(April 28, 2016 at 4:52 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(April 28, 2016 at 4:46 pm)SteveII Wrote: P1 said "whatever begins to exist has a cause". If P1 and P2 are true, then the conclusion is true. We inductively reason what could be the cause of the universe (or its predecessors). That entity would be:
eternal-uncaused-did not begin to exist (avoids the infinite causal chain problem)
timeless (existed before time)
non-physical (exists before all of physical matter existed)
has intent (decided to create something rather than not create something)
powerful enough to make something out of nothing
This is all the conclusions we get from this particular question. Note I did not conclude the God of the Bible.
As i pointed out quite a bit earlier in this thread, since you only believe one thing did not begin to exist,
What one thing is that? And how do you conclude that I believe it didn't begin to exist? Your knowledge of my opinions that I didn't know I had fascinates me.
Quote: your argument is guilty of the fallacy affirming the consequent.
Aren't you the one claiming that only one thing didn't begin to exist? Does that make you guilty of affirming the consequent?
Quote:Unless you believe there was more then one thing that did not begin to exist.
Contrary to your fantasies about my mental state, I don't have an opinion on this topic. [/quote]
