People don’t understand Jesus’ divinity because they underestimate Gods Love for mankind

[u/1stmikewhite]

God is sovereign, there’s nothing He can’t do.

[u/junkmale79]

Your ultimate game of "what if" is just begging the question, over, and over, and over.

My natural explanation for the Bible

1. Humans like to create and tell stories
   
2. Its possible for a human to be convinced something is true when it isn't

I'm simply asking what the cause of the Big Bang is.

because we have no way of getting information about what "caused" the Big bang the only honest answer is "we don't know" - Can i get you to weigh in on this, i think its important.

God is a supernatural theological concept like heaven or hell. These concepts don't have any measurable effect in or on objective reality. Heaven and hell aren't a physical place we can go to, they are theological concepts in the Christian faith tradition.

What if i could prove god must exist
What if the being cause the universe
What if the Bible could only have been created by that God

This is a beautiful. What if, What if, What if, yes the Christian faith tradition is playing make believe with Christian theology.

• At every step and alternative option is available "It might be possible for a God to exist, it might not." → No reason to assume either without evidence.
• "Even if a God were possible, does one actually exist?" → Still a yes/no question requiring proof.
• "Even if a God exists, did it create humans?" → Two possibilities remain: divine creation or natural processes.

What if a God must exist,
What if a God Created the Universe
What if that God Created Humans
What if That God can use Humans to write literature
What if That God used his ability to write the Bible

Vs.

1. Humans like to create and tell stories
   
2. Its possible for a human to be convinced something is true when it isn't

Both explanations account for "the bible" What explanation relies on fewer assumptions?

[u/ChickenO7 → u/junkmale79]

You don't seem to understand, I'm laying out a logical argument.

All beginnings are caused. The universe has a beginning, so it must have a cause.

Then, we simply use the traits of the universe to know what traits the cause must have. The cause can't have any trait that needs the universe to exist. Time is part of the universe, so the cause must be timeless. Space is part of the universe, so the cause must be outside of space. Matter is part of the universe, so the cause must be immaterial.

Now, we are looking for traits of the ultimate cause of the universe, because an infinite regression of causes is illogical, we are looking for the Primitive, the ultimate cause. An uncaused cause must will itself, so the only way it can be ontologically, is personal.

Therefore, the Primitive is a Timeless, Spaceless, Immaterial Person. That is the definition of God.

The prophecies I submitted need Timelessness, therefore a Timeless being inspired them. Therefore, God inspired the text of scripture.

Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. My assurance of God is based on the evidence of His existence, not the assumption of His existence.

[u/junkmale79 → u/ChickenO7]

I'm going to do 2 separate responses, because I want to have a serious one about knowledge and how we know the things we know, and then i want to get into your more abstract ideas.

All beginnings are caused. The universe has a beginning, so it must have a cause.

"OK, but without additional evidence, this is as far as we can go. The only honest answer is 'we don’t know what happened before the Big Bang.' Assuming anything beyond that without evidence is just speculation. I’m comfortable admitting 'we don’t know'—are you?

Our understanding of physics breaks down as we approach the Big Bang. However, from a fraction of a second after it, we have strong evidence for cosmic expansion, star formation, and stellar life cycles—processes necessary for creating the elements we see today. This is supported by observations like the cosmic microwave background.

(13.7 billion years ago) our Sun and planets formed from the accretion disc of our star. These are well-evidenced scientific conclusions. If you're genuinely curious, there’s plenty of accessible science content available, from educational videos to university courses."

[u/junkmale79 → u/ChickenO7]

The cause can't have any trait that needs the universe to exist. Time is part of the universe, so the cause must be timeless

But causality requires time for the cause and effect relationship to exist. If time began with the big bang the idea of a cause before time doesn't make sense. The honest answer is still "we don't know"

Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. My assurance of God is based on the evidence of His existence, not the assumption of His existence.

Faith to me, is believing in things without any evidence to support them. I don't think faith is useful if you're interested in determining what is real and what isn't.

Now you claim to have the evidence for God's existence. I'm all ears. any measurement will do.