Hello again T,
In space-time, we have discovered that, “nothing” cannot produce, “something”. Everything in this universe must have a cause, as far was he have seen. So, to extrapolate, it would make just as much sense that ontological nothingness also cannot create anything, since even in space-time something cannot come from nothing. It is not a, “proof” that nothing cannot create something, only an acknowledgement that in the history of humankind nobody has demonstrated, “nothing” creating, “something”.
If that’s where you rest your case, then you have some serious problems. Where did this, “unidentified physical entity” (UPE) come from? How can this UPE exist outside of spacetime? And how did it have the properties to create a universe that produced life? As above, in this universe something can only come from something. And this only shows to illustrate that even, “weak atheists” have faith in something. In your case, you have faith that there is something out there besides God (or ontological nothingness, but it doesn’t seem you want to go that route) that can create a life-creating universe. But we have no precedent for any such an UPE.
What examples can you show where, “something” came from, “nothing”? If you don’t have any, then the UPEs that somehow exist outside of spacetime must have a cause. So when you say that an UPE besides God created the universe, you in fact are offering an alternative that is no more logical than God.
Again, I never said that the vast humanity feeling and/or recognizing the spiritual proves anything. It is another evidence that points to God. But my whole point in this debate is that deciding, “God or no God” is not strictly a decision from a, “logical” analysis of the evidence. There is evidence of a God, and that is we exist an intelligent life producing universe. That is not proof. The alternatives to God are nothing and an UPE. However, we have no precedent for UPEs, as Ellis stated when he ridiculed the, “science” of Kraus. You seem to think that the, “weak atheist” position of, “I don’t know” is s more logical choice than choosing an option, but it isn’t, becuase the vast majority in history don’t experience existence in a way that not having an explanation is in any way, “logical”. Below are the evidences that a prompt a theist to his/her conclusion:
A 100 billion light-year entity we call, “the universe” that has evolved conscious, intelligent life.
We seem to be, “created” to recognize God, since even a 2-year old can easily understand the concept.
The purpose, rationality, order, complexity and beauty in the world/universe add to the sense of the spiritual and give most people a sense of eternity.
Adding to the last 2, most people see life and their individual lives as having a purpose and leading somewhere, which usually is to live for eternity in another dimension, here on earth or in another life here on earth.
Hence, to most people the logical choice is to choose God as the explanation of the universe, since, If we want to treat Him as a theory, He’s a theory that bests fits the data, physical or otherwise.
The alternatives to explain the universe are:
Ontological nothingness, which almost noone believes.
UPEs outside of spacetime. This is usually the multiverse, but that only begs the question, where did the multiverse come from and how did it have the special physical properties, which it would have to have, to create a universe that could evolve life?
So, given the life experiences of vast majority in history, God (or the divine) is the best fit for the data. To them, not choosing is no more logical than nothing or an UPE, since life tells them that their is a purpose for their life. This sense of purpose and eternity can’t be qualified as, “logical” or, “illogical” But it is evidence to them for God.
And it isn’t only theists that see the need for an explanation of life/existence. The vocal proponents of the atheist cause, the, “positive atheists”, who insist that that there is no God, also feel that life demands answers, and their answers for this universe are either the multiverse (Tegmark, degrasse Tyson, Dawkins) or the UPEs (Kraus). So you are well within you’re rights leave open the question of God, but to most people, even many atheists, it’s not, “logical” to not chose because the cognitive dissonance of not having an explanation for a universe that, to them, demands them is too great. In the end, the case simply can’t be made that theists don’t employ, “logic” in concluding that there is a god, because to them all the evidence points to God, and the alternatives are no more logical, including, “none of the above” or, “I don’t know”.