Conversation with a Theist #Part3

This is the 3rd part of the conversation with a theist with Jessica (A theist who don’t know anything). I hope you’re enjoying this conversation and I’ll be posting more of this.
In case you haven’t read the first two part of the conversation, you can read them here:

CaptureCapture

JESSICA:So, even if everything that happens is natural, where did the laws of nature come from?

ME:The laws of nature are misnamed. They are not necessarily rules that govern the universe, that sit out there in some kind of law books. They could just as well simply be human inventions, descriptions we have made of observations.

JESSICA:Then they are subjective. We can all make our own laws.

Me:Not quite. We can make up different laws if we want, but they are not scientific unless they agree with observations. The laws of physics can be written in many different ways, but they agree so well with the data that we are confident they describe aspects of reality.

JESSICA:Well, then where did those aspects of reality come from, if not from God?

Me:Why did they have to come from anything? But, that’s how we started this discussion.


JESSICA:Still, you have to explain why there is something rather than nothing.

Me:Define nothing.

JESSICA:Nothing. No thing. No matter, no energy, no space, no time, no laws of physics.

Me: No God?

JESSICA: God is a separate entity who created matter, energy, space, time and the laws of physics from nothing.

Me: I won’t ask you again who created God. Rather, why was it necessary for the universe to have come from nothing?

JESSICA :It had to come from something.

Me:But you just said it came from nothing! 😀

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Conversation with a Theist #Part3

  1. Always amazes me that they think their god being magically exempt from the same argument they’re making against the beginning of the universe is valid. Jessica is struggling to be logically consistent. God just complicates things.

  2. “Jessica didn’t know anything” is what you said. That’s a powerful testimony to your debating skills and your knowledge of science and logic; you defeated someone that you describe as devoid of intellect. Congratulations on the achievement. As inspector Clouseau would say, “The case is solv-ED!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s