The God Of The Bible Exists

1. Here is the cosmological argument for the existence of God yet again: The Cosmological argument: The argument in a nutshell is as follows: a. Everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence. b. The universe began to exist. c. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence. d. Since no scientific explanation (in terms of physical laws) can provide a causal account of the origin of the universe, the cause must be personal (explanation is given in terms of a personal agent). God is the best explanation for the existence of the universe. If you have any objections to any of the premises in this argument, see source and see if your objection is listed there. The source gives good explanations to the objections it lists. Source: . https://carm.org............ My opponent responds to this by claiming that before the universe existed, there was no "radiation/particles/wavelengths/matter/energy/space/time/gravity. .. nothing [+0,-0]= 0. " I completely agree with that statement. Then he goes on to explain that the Universe does have a origin. Notice how he agrees to the first three premises (letters a,b,c) in my argument? Lastly, he goes on defending the Big bang as the event that caused the universe. There are many problems with this. He says this: "The article above refers to quantum fluctuations as vacuum fluctuations because, in our universe of space and matter, we've detected these fluctuations by using a vacuum that strips the basics of something from empty space. But the sub nuclear particles in QF are something, right? " No, the sub nuclear particles may not be something but the vacuum is something. That is where your argument falls apart. Therefore you haven't shown that something can come from nothing (that is impossible). By the way, even if something could come from nothing. .. wouldn't that be happening all of the time? Lets move onto my forth premise of my argument. God is the best explanation of the Universe since the cause of the Universe has to "transcend space and time, since it created space and time. Therefore it must be immaterial and nonphysical. It must be unimaginably powerful, since it created all matter and energy" (William Lane Craig). That sounds a lot like God to me. The Big Bang theory affirms that the universe has a cause but it doesn't establish itself as the cause (at least not the all powerful, timeless, personal cause of the universe). "I reject the claim that the universe has a creator, god, because creation is a temporal process, contingent on time, and at [+0,-0] there was no stative time or the passage thereof, because there was no stative space; temporal processes like creation are nonsensical without time. " I find this confusing since my opponent has already admitted that the universe has a cause and at the same time he admitted that time did not exist before the universe. So why does my opponent have a problem with an all powerful timeless being creating the universe (including time)? He believes that the big bang somehow created time so why couldn't a God do the same? 2. Lets take a look at my moral argument again. 1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist. My brief defense of this premise: Objective morals have to come from an objective source and that source can only be God. Nothing/nobody else could produce an objective moral code. 2. Objective moral values do exist. My brief defense of this premise: Almost all people are aware that murder, lying, stealing, and etc. .. are wrong. it seems crazy to believe that every person just so happens to have the same subjective opinion on these basic moral principles. There must be some sort of universal moral law that exists. 3. Therefore, God exists. That is the short version of the argument. Please tell me what problems you have with the argument and I will address them in the next round. My opponent responds to this by saying that objective morality does in fact exist (affirming my second premise). He says that "objectively, slavery is immoral. " Therefore my opponent has acknowledged that a moral God exists by affirming my argument. Now all I have to do is to convince him that the God of the Bible is moral. First lets start off by mentioning that God freed thousands of people from slavery in the book of exodus. And in Genesis 21:10, a woman tosses her servant (or slave) and her son into the wilderness and God takes care of them and promises them security. God certainly cares about slaves. Paul even says that in Jesus, there is no slave or free. All people (in a sense) are one in God's eyes. As for the verse from Exodus, you just quoted a restriction God put on slave owners. God allowed slavery to happen so that people could have free will. God hates sin but does allow humans to make their own choices. God never does anything in the Bible to condone slavery. But he does restrict it (. https://carm.org...), free slaves, and say they are all one in Christ Jesus. Sounds perfectly moral to me. As for the stoning of non virgins. .. you must keep in mind that with the atheist worldview, morality is subjective. So you couldn't say whether something was immoral or not. But since you have already admitted that objective morality exists, I will address this. Women were not stoned for not being a virgin, but for the deception in trying to appear as one" (. https://carm.org...). If you actually took time to read the whole chapter, you would see that Adultery was taken very seriously by cultures at that time and men and women were punished for their sins. If a man accused a women of not being a virgin when they married (which was a horrible offense 3,000 yrs ago) and was wrong, he would be whipped and would have to pay the women's parents a lot of cash. And he would have to provide for his wife forever. But if he was right in his accusation, the women would be put to death. Keep in mind that all people who committed adultery were put to death in those times. God declares adultery as immoral and that happened to be a commandment that had to be followed back then. Now a days, people can commit adultery whenever they want and seem to get away with it. It was a good thing that it was punished back then. Wouldn't you agree? 3. Teleological Argument Why did you completely ignore this argument for God's existence? 4. Jesus' existence Why did you completely ignore what I said about the Resurrection of Jesus?