(August 27, 2013 at 5:22 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: God is not one of the things that exists/was brought into existence he created everything that exists he is the cause we're talking about that's the idea. Everything that exists has a cause.

According to rules of creation, it is illogical for god to have always existed. Something had to create your god.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:22 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: God is not one of the things that exists/was brought into existence he created everything that exists he is the cause we're talking about that's the idea. Everything that exists has a cause.

Then following your argument a step further: if your god didn't have a cause, it isn't a thing that exists - like you say. I agree. We're definitely making progress here!

(August 27, 2013 at 5:17 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote:

(August 27, 2013 at 5:11 pm)BadWriterSparty Wrote: Your mistake is presuming creation as a necessity. Try again.

All things that exist anywhere in reality were caused by something else that exists that brought them into existence to begin with, this is why they exist. What the bloody hell is your problem here?

Your inability to discern everything from (Universe plus god).
Your first premise concerns everything within the Universe.

A Helium atom's nucleus was caused into existence by the fusion of two hydrogen atom nuclei and two neutrons thrown into the mix. Both these things were already existing, only in a different form. two protons and two neutrons. As a Helium nucleus, these 4 particles are simply arranged in a particular way, different from the original arrangement.

What you propose is that you can take this mechanism whereby everything that exists is a transformation from something to something else using the same basic components and you extrapolate it to "there was nothing and then *puff* something exists". The *puff* you explain with a super powerful entity willing the transformation.
This extrapolation is completely illogical, as the premise does not include the mechanism of transforming nothing into something.

We simply say that we don't know what was before the big bang, if there was a "before the big bang", because that's the most honest position there can be.

I hope you finally understand why we don't accept your reasoning.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:23 pm)Maelstrom Wrote: According to rules of creation, it is illogical for god to have always existed. Something had to create your god.

God doesn't "exist" he creates things that exist, he is the ultimate cause of existence. If he wasn't the cause of existence then he would not be God.

Cause= God

Effect= Universe/s

Question: why do you keep referring to this god as a "he"?

(August 27, 2013 at 5:30 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote:

(August 27, 2013 at 5:23 pm)Maelstrom Wrote: According to rules of creation, it is illogical for god to have always existed. Something had to create your god.

God doesn't "exist" he creates things that exist, he is the ultimate cause of existence. If he wasn't the cause of existence then he would not be God.

Cause= God

Effect= Universe/s

OMG, something got through!

Yes, god doesn't exist. Wasn't really the point people were pushing for, but yes, great progress.

Sadly, you contradicted yourself right in the same sentence.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:30 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: God doesn't "exist".

If he does not exist, there is no reason to believe in him.

If every cause is due to an effect and god, as you state, is equal to a cause. What was the effect that caused god?

(August 27, 2013 at 5:32 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Question: why do you keep referring to this god as a "he"?

I can equally well say she if you prefer? You certainly can to refer to God as a woman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekhinah

(August 27, 2013 at 5:33 pm)pineapplebunnybounce Wrote: OMG, something got through!

Yes, god doesn't exist. Wasn't really the point people were pushing for, but yes, great progress.

Doesn't exist in a tangibly defined state as an object with any properties or dimensions, anything you can see or measure. Anything of that nature that exists God creates through the cause of an effect. He is the guy who sets the ball rolling, he is the first cause.

Quote:Sadly, you contradicted yourself right in the same sentence.

God is something of a contradiction. It doesn't mean he is a fairy-tale it means he is a contradiction.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:09 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote:

(August 27, 2013 at 4:04 pm)CleanShavenJesus Wrote: Oh, yes. If God does exist, then you would be correct in saying this. But, you and I would still be taking this on faith, not logic.

This is logical deduction I've taken you through the steps a million times.

And we'll be here to point out the flaws in your "logic" a million times. Which you will ignore, of course.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:09 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: Everything that exists has been caused by something that exists but not that which caused everything to exist.

Virtual particles. Keep ignoring this. Keep that standard of intellectual honesty nice and low.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:09 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: You can not have an infinite series of effects that go back forever without there ever being within that chain of effects any one first cause.

You can prove this, yes? (By "yes", of course I mean "no", because you can't.) I would agree that it intuitively would seem improbable, but intuition is not proof, and improbability does not equal impossibility.

The infinite regress and the uncaused cause are both *equally illogical*. That one is chosen over the other is a matter of preference. I for one choose to not make a choice, because it's not entirely clear that our idea of causality is even demonstrably correct. That's the rub. "Demonstrably correct".

Let that sink in.

"Demonstrably correct".

Contemplate what those words mean.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:09 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: Where the flipping heck does faith come into this?

Faith comes into it when YOU assume that you have answers that you in fact do not possess.

You know not. Worse, you know not that you know not.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:09 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: You don't take this on faith this is rational, logical deduction that you can figure out by yourself.

Wrong. Hey, asserting things without proof IS fun. Thanks for turning me on to it.

(August 27, 2013 at 5:09 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: Forget all about faith for moment and just think about this logically.

LOL. You first.

Oh wait. You second.