The idea of God always existing

[NoMoreFaith]

Every effect has a cause, can be said to be properly basic. At any rate, even if we don't know have intuitive knowledge of this, when it comes to explaining our universe, we should hold this principle all times. It doesn't make sense that the orginal constitutes of the universe didn't follow this principle and all of sudden the principle applies to it and it became a property of it. That's illogical.

You are still making the argument that a being exists that doesn't follow this principle of every effect being caused. I can certainly agree thats illogical.
While science certainly has not provided all the answers and maybe never will, this idea that "every effect has a cause" and should "hold this principle all times" is not a true statement. If it were completely true, with no exception, your own argument is broken. I sympathise however, its tough to have an opinion which if True, breaks the argument, and if False, breaks your argument. Catch 22 for the cosmological.
I'll refer you to quantum vacuum fluctuations and the casimir effect. Particles appear from nothing on a regular basis and in a vacuum ALL the time.

We do not observe things coming into existence in our day to day existence which is why you will reify this law of "everything has a cause". However this reification of the law is based upon our incredibly limited observational powers in context of "universal laws" and it is simply a desperate leap to hold something which says "this is why" in the empty void of our lack of understanding.

Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose. - JBS Haldane

The point being, is that the cosmological argument makes little sense on many levels, and is based upon a major presupposition that an intelligent being came from nothing or was eternal in a metaphysical realm which can cause effects in the material realm.
The simple and bludgeoning impolite reality is that this is superfluous to requirements adding a layer and a being whom requires no cause. If quantum particles can create matter, they can create God, but the likelihood they created complex matter is far greater than the likelihood they created complex intelligent sentient power.
In this it is remarkably similar to abiogenesis in that we know that it happened, and God is an unnecessary complexity to the problem.

Well I do wish it to be true. But the same can be asked about morality. How do we know morality is not a delusion, and should be followed. How do we know it has authority over us? If it's properly basic knowledge, at the end, you don't need to justify it.

Morality is a delusion. Delusion is not a naughty word, and is the standard state for most humans in every aspect of their existence. However, society exists to propagate and survive, to subsist. Which is why morality is malleable to the zeitgeist of an age, and why religious morality follows suit through interpretation.

It is not pleasant to imagine that there is no morality, however I hold moral ideals because I love my existence, and my happiness is dependent on the shared moral consensus which allows society to subsist.

Without shared moral consensus (or the general close approximation), society cannot survive, and human endeavours are meaningless, including your own without it.

Well I think morality speaks of an authority to the infinite degree, the nature of moral authority is such that it's height of authority is ultimately high, what can that authority be but God.
This is not the only argument for morality. I have basically three arguments from morality, that make it seem to me it's obvious God exists.

You may think that it does, but as it remains an opinion, the rest of the conclusions are invalid.
I think morality speaks of social consensus between sentient beings to ensure the propagation of their society, as there is no height of authority in this idea, this by default states there is no God.
This is equally invalid as an argument. It simply highlights the fruitlessness of that line of reasoning. Although like yourself it is a statement of opinion.

Well I don't know for sure, but I would imagine we all have the ability to see God so to speak. It's just some are not looking, and although his light shines upon them, and they can realize the Sun from the sunlight, they don't.

This can because they are looking for rational proof instead of spiritual truth.

Yet you are trying to use rational proof and philosophy to prove your opinions. Why not just come out and say it; "I want it to be true, I do I do I do".
I refer to my signature for this argument;
Self Authenticating Private Evidence is useless, as it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it.

God certainly seems to be going out of his way to make sure nobody can prove him.. which makes me very suspicious.. what on earth is he up to. The sneaky bastard.

But God is obviously Spiritual and knowledge of him will not be in the realms of cold hard dry logic, but rather metaphysical intuition.

Anyone else read "metaphysical intuition" as interchangeable with imagination?

I don't think you would know by trusting me or another person or mystics, it's rather should be self-realization.

Hmm, sad end to a good discussion.
You don't see the truth because you don't believe hard enough. If you believe enough to convince yourself that its true, then it is true. This can be said of any figment of your imagination.

So, I for one, am going to continue with my delusion which is based in supporting evidence and materialism, and you are free to continue your delusion which is based in imagination.

Either way, the universe is almost certainly queerer than we can suppose. It'd be nice if this was proven to be not true thou.