What is "FAITH"

[little_monkey]

I think the call for evidence is one we should ALL be privileged to answer.

Sorry, it's not a priviledge but an imperative.

"Believe me because I'm right." Can you produce that quote, but from myself this time? Any suggestion of that quote? A single instance where I've based an assertion off my own authority?

No, that wasn't meant that you said those words verbatem, but to captulate the gist of your assertions so far.

[Faith No More]

Consilius, you have gotten to the point where you are just repeating your assertions instead of trying to debate what's been presented to you. You haven't demonstrated how the laws of cause and effect work when time does not exist, and you haven't demonstrated that there is a will and a choice as a cause as the universe.

Until you can address these issues, this debate has run its course.

[Consilius]

Evidence?
The force that began the universe always existed, since there was nothing to bring it into being.

Assumption

The cause of the universe made time, hence it was not limited by time. Edison didn't need a lightbulb. The cause of the universe is timeless.
The cause of the universe made cause, hence it is not a product of cause. The father of cause cannot also be the son of cause. Therfore, it is uncaused.

Assumption. you still haven't addressed how causation works without time.

Our cause of the universe does not need time to make time, as Edison didn't need to work by electrical light. The cause of the universe caused the universe without using time. The expansion of the universe (time) helped the universe to cause things in a more independent manner. You can build a robot without the help of a robot and let the machine do what you could do yourself, but on its own. Yet the robot can do nothing outside of what it was intended to do and its all of your idea.

[genkaus]

The cause of all things is not a material thing itself. That is yet another qualification for the cause of the universe.

Irrelevant. Material or not, it is a thing and therefore, by your own premise, must have a cause.

All natural forces are caused, along with everything else,

That is as yet unproven.

and therefore, the cause of the universe muct be supernatural, or not subject to the laws of nature, for the reason that this cause instituted the laws of nature itself.

That would be true only if you can first prove that everything must have a cause except for a particular supernatural thing. Otherwise all this amounts to is baseless assertion.

---

I'm sorry, but did you think that the atheist argument is a rollercoaster of new surprises?
Or that theism stands helpless in the face of the irrefutability of atheism?
Or that Christianity is a cult of deluded slaves that don't know what they're talking about?

No, yes and yes.

[MindForgedManacle]

Consilius, I ended this game 5+ pages back, and you never responded to my correction as to why you are just plain wrong:

OK, the universe had an origin. Where did the universe come from? How did it come to be?

The universe had an origin of a sort, but regardless your question is malformed. For starters, you need to define what you mean by 'universe'.

Clearly you cannot be defining it as the totality of existence, because then your question answers itself: it always has existed in some form.

And:

The universe has always existed. Why can't it continue to exist, then? Why will it cease to exist?

What? No one here has said the universe will cease to exist. If you're referring to the 'fate' of the universe (i.e Heat death, etc.), the universe still exists, just in a different form.

[genkaus]

I don't think I made an assumption. I started from scratch and used existing information to come to a conclusion.
"The force that began the universe always existed, since there was nothing to bring it into being.

Wrong. We haven't even established that the universe began in the first place.

The causation of the universe was not made necessary, since there was nothing to make it necessary.

Wrong. We haven't established that the universe was caused.

As far as we know (I am willing to take correction on this one, it is redundant anyway), there are no more universes that are being caused.

As far as we know, there is not even a single universe that has been caused.

THEREFORE, the causation of the universe was a free choice."

Given the failure of all the other premises - wrong.

---

The cause of the universe made time, hence it was not limited by time. Edison didn't need a lightbulb. The cause of the universe is timeless.
The cause of the universe made cause, hence it is not a product of cause. The father of cause cannot also be the son of cause. Therfore, it is uncaused.

Before spouting this nonsense, establish that there was a cause.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Assumption

The cause of the universe made time, hence it was not limited by time. Edison didn't need a lightbulb. The cause of the universe is timeless.
The cause of the universe made cause, hence it is not a product of cause. The father of cause cannot also be the son of cause. Therfore, it is uncaused.

Assumption. you still haven't addressed how causation works without time.

