Sounds like someone found raiding WLC's underwear drawer satisfying.
I don't think the uncaused cause argument is convincing, because the uncaused cause appearing at the beginning of our universe seems quite arbitrary. Why doesn't the uncaused cause exist further back in the causal chain? We can imediately conjur up a chain of causes regressing from the Big Bang; all just as fictional as the idea of god considering the total absence of evidence.
I also don't think this argument does much for the God of the Bible. Even if I were to grant the idea of an uncaused first cause being directly responsible for the Big Bang I only get Spinoza's god, not the God of the Bible. This does absolutely nothing to support Christian claims.
People that find the uncaused cause reasoning compelling aren't sincerely searching for answers to our existence; they are believers trying to rationalize God's existence in the absence of evidence.
I don't think the uncaused cause argument is convincing, because the uncaused cause appearing at the beginning of our universe seems quite arbitrary. Why doesn't the uncaused cause exist further back in the causal chain? We can imediately conjur up a chain of causes regressing from the Big Bang; all just as fictional as the idea of god considering the total absence of evidence.
I also don't think this argument does much for the God of the Bible. Even if I were to grant the idea of an uncaused first cause being directly responsible for the Big Bang I only get Spinoza's god, not the God of the Bible. This does absolutely nothing to support Christian claims.
People that find the uncaused cause reasoning compelling aren't sincerely searching for answers to our existence; they are believers trying to rationalize God's existence in the absence of evidence.
