The Unproven Claim of the Uncreated Creator.

Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 7:18 am

It has been claimed that because of the principle of cause-and-effect there must have been a cause (God, the Uncreated Creator) to bring about the effect (this universe).

Cause-and-effect works within our universe but is not proven to work outside of or before it.

Therefore it is impossible to extend the use of cause-and-effect beyond or before the universe and claim that an Uncreated Creator must be the first cause of everything. To do that you would need reliable information about god - which the bible claims to be.

So the claim of the Uncreated Creator relies on the accuracy of the bible.
Until the accuracy of the bible can be proven or disproven the case for the existence of the Uncreated Creator remains unproven.

In the thread, "Another Day - Another Bible Contradiction" I have invited anyone to look at my argument for the bible being a contradictory, and therefore unreliable, source of information. So far my argument has been unmet and unchallenged by those who claim the bible is accurate.

The Uncreated Creator remains an unproven claim until the bible is demonstrated to be a reliable and non-contradictory source of information.

BornAgainAthiest.

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:20 am

Hello.

I've recently tried to register at http://biblocality/forums/ ,which is the forum run by ForeverSaved. Being entirely honest I chose the member name, BornAgainAthiest, so that he would recognize me. Registering under another name was an option I chose not to take.

There are a number of questions that must be answered at Biblocality before registration is complete - not just the usual ones concerning a valid e-mail address, password and similar. These all concern issues of faith and, being an athiest, I answered "No" to every one. The last one was most interesting. It read, "According to the bible I am going to hell."

I clicked on this one, even though Foreversaved explained to me in this forum that it was impossible for me to become "unsaved". Hence his name.
Once saved - forever saved, is the rule he applies. So according to him I won't burn in hell, I'll be eternally shut out of god's presence in the outer darkness where there will be a "weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth."
I couldn't find an option for this on the registration pages of his forum, so I clicked on the "burn in hell" one instead. It seemed the most appropriate thing to do. But I digress!

A portion of the member registration process is an invitation to say something about yourself in your own words. I did so, once again inviting ForeverSaved to join me here in this thread to debate his claims about the Uncreated Creator.

Once the registration process is complete a message appears telling you that an e-mail will be automatically sent to your given address, providing a link back to the Biblocality forum. Sadly, I have to inform you that no such message has yet appeared in my InBox. Please draw your own conclusions about this.

Also of note about Biblocality are the following points...

* There are 63 instances of ForeverSaved (under different pseudonyms) banning members for supposed breaches of forum etiquette.

* These breaches (as far as I can tell) are simply cases of where these members pointed out flaws in his logic, his cited sources and his assertions. Continued disagreement yields banning, admonishment for lying and much talk about "burning in hell".

* Nowhere in Biblocality have I seen any instance of this person exercising any Christian compassion, gentleness or genuine teaching to build up others. All I have seen is denial, criticism, admonishiment and inflexibility. None of these qualities and attitudes helps those genuinely seeking to learn.

Please feel free to go to Biblocality forums to check on these things.

As for me, I'm still waiting for my registration to be authorized and/or for ForeverSaved to return here and debate me.

Thanks,

BornAgainAthiest.

Grand Poster Joined: Apr 22, 2005 Posts: 1039

BornAgainAthiest wrote:

Nowhere in Biblocality have I seen any instance of this person exercising any Christian compassion, gentleness or genuine teaching to build up others. All I have seen is denial, criticism, admonishment and inflexibility. None of these qualities and attitudes helps those genuinely seeking to learn.

There is no forgiveness in christianity, it's just as intolerant as other theist fantasies. It thrives on unquestioning bigotry to give a sense of superiority to its followers.

The fact that the site you mention classes senior mods as "Apostle", suggesting really serious sociopathy, awards "Rep power" to the most proselytising, and contains gems, bearing ForeverSaved's attitude in mind, such as

Biblocality wrote:

If no naturalistic theory can account for witnessing the bodily resurrection, very probably it is true then they saw Jesus resurrected.

and the terms and conditions include

Biblocality wrote:

To confirm you are an Apostle for a region of churches, you would agree to all 37 questions which is the minimum standard set by the Apostles, so the Church can be confident you were directly commissioned by God. If you are an Elder of a locality, appointed by an Apostle, you would agree to at least the first 19 questions, without disagreeing with the remaining 18. The same applies to Elders of a meeting place.

shows what a farce it is.