Our cause of the universe does not need time to make time, as Edison didn't need to work by electrical light. The cause of the universe caused the universe without using time. The expansion of the universe (time) helped the universe to cause things in a more independent manner. You can build a robot without the help of a robot and let the machine do what you could do yourself, but on its own. Yet the robot can do nothing outside of what it was intended to do and its all of your idea.

Mistakes:
1. confusing time with mass.
2. i've underlined the statements that have graduated from the school of assumption and moved on to the school of i-completely-made-this-up.
3. illogical reasonings (italicized)

And this is why you don't have a nobel prize.

---

Consilius, I ended this game 5+ pages back, and you never responded to my correction as to why you are just plain wrong:

The universe had an origin of a sort, but regardless your question is malformed. For starters, you need to define what you mean by 'universe'.

Clearly you cannot be defining it as the totality of existence, because then your question answers itself: it always has existed in some form.

And:

What? No one here has said the universe will cease to exist. If you're referring to the 'fate' of the universe (i.e Heat death, etc.), the universe still exists, just in a different form.

@ MFM: he tends to ignore the parts he has no answers to. and then make new arguments like nothing happened. or repeats his old ones like nothing happened.

[Faith No More]

Assumption

The cause of the universe made time, hence it was not limited by time. Edison didn't need a lightbulb. The cause of the universe is timeless.
The cause of the universe made cause, hence it is not a product of cause. The father of cause cannot also be the son of cause. Therfore, it is uncaused.

Assumption. you still haven't addressed how causation works without time.

Our cause of the universe does not need time to make time, as Edison didn't need to work by electrical light. The cause of the universe caused the universe without using time. The expansion of the universe (time) helped the universe to cause things in a more independent manner. You can build a robot without the help of a robot and let the machine do what you could do yourself, but on its own. Yet the robot can do nothing outside of what it was intended to do and its all of your idea.

[Consilius]

Consilius, I ended this game 5+ pages back, and you never responded to my correction as to why you are just plain wrong:

The universe had an origin of a sort, but regardless your question is malformed. For starters, you need to define what you mean by 'universe'.

Clearly you cannot be defining it as the totality of existence, because then your question answers itself: it always has existed in some form.

And:

What? No one here has said the universe will cease to exist. If you're referring to the 'fate' of the universe (i.e Heat death, etc.), the universe still exists, just in a different form.

I am referring to more like the universe we experience; all that is part of the natural order.
An eternal universe? Why did this universe change from one form to another at a definite point in time? Why will it do so again? And probably again?

---

I don't think I made an assumption. I started from scratch and used existing information to come to a conclusion.
"The force that began the universe always existed, since there was nothing to bring it into being.

Wrong. We haven't even established that the universe began in the first place.

Everything has a cause, except the thing that caused cause.
The universe was caused by a Big Bang 4 million years ago.
What caused the Big Bang? A singularity of some sort. What caused the singularity? We can continue to go back. We can only arrive at an uncaused cause.

[Consilius]

The cause of the universe made time, hence it was not limited by time. Edison didn't need a lightbulb. The cause of the universe is timeless.
The cause of the universe made cause, hence it is not a product of cause. The father of cause cannot also be the son of cause. Therfore, it is uncaused. Our cause of the universe does not need time to make time, as Edison didn't need to work by electrical light. The cause of the universe caused the universe without using time. The expansion of the universe (time) helped the universe to cause things in a more independent manner. You can build a robot without the help of a robot and let the machine do what you could do yourself, but on its own. Yet the robot can do nothing outside of what it was intended to do and its all of your idea.

Mistakes:
1. confusing time with mass.
2. i've underlined the statements that have graduated from the school of assumption and moved on to the school of i-completely-made-this-up.
3. illogical reasonings (italicized)

And this is why you don't have a nobel prize.

Time and space were brought into being at the beginning of the universe along with matter and energy.
We live in a universe where everything has a cause. Why would a changing universe where cause and effect have a role in absolutely everything conceivable be itself uncaused? Why should our understanding of cause and effect stop with the vessel of all cause and effect?

Nothing can be created when it already exists.