless-cosmos model is true (e.g. emergent, pre-BigBang, cyclic).
• …the Schrödinger equation implies the past is eternal. [Forthcoming]
• …time does not truly exist. [Forthcoming]
• …there is no first point in time. [Forthcoming]
• …the singularity isn’t a first event (it is not in time). [Forthcoming]
Of all the known ways the Universe's physical laws, constants, and initial conditions could have been, few ways would ever allow any life to exist..1
• …various constants of physics are fine-tuned.
• …various initial conditions are fine-tuned.
• …various laws of physics are fine-tuned.
• …changes just yield different life forms
• …constant's can't be different (T.O.E.)
• …life-friendly Universes are rare but probable[Forthcoming]
• …one can't do probabilities with an infinite range[Forthcoming]
• …new knowledge will eliminate fine-tuning
• …over 99.9% of the universe is hostile to life.
But so what if the Universe is fine-tuned (or life-permitting)? Plausibly…
• …many universes exist or existed, and we won the universe lottery.4
• …we would not be here unless the unlikely did occur.
• …the Universe is equally fine-tuned to permit rocks, etc.[Forthcoming]
• …-t is only fine-tuned to life as we know it.
• …God would need a fine-tuner, too.
• …“God did it” is not an explanation.
Of all the known ways the universe could have been, few have initial conditions, laws, and physical constants which would ever allow those lifeforms to learn about it. This is a uniquely awkward and shocking development for atheists1 because it means for them that we got really lucky for no reason. If God exists, however, then the Universe’s amenability to being discovered and known is not nearly so surprising or improbable.2 Such a universe is the kind of thing God would plausibly choose to create.
Features of living organisms resemble the products of an intelligent mind intentionally arranging parts for a purpose..
• … the cell and its inner-workings seem to be.
Actually it is not relevant. Plausibly…
• … [life evolved in an unguided way that mimics the pattern of intelligent design].[Forthcoming]
Our perception, memory, reason and so forth can justify beliefs, and have a propensity to recommend to us true beliefs rather than false ones.1
• …x law of physics is constant.
• …x happened in the past.
• …x exists outside my mind.
• …x is conscious.
• …x is objectively morally wrong.
• …x could've occurred.
Actually its not relevant. Plausibly…
• …reliable faculties were selected for by an unguided evolutionary process.[Forthcoming]
Humans are innately inclined to be theist—instinctively it commonsensical or intuitive—even if they and/or their culture ultimately disbelieve it.
• …scientists find theism intuitive. (Boston study, 2013)
• …atheists find theism intuitive. (Finland study, 2013)
• …humans are born believers. (Oxford study, 2011)
• …intuitive thinkers favor theism. (Harvard study, 2011)
But so what? Plausibly,
• The God intuition is a misleading evolutionary byproduct?
Some actions are morally wrong despite what anybody believes. This is relevant because the existence of such specifically personal facts in the world is unlikely if the world is, at bottom, impersonal (particles and physics), and yet it is very much the kind of thing we would anticipate if a God exists who grounds the world and who could not fail to have been loving, honest, etc.
But so what? Plausibly… [All Forthcoming]
• x's net consequences are bad.
• x is done for bad reasons.
• x wouldn't be done by an “ideal observer”.
Some thing exists which is such that it could not have failed to exist; all possible realities require it.
• Turri's Argument from Beginnings
• A “Sum-styled” Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
• A “Start-styled” Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
• Pruss's Leibnizian Cosmological Argument
• A Big Bang Argument from Beginnings
• Rasmussen's Modal Argument from Beginnings
• Weaver's Argument from Beginnings
Genuine supernatural events have occurred within human history, ones which are plausibly imbued with spiritual significance.
• Jesus was raised from the dead (resurrected).
• Ezekiel accurately prophesied Tyre's destruction.
God's properties are incoherent or yield contradictions.
• …all-powerful (e.g. able to life unliftable rocks)!
• …free (will)
• …perfectly rational
• …both timeless and personal
• …both timeless and a creator
• …both omniscient and libertarianly free
• …both omnipotent and omnibenevolent
• …both all-just and all-loving
The idea of a God existing is extravagant and intrinsically improbable; the so-called prior probability of God’s existence—prior to looking at evidence for or against—seems very low. This is relevant because a low prior probability is functionally similar to having evidence against it. More complex and bold hypothesis have more ways/chances of being wrong. We expect them to be wrong in the absence of sufficient evidence.
• …the God of bare theism is more simple than a single fundamental particle. God is a unified soul (an unbreakable thing with no parts)1, and its the simplest possible soul: it only has three fundamental properties (those necessary for being a soul), and in their simplest form—without limits.2
• …reason alone confirms theism (or something close). [Forthcoming]
Fundamental reality is mind-less (or mathematically describable). This is relevant because God is essentially a thinking-thing without limits, and God's nature cannot be captured by mathematical equation.
No, [All Forthcoming]
• Mental properties exist.
• Souls exist
• Heaven exists
• Moral facts exist
• The cause of of the natural world exists
Any good God who exists would've chosen to ensure less (or no) suffering occur
• …plausibly, greater good require, risk, or result in suffering. Like the conjunctive goods of…
Any loving God who exists would've chosen to ensure less (or no) disbelief occur.
•…belief in God is required for relationship with God.
Theistic explanation is illigitimate; real potential explanations cannot feature God.
• …“God-did-it” is just an appeal to ignorance-gaps
• …“God-did-it” is just an appeal to magic
• …explanations don't compound the mystery
• …explanations don't explain “too much”
• …meaningful claims are verifiable (by senses)
• …meaningful claims are falsifiable/testable
• …explanations cite effective mechanisms
• …explanations are unificationist