
Originally Posted by
James
This is loaded with logical flaws.
First you take the scientific model of the universe (moments ago we agreed scientific models cannot be used to prove the existence of a formless god so why use it as a base to argue that god exists);
Then you assume an absolute state of nothing (whatever that would be - science has made no claims) is the opposite of the scientific model of the universe;
Then you make the leap to "for the universe to be created", which presupposes it was indeed "created" out of nothing, by a creator who is apparently "something" (which undermines the claim of absolute nothing, unless he is exempt from logic as a special case) not subjected to the physical laws of the universe as we currently understand them.
Somehow this is meant to prove the existence of a creator god?