Why I Don't Believe in Atheism

[SteelCurtain]

For me it is really simply why I don't believe in atheism, because the universe can't come from nothing, that is, non-existence, because that which does not exist can't cause anything, since it doesn't exist. We only have evidence of causation from 'something', no evidence to the contrary.

Okay.

To start out, I need to define something for you: bare assertion. You have a tendency to make them quite often. A bare assertion is when you make a claim, and then proceed as if just making a claim is enough for that claim to be true. Doesn't work that way. When you make a claim, you have to provide some support that said claim is true. For example, simply stating that the universe can't come from nothing overlooks two very important details: 1) that there ever was a "time" when the universe wasn't, and 2) that matter behaves the same at the level we are talking about when we talk about singularities. You have not proven anything here, you have simply made an assertion. One that is deeply flawed.

And I don't believe in atheism because the universe(s) could not have always existed because if it (they) had then by definition there would have been an be an infinite regress of cause and effects, so you would have had an eternity to come into being before now, so you should have already happened. And self-contradictorily, you would never have existed because a past eternity would continue to go on for eternity, thus never reaching this point of existence now.

Please don't make up words to make yourself feel smarter. It really has the opposite of the intended effect. As has been stated before, I'll repeat: you may not believe that atheism is a valid position, but you believe in atheism. Let's not be dense.

Please demonstrate why your deity is immune to this infinite causation regression. This is a very important point. And please remember that I can define things as I want, too.

Therefore, by this evidential reasoning, I conclude nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated. This uncreated Creator is Whom I call God. Logical, since we know the uncreated Creator exist, it is incumbent upon us to find out where God reveals Himself personally. The initial caveat is that God is not self-contradictory so only one religion can be the correct one.

Again, with the made up words! Evidential?!? Come on.

Your path here makes no logical sense. You believe you have made a proof here, but at the very least you have haphazardly chained together something resembling Anselm of Canterbury's ontological proof. This "proof" has been refuted by no less than St. Thomas Aquinas, David Hume, and Immanuel Kant. Note the profession of the first. It's been trodden over time and time again on this site and many others. Please take the time to actually research what you post. I know your presuppositions are strong, but actual rationality and reasoning dictates that you put that aside and take a critical look at your argument.