Hebrews is included among the Pauline epistles. No one really knows who wrote much of the New Testament. OK, replace Paul by 'the unknown author'.
" "Elegchos" is literally "proof" and "ou blepomenon" means "things not being seen with the eyes" like wind and gravity.
I take it you're not a scholar of koine Greek? Fine, neither am I. We're not going to get anywhere by fighting a war of dueling, likely tendentious sources here. Let's stick to the plain English meaning. And in English, a matter that is proven by the preponderance of evidence does not require faith. When yer typical trial lawyer askes a jury to find against Nasty Chemical Company Inc. for turning Erin Brockovich's hair yellow, does he ask them for faith? Not hardly.
A more interesting question might be *why* did the universe create itself?
If the universe were inanimate, the question would be 'how', not 'why'. Stipulating that this has nothing to do with evolution. I think the best answer which is in accordance with modern physical theory would be that the vacuum is unstable with respect to non-vacuum. A vacuum is the most symmetric possible state; but universally in the physical sciences we see phenomena where more symmetric systems spontaneously break symmetry and become less symmetric.
BTW, I'm not likely to be back on FR for about two weeks, so you have the last word.
Now there's a universal you'd have some difficulty supporting.
I take it you're not a scholar of koine Greek? Fine, neither am I.
A scholar, no. I can read it and understand it which I suspect is something you are unable to do.
Let's stick to the plain English meaning. And in English, a matter that is proven by the preponderance of evidence does not require faith.
??!!!??? That only works if you define faith to suit your own bias. Perhaps those who saw Christ's miracles no longer could have faith in Him. Did Thomas lose his faith when he touched Christ's wounds? No! He had absolute proof and his response was, "My Lord and my God!"
Bottom line: Your definition of faith doesn't square with the Bible. Since we all know who the Author of faith is, it only makes sense to apply the meaning He intends rather than an unbeliever's personal fancy.
If the universe were inanimate, the question would be 'how', not 'why'. Stipulating that this has nothing to do with evolution. I think the best answer which is in accordance with modern physical theory would be that the vacuum is unstable with respect to non-vacuum. A vacuum is the most symmetric possible state; but universally in the physical sciences we see phenomena where more symmetric systems spontaneously break symmetry and become less symmetric.
Nice swing-and-miss. Materialistic cosmology denies the existence of said vacuum before the BB. So where did the vacuum come from?
There is no satisfactory alternative to Creation.