Proving God in 20 statements

[smfortune]

I still haven't seen an explanation why the first premise is justified. Just reiterating the rough everyday notion of causation isn't doing it.

Well I don't know how to help you understand further. Horse to water kind of thing. Perhaps you could justify to yourself your continued discomfort with the premise by thinking of an uncaused thing? Good luck.

---

That's right. I use the equivalence rule to break down the double implications into their single implication form.

---

Maybe you just don't get our jokes.

Sure, You guys have this great one about an invisible sky daddy, Cracks me and FSM up every time.

Hmmm, the miscommunication must work both ways. I don't find you funny.