What is "FAITH"

[Consilius]

My argument is based off of human reason. That's the authority it is subject to, as well as to some observable facts.

I don't think it is human reason at all. It is your own brand of reasoning you are using. Thats irrelevant anyway, the point is: no matter how logical you think you have been when coming to your conclusions, unless you have evidence, these assertions of yours mean nothing. 'Human reason' doesn't count as evidence

The universe cannot be younger than the oldest thing in it. Just a theory.

---

We don't need to go back any further. The singularity was the uncaused cause. Disprove that.

So we DO have an uncaused cause, the existence of which I've been advocating for all this time.

Because - and read slowly, so that you understand - causation is a spatio-temporal phenomenon. Since time and space are aspects of universe and do not exist "outside" it, the causation is an aspect of universe as well and therefore does not apply prior to it.

Our universe WAS caused? That's not what I've been hearing.

[genkaus]

Our universe WAS caused? That's not what I've been hearing.

That's not what I said either.

[Bad Writer]

The universe cannot be younger than the oldest thing in it.

So what?

[quote='genkaus' pid='477677' dateline='1373803471']
We don't need to go back any further. The singularity was the uncaused cause. Disprove that.

So we DO have an uncaused cause, the existence of which I've been advocating for all this time.

Hehe. I think he was actually mocking you. It's kind of like if I were to say, "I'm Batman. Prove me wrong."

[quote]
Because - and read slowly, so that you understand - causation is a spatio-temporal phenomenon. Since time and space are aspects of universe and do not exist "outside" it, the causation is an aspect of universe as well and therefore does not apply prior to it.

Our universe WAS caused? That's not what I've been hearing.

Certainly there was a cause. There's a cause to everything that occurs (at least in this universe there is). But does the cause have to be a prime mover? Do we exist because of some grand scheme? I think what's getting confused on this thread is cause out of planning and cause out of nature.

[fr0d0]

A one man ambush. Impressive!

[Bad Writer]

Crap, my post isn't showing up. Lemme see if this fixes it:

The universe cannot be younger than the oldest thing in it.

So what?

[quote='genkaus' pid='477677' dateline='1373803471']
We don't need to go back any further. The singularity was the uncaused cause. Disprove that.

So we DO have an uncaused cause, the existence of which I've been advocating for all this time.

Hehe. I think he was actually mocking you. It's kind of like if I were to say, "I'm Batman. Prove me wrong."

[quote]
Because - and read slowly, so that you understand - causation is a spatio-temporal phenomenon. Since time and space are aspects of universe and do not exist "outside" it, the causation is an aspect of universe as well and therefore does not apply prior to it.

Our universe WAS caused? That's not what I've been hearing.

Certainly there was a cause. There's a cause to everything that occurs (at least in this universe there is). But does the cause have to be a prime mover? Do we exist because of some grand scheme? I think what's getting confused on this thread is cause out of planning and cause out of nature.

---

Still not showing up. How odd.

[Consilius]

I'm still waiting for that explanation as to how cause and effect works when time does not exist.

You can't keep asserting that there must be an uncaused cause without addressing that issue first.

Time began when the universe did. It was developed by something that did not rely on time; something that was timeless. If it did not rely on time, then it did not rely on cause.
If it did not rely on time, then it did not need time to cause the universe. The causation of the universe brought about time and, with it, cause. Everything in our universe, therefore, needs time and cause. The cause of our universe exists on a different plane and by nature does not have either time or cause, as it did before both of these two existed.

---

Our universe WAS caused? That's not what I've been hearing.

That's not what I said either.

"the causation is an aspect of universe as well and therefore does not apply prior to it."
You said that since causation is an aspect of the universe, there can be no causation "before" it.
Is an uncaused thing needed to make cause exist?

[little_monkey]

Is an uncaused thing needed to make cause exist?

This is the same question as, Does God exist? Atheists say no, you say yes. It would have avoided 42 pages of nonsense.

[genkaus]

Time began when the universe did. It was developed by something that did not rely on time; something that was timeless. If it did not rely on time, then it did not rely on cause.
If it did not rely on time, then it did not need time to cause the universe. The causation of the universe brought about time and, with it, cause. Everything in our universe, therefore, needs time and cause. The cause of our universe exists on a different plane and by nature does not have either time or cause, as it did before both of these two existed.

Do you not see how silly you sound here? "Beginning of time" is a ridiculous concept because any beginning would require time to be already present. Any action that takes place would also be a time-dependent phenomena - so talking about something developing or causing something else without a temporal context is stupid. Its like you have memorized the sentences but don't understand what they actually mean. Any sort of cause would require a temporal context - one that exists only within our universe - and therefore the concept of cause does not apply to the universe.

"the causation is an aspect of universe as well and therefore does not apply prior to it."
You said that since causation is an aspect of the universe, there can be no causation "before" it.
Is an uncaused thing needed to make cause exist?

No. Causing cause to exist would be an act of causation which wouldn't apply without pre-existing causation.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

i'm going to try this one last time, although i'm really not optimistic about what this will achieve.

Causation is dependent upon time. if A causes B, A has to happen before B. If there is no time, how can A happen before B? The phrase before the universe existed, is wrong in itself, because there's no time, you can't say before.

Get it?

[Consilius]

There is no "before the universe existed", because that would require a measure of time, which didn't exist yet.
What I am suggesting is that the universe was caused by something not reliant on time, that existed on a different plane.

---

"the causation is an aspect of universe as well and therefore does not apply prior to it."
You said that since causation is an aspect of the universe, there can be no causation "before" it.
Is an uncaused thing needed to make cause exist?

No. Causing cause to exist would be an act of causation which wouldn't apply without pre-existing causation.

We can't have pre-existing causation because there was no time. The cause of the universe does not experience time, because it is timeless.