I will give you the same reply that I gave to, 'Absurdist' on virtual particles: ''It would be quite ridiculous to believe that the Universe came out of nothing, wouldn't it? We do know that the Universe did come out of nothing, (absence of space-time and matter). Even though, there are hypotheses on how unstable fluctuations in a quantum state, (quantum information) could produce space-time and matter - these have not been proven yet.
Neither has your God solution. Double standards. Also these hypothesis' provide some mechanic while your God provides nothing. All you can say is "God did it"
These hypotheses are based on phenomena that occurs in physics where fluctuations of energy contained in a vacuum produce virtual particles. However, prior to the creation of space-time, no space existed which would be needed to contain such a vacuum so the same natural processes could not be responsible for creating our physical Universe, (space-time). One would have to infer a timeless quantum flux of information, without energy or a vacuum would need to occur to begin space-time. What is the cause of this flux of information processing? If there are NO computer-like substances, due to a lack of matter, then it cannot be: physical and if there is no space, then there would be no vacuums containing quantum fluctuations from which an unstable pseudo-nothing could produce matter. Now, if there is no time, there are no naturalistic processes which could play out. Thus, we are left with an immaterial, space-less, timeless cause of the Universe. An immaterial cause that can also process information and cause other things to come out of that information on its own. Given these conditions, the only clear option we are left with is none other than a immaterial mind which spoke/thought the Universe into creation. Essentially, 'information creation'. No other logical option can account for these conditions.''
You are making an assumption that an immaterial cause can fulfill all the problems you mention without providing a single mechanic as to how. You follow this up by asserting your assumption is true. Just another God did it answer.
The god solution is based on ideas from nature such as causality, first cause then use special pleading to render itself immune to the implication of such thoughts.
I will now respond towards your claim on the, 'Multiverse theory'. This, again, is the same reply that I gave to, 'ibn Bilal': ''I begin by saying that the Multiverse theory is speculation.
It is actually theoretical.
We don't have a theory in which that speculation is mathematically realized. ] Now, we exist in this observable Universe, so I would agree that there could be another. I have an issue though. Do you know how many Universes we would need to postulate in this, 'Multiverse' would be very large. How large? 10^120.
Pick one:
(a) God - which you all refuse to accept.
(b) At least 10^120 Universes.
False dilemma. Both could be wrong.
Wait! Before you pick, I want to make sure you understand how large this number is, (if you pathetically choose to pick option b): 10^120 is more then all atoms of our Universe, multiplied by a trillion, trillion and another trillion times. In other words, all atoms of the observable Universe, with another 40 zeros to it. Still thinking its quite plausible of a theory? Don't be ridiculous.''
Big scary number therefore God.
Topic: The Kalam Cosmological Argument