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:51 pm

Quote:

I clicked on this one, even though Foreversaved explained to me in this forum that it was impossible for me to become "unsaved". Hence his name.
Once saved - forever saved, is the rule he applies. So according to him I won't burn in hell, I'll be eternally shut out of god's presence in the outer darkness where there will be a "weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth."

I wonder if Foreversaved will someday realize that being eternally isolated is a form of psychological torture?

Quote:

* Nowhere in Biblocality have I seen any instance of this person exercising any Christian compassion, gentleness or genuine teaching to build up others. All I have seen is denial, criticism, admonishiment and inflexibility. None of these qualities and attitudes helps those genuinely seeking to learn.

Well, as you have said before, he is a fanatic.

Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:08 pm

Hey Stutz! Hey Cygnus!

I'm going out on a limb now - by speculating on the content of Biblocality. As you know I don't do insults or name-calling, but consider this for a moment.

Clicking on the, "Members" button at Biblocality brings up a list of name and avatars that looks (with a few exceptions) like this...

NAME............................................AVATAR

AlwaysLoved................................Shepherd & Teacher
ChurchWork.................................Discerning of Spirits
Faithful
(Elder of a Locality).......................Gift of the Spirit
InTruth.........................................Word of Wisdom
NotTheWorld.................................Gifted with Faith
Scriptur........................................Deacon

Looking carefully thru the words of these different "members", what they say and how they say it is very interesting. They all agree about the Perfect Proof of the Uncreated Creator. They all agree about the Minimal Facts Approach, as advocated by Gary Habermas. They all agree about...

Do you see a pattern here?

I suspect (but I can't prove) that all of these so-called "members" are nothing but sock-puppet manifiestations of Troy (ForeverSaved) Brooks.

I suspect (but can't prove) that none of these people really exist outside of Biblocality.

I suspect (usual proviso) that T (FS) Brooks uses these virtual "members" to make his one-man-band of a forum look good.

I suspect (usual) that a lot of what is written there is lifted directly from other christian sources like Gary Habermas, Watchman Nee, etc.

I also suspect that Mr. Brooks isn't really interested in spreading the Good News, preaching about Jesus Christ or saving souls. He's waaaaay to ready to damn anyone who disagrees with him to eternal hellfire. Using his measure there will be just two residents in heaven - God and Troy.
All the others having disagreed with him and, having fallen short, been consigned to the flames of hell.

Now if I'm wrong I'll happily apologize to him. I've already done so in another thread.

But if I'm right then Biblocality is nothing more than the futile attempts of a sad man to bolster up his own "reality" in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence and well-argued opposition.

Any thoughts on my suspicions, guys?

BornAgainAthiest.

Grand Poster Joined: Apr 22, 2005 Posts: 1039

I think Biblocality is almost certainly the work of one very twisted mind. I shudder at the thought that there may actually be several people who think that way...

The most (unintentionally?) hilarious aspect, though, is that their proof of the existence of god is called the "Minimal Facts" approach. Many a true word spoken in jest!

Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 2:31 am

Quote:

I suspect (but I can't prove) that all of these so-called "members" are nothing but sock-puppet manifiestations of Troy (ForeverSaved) Brooks.

I suspect (but can't prove) that none of these people really exist outside of Biblocality.

I suspect (usual proviso) that T (FS) Brooks uses these virtual "members" to make his one-man-band of a forum look good.

Or it could be that these brainwashed religious zombies all think alike for the very reason of them being brainwashed religious zombies.

Quote:

The most (unintentionally?) hilarious aspect, though, is that their proof of the existence of god is called the "Minimal Facts" approach. Many a true word spoken in jest!

While BornAgainAtheist doesn't bother with insults, I do, when they are well-earned. So to hell with courtesy, I say they are morons.

The Learned Joined: Oct 16, 2005 Posts: 125

BornAgainAthiest wrote:

In the thread, "Another Day - Another Bible Contradiction" I have invited anyone to look at my argument for the bible being a contradictory, and therefore unreliable, source of information. So far my argument has been unmet and unchallenged by those who claim the bible is accurate.

BornAgainAthiest.

The bible is very accurate. A very accurate load of bullshit !

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 2:22 pm

Any time you're ready, Parture / ForeverSaved / ChurchWork / Troy Brooks / whoever...

BornAgainAthiest.

Confident Learner Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 80

BornAgainAthiest wrote:

Once saved - forever saved, is the rule he applies. So according to him I won't burn in hell, I'll be eternally shut out of god's presence in the outer darkness where there will be a "weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth."
I couldn't find an option for this on the registration pages of his forum, so I clicked on the "burn in hell" one instead. It seemed the most appropriate thing to do.

