For all of you objecting the beginning of the Universe, I want to express how science theorizes that the universe does in fact have a beginning. There are multiple examples of where famous scientist have come to this conclusion. Here are a few of them:

1) Given the 2nd law of thermodynamics – all things tend to disorder – if the universe is past eternal, there should be no more heat left in the universe.

- With this, one can not conclude that the universe doesn't have a beginning. There has to be a beginning for the universe. Without a beginning - if it was past eternal - human life would have been killed by the heat, yet we are still here.

2) The standard model for the universe’s existence is the Friedman-Lemaitre theory, colloquially referred to as the “Big Bang." From out of nothing, the great singularity, all the matter of the universe began to

expand and is still expanding to this day.

- Moreover, Einstein’s theory of relativity (improved version of gravity) implied a beginning so he added a ‘fudge factor’ to make them consistent with prevailing opinion, i.e., that the universe was beginningless.

- Aside from this, Friedman and Lemaitre ignored Einstein's fudge factor, that was implicated to please the popular belief of a beginningless universe, and the two scientist claimed the beginning of the universe to be 13.7 billion years ago.

As you can see, many people did believe in a beginningless universe like you do; however, that has been disputed long ago by famous scientist. There is much more scientific evidence of a beginning of the universe that supports my stance, but for now, I think what I have presented you with will suffice. If you would like more support or further disagree with me, please comment below.

This post is outside of our cosmological debate of God's existence. You seem to be confused with God's relationship with His people. I believe in a loving, caring, powerful, gracious, forgiving and just God, that does have a relationship with his people, an a very intimate relationship to be descriptive. However, this is outside of our argument. We can discuss this in a different debate context. Thanks for the thoughts though.

You are going in a circle my friend. To say that everything began with the big bang, directly states that there was in fact a beginning to the universe, which you believe to be the big bang. You obviously believe that there was a beginning to the universe. My question to you is what caused this beginning, or possibly what caused the big bang?

This is wrong. Science theorizes that the universe does in fact have a beginning. There are multiple examples of where famous scientist have come to this conclusion. Here are a few of them:

1) Given the 2nd law of thermodynamics – all things tend to disorder – if the universe is past eternal, there should be no more heat left in the universe.

- With this, one can not conclude that the universe doesn't have a beginning. There has to be a beginning for the universe. Without a beginning - if it was past eternal - human life would have been killed by the heat, yet we are still here.

2) The standard model for the universe’s existence is the Friedman-Lemaitre theory, colloquially referred to as the “Big Bang." From out of nothing, the great singularity, all the matter of the universe began to

expand and is still expanding to this day.

- Moreover, Einstein’s theory of relativity (improved version of gravity) implied a beginning so he added a ‘fudge factor’ to make them consistent with prevailing opinion, i.e., that the universe was beginningless.

- Aside from this, Friedman and Lemaitre ignored Einstein's fudge factor, that was implicated to please the popular belief of a beginningless universe, and the two scientist claimed the beginning of the universe to be 13.7 billion years ago.

As you can see, many people did believe in a beginningless universe like you do; however, that has been disputed long ago by famous scientist. There is much more scientific evidence of a beginning of the universe that supports my stance, but for now, I think what I have presented you with will suffice. If you would like more support or further disagree with me, please comment below.

I think you have come to a false conclusion. God did not begin to exist and therefore, God is uncaused. To dispute your last sentence, the universe cannot exist without a cause because it has a beginning, so something must have caused its existence. God on the other hand doesn't have a beginning and therefore doesn't need a cause.

I favor agnosticism over atheism because there are good arguments for the existence of God, such as one on objective morality. Here's a basic syllogism of the argument:

1) If God does not exist then objective moral values and duties do not exist.

2) Objective moral values and duties exist.

3) Therefore, God exists.

Please respond, I would love to hear your opinions