Second, I find the 20 reasons a little... fuzzy, As you said I can't understand all that they're saying.
Example: Argument 3- Time and contingency:
# Whatever comes into being or goes out of being does not have to be; nonbeing is a real possibility.
# Suppose that nothing has to be; that is, that nonbeing is a real possibility for everything.
# Then right now nothing would exist. For
# If the universe began to exist, then all being must trace its origin to some past moment before which there existed—literally—nothing at all.
# From nothing nothing comes. So
# The universe could not have begun.
This I realy don't understand[Yes I know that they are related, 3 with 4 and so on but I still don't get it]
The 5th argument states that
# Design comes only from a mind, a designer.
# Therefore the universe is the product of an intelligent Designer.
But what makes it so sure that it's not realy chance???
? Why can't something turn out "By chance" right??"chance" is simply not credible.
I prefer the Darwinian theory because(if I get it right) the Bible sais that man was created after God's appearance. Then why did man evolve?
For the 6th argument: Why does everything HAS to have a reason for being... yes I DID read the
but why should this be true... why people should consider this true? (from this point on this argument becomes fuzzy again)Most people—outside of asylums and graduate schools would consider it not only true, but certainly and obviously true.
7th argument: I just don't agree, why should there be a reason for the universe to exist? It just does.
9th argument... I can't realy explain this one... I consider this as ONE good argument. But not more.
[I wrote this as I read the arguments so if it may not make much sense in some areas please bear with me.
since the fuzzyness seems to grow bigger and bigger I believe it's because of me, my lack of sleep is realy showing right now ->22:00, I'll continue this post tomorow]