The registration is for you to be honest with what the Bible clearly says so you don't misread it. The Bible is very clear you will be going to Hell if you are not born-again.

You will burn in hell, because you have never been born-again and apparently will never want to be. Thus, you choose to eternally separate yourself from God. He will resurrect you, judge you, and throw you into Hell because that is what you want despite every effort to convince you with every mercy and grace righteously possible. This is not God's desire for you that you go to Hell, but if you leave Him no choice, He must do the right thing. Just like we lock people up on jail for life because the authority has no choice left.

Hell is not Outer Darkness. Outer Darkness is temporary loss of rewards for believers from returning with Christ to reign during the 1000 years. More here,
http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/parableofsalt.htm
Outer darkness is mention by name only 3 times in Scripture, always pertaining to believers, not unbelievers. In other words, there is accountability for Christians unto rewards for the 1000 year reign of Christ.

Question 12 for Apostles is about Hell -
http://biblocality.com/forums/faq.php?faq=vb3_board_faq#faq_37questions

Do you believe hell is not annihilation of the soul, but eternal suffering, separation and punishment for the unsaved once they are resurrected to the Great White Throne (after the millennial kingdom) to be judged, then cast into the fire (Rev. 19.20, 20.10,15)? "And death and hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death, even the lake of fire" (v.14) which is hell. Unlike any natural fire that burns out, this one never does. "He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone" (14.10), and "they have no rest day nor night" (v.11), for it "will never burn out" (Matt. 25.41). They "will never die, and the fire that burns them will never go out" (Is. 66.23).

"Do not fear them who can kill the body only rather fear Him who can destroy both the soul and body in hell" (Matt. 10.2 Cool

. "Destroy" doesn't here mean annihilation, but discipline in the lexicon: "render useless...to perish, to be lost, ruined...to lose...metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell...to put out of the way entirely, abolish, put an end to ruin." The unsaved can no longer do damage to the elect because they will be eternally separated from them like a prisoner locked in jail for life. "The hour is coming...unto the resurrection of life" and separated by a thousand years, some "unto the resurection of damnation" (John 5.28-29). "He that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3.36).

Confident Learner Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 80

Notice the non-Christian (a) shuts his mind down, (b) misreads the Bible, (c) avoids dealing with and is (d) unable to disprove the 4 Step Proof for God or the Minimal Facts Approach which, therefore, remain unchallenged. To them we say, "In the name of Jesus Christ, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead in none other is there salvation: for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved" (Acts 4.10,12). May you experience the love and joy and peace of God completely proving His existence as shown in the Perfect Proof for God and the Minimal Facts Approach. These prove the resurrection of Jesus and that He is God. If you choose to refuse the forgiveness of the salvation of Christ on the cross, you will be resurrected for Hell. Jesus said, "I assure you, those who listen to my message and believe in God who sent me have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but they have already passed from death into life" (John 5.24) which implies some shall be condemned and eternally separated from God.

4 Step Perfect Proof for God of the Bible (4SPFG)
1. Exponential progression of conscience disallows an eternity of the past of cause and effects in the natural realm since you would not still be sinning by now. Therefore, the uncreated created who is God of the Bible ONLY since none can compare to Christ.
2. Nothing in the universe is without a cause. Therefore, the uncreated creator is the only known available possibility who is God of the Bible since none can compare to Christ.
3. Don't argue against a quality of some god that is not the quality of God of the Bible, otherwise you are arguing not against God of the Bible but something else. (It is necessary to point this out because this problem of misreading the Bible happens so often.)
4. Exponential progression of conscience disallows the eternity of the past of cause and effects in the supernatural (the supernatural was proven to exist in Step 1 and 2) since you would not still be sinning by now. Ergo, the uncreated creator created who is God of the Bible because none can compare to Christ.

4 Step Minimal Facts Approach, Proving the Resurrection of Jesus and that He is God (4SMFA)
1. 95 to 99.9% of scholars in the past half century (we know this because we counted them) agree Paul really wrote and really believed what he wrote in 1 Cor. 15 and Gal. 1 & 2.
2. In these 3 chapters, Paul said he met with Peter, James (brother of Jesus) and John on several occasions in which the first meeting was with Peter and James within 5 years of Jesus' death on the cross, and they all agreed to the reason for being the eyewitness testimonies to the bodily resurrection of Jesus.
3. People do not go to their deaths as martyrs if they don't believe in what they are doing. The apostles really believed they saw, talked with, touched, walked with and ate with the resurrected Jesus which convinced them He is God when before they were doubters.
4. If no naturalistic theory can account for witnessing the bodily resurrection of Jesus, very probably it is true then they saw Jesus resurrected which shows He created us, He is uncreated and salvation is through Him. Therefore, Hell would be needed for the unsaved to keep them eternally separated from God's own people.

Since ~90-95% of the people of the late great planet earth have settled on four major religious world views, logically we can conclude only these four need be examined to determine the big picture reality:

1) Agnosticism/atheism can't be true because the universe can't start up all by itself, nor can it always have existed. There is no moral compass, thus, causing you to increase sin.

2) Hinduism and Buddhism are not true because you don't get endless opportunity to be a chicken then come back as a human again which never effectively deals with sin; it even encourages sin. "It is appointed unto men once to die" (Heb. 9.27).

3) Islam is irrelevant because it is just some guy without any evidence six centuries later in a cave all by himself who said Jesus never died, despite the well attested historical record. If you can alter history so arbitrarily in your own mind without any evidence, you can assume anything which opens the door to sin more.

4) We are left with Christianity only. And so, there is a place called Hell. Those who refuse Jesus' atonement on the cross will go to Hell. Jesus said, "For whoever is not against us, is for us" (Mark 9.40). You're against Him if you reject: a) what Jesus did for you on the cross for God the Father to forgive all your sins; b) Jesus was resurrected and raised to the right hand of the Father (as proven using the Minimal Facts Approach); c) Jesus reveals to us He is the 2nd Person of the Trinity; and d) Jesus clearly said He is uncreated Creator of the universe with the Father and the Spirit having the the power to forgive the sins of mankind).

http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2256

Confident Learner Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 80

Basically since nothing in nature can happen all by itself and there can't be an eternity of the past of cause and effects according to the exponential progression of conscience, there is only one possiblity, the uncreated created.

If you demand that you have to be God to know God exists that is illogical when you say you need to know if cause and effect still work outside of nature and time that is brought into existence by the uncreated Creator.

Placing impossible demands is illogical. There are some things you will never know how God does.

Think of it this way. If you know a tree an hour ago had an apple on it and it is not there but there is an apple on the ground just below it, it is reasonable to conclude the apple fell. We do the same thing with nature. We see no causelessness in nature so nature can't cause itself, and since the exponential progression of conscience disallows an eternity of the past of cause and effects, the conclusion is that there must be an uncreated creator (or in the example, there must be gravity).

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/perfectproof.htm

Confident Learner Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 80

You are welcome to join the forums, but you need a username that is not illogical. Bornagainatheist is impossible. You can only be born physically once and you can only be born spiritually once. You can't be born again atheist. It's impossible.

Register with say Atheistagain perhaps.

Confident Learner Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 80

Inerrancy issues are not a valid to reject God of the Bible, for Paul said it all depends on the resurrection. So either prove the resurrection or disprove it, but top beating around the bush.

Begin with what skeptical scholars are virtually unanimous about the resurrection claim,
http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5503#post5503

p.s. you are forgiven for the multiple mistaken accusations above.

Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:10 pm

Parture wrote:

Basically since nothing in nature can happen all by itself and there can't be an eternity of the past of cause and effects according to the exponential progression of conscience, there is only one possiblity, the uncreated created.

If you demand that you have to be God to know God exists that is illogical when you say you need to know if cause and effect still work outside of nature and time that is brought into existence by the uncreated Creator.

Placing impossible demands is illogical. There are some things you will never know how God does.

Think of it this way. If you know a tree an hour ago had an apple on it and it is not there but there is an apple on the ground just below it, it is reasonable to conclude the apple fell. We do the same thing with nature. We see no causelessness in nature so nature can't cause itself, and since the exponential progression of conscience disallows an eternity of the past of cause and effects, the conclusion is that there must be an uncreated creator (or in the example, there must be gravity).

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/perfectproof.htm

Hello Troy.

Thank you for responding.

Just for the record I'd like to state the following:

1. In the message I aim to prove that your 4-step Perfect Proof is in fact unproven.

2. I also aim to show anyone else reading this thread how the limitations of your argument naturally lead to the conclusion that your case is unproven.

3. What I am not aiming to do here is persuade you of anything, change your mind or get you to admit to any kind of error. That is a lost cause. Most likely you will demonstrate this in your replies. Your track record here, at Biblocality and the other blogs and forums you post to indicate that you brook no opposition. (Pun intended!) Therefore, I am not typing this for your benefit or mine. I'm simply doing it so that anyone reading this who sees a link to Biblocality.com anywhere else on the 'Net will know that it's you and avoid you accordingly.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Moving on...

Step 1. The disallowance of an eternity of the past of cause and effects.

The universe came into being via the Big Bang event 13.73 billion years ago. This period of 13.73 billion years is not the same as an eternity. One is a fixed amount of time, the other is not - it is beyond human comprehension. The Big Bang event is retreating from us, deeper and deeper into the past at the rate of one-second-per-second. In ten years time it will be ten years further into the past than it is now. This is knowable and comprehendable.

Eternity, in contrast, having no begining and no end, cannot be properly grasped by the human mind. It is beyond the understanding of our minds, because we inhabit a universe that is defined by space and time. Everything that we know, understand and experience is determined by where we are (our location in three-dimensional space) and when we are (our past, our present and our future).

These are simply the facts.

Therefore, Step 1 agrees with Big Bang Cosmology, which states that neither the universe or our past are eternal. The best estimates for the age of our universe are 13.73 billion years, + or - .02 billion years. As mentioned before, this is a fixed and not eternal quantity of time.

Please note that there is no need to invoke any kind of mechanism involving the exponential progression of sin at this point. All I have done is to point out that the wording of Step 1 agrees with Big Bang Cosmology about the non-eternal nature of our past. Both of these things, disallowing an eternal past, argue for a past of a fixed duration. If the duration of our past is fixed it cannot be eternal. Therefore there must have been a point at which our past began. Science describes this point as the Big Bang event.

Step 2. Nothing in the universe is without cause.

This statement is totally, absolutely, completely and 100% correct.

The key word here is, "in". Everything within our universe has a cause. We can trace every effect to it's cause, all the way back thru 13.73 billion years of time to the Big Bang event.
To go beyond or before this impossible in terms of human understanding.
The words, "beyond" and "before" need to be qualified in this argument.

The Big Bang was not an explosion like a nuclear detonation or a supernova. In both of those cases matter and energy are radiated out from the blast center, expanding into the waiting dimension of space surrounding them and taking time to do so. Instead the Big Bang was the explosive growth of Space and Time themselves. There was no space into which the growing universe could insert itself and no time in which it could do so. Space and Time are qualities of the universe itself and did not exist before it, nor do they exist beyond it. There is no before and no beyond.

It has already been stated and agreed, that nothing in the universe is without cause. It must therefore also be true that every cause and every effect must take place within the context of space and time, because these are the qualities by which we perceive and understand them. All of these causes and effects require a duration of time in which they can occur and an area of space in which they can happen. To talk about something requiring zero time to happen or requiring zero space in which to occur is meaningless.

Therefore all causes-and-effects are, by definition, events that occur within our universe, within our continuum of space and time. Even if they could occur in timeless and spaceless void, we would have no way of perceiving or understanding them. It is therefore useless and meaningless to talk about anything outside of the framework of cause-and-effect within our spacetime continuum. All we can understand is cause-and-effect within our universe.

So Step 2, which says that nothing happens within this universe without a cause , is in fact arguing that it is useless and meaningless to talk about anything outside of the framework of cause-and-effect in our spacetime continuum. Even though you did not intend to do so Troy, by using the words "in this universe" you've rendered discussion about anything not within it meaningless. So when you then go on to talk about an Uncreated Creator, God, Jesus or anything else you're doing so on an unproven and unprovable basis.

Logical argumentation and scientific fact go together very well, but mixing them with unproven articles of faith is a recipe for trouble. I strongly suggest that you go back to the drawing board and re-think your ideas.

Finally, I don't demand that I have to be God to know that God exists - everything written here is either what you've stated or what I've stated. I'm not making impossible demands -I'm just discussing what you've written in your 4 Step Proof (?). Oh and I really don't care about never knowing how God does things. This message is about how you haven't done what you thought you had, that's all.

As far as I'm concerned you've unwittingly argued against the very thing you are championing and I've demonstrated so here. Case closed.

I've already stated that I'm not expecting to change your mind. Others reading this thread will draw their own conclusions and (if they've got any sense) avoid all contact with you accordingly.

Will I have any further contact with you?

Well, that's up to you. Think about it.

BornAgainAthiest.


Login/Register New account	Home · FAQ · News · Shows · Videos · Forums · Arcade · Listen & Chat · Book Store · Contact Us · Go Mobile