Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?

[Esquilax]

Prove it.

An effect has a cause.

Except for your god, right? Special pleading at it's finest.

See, this is what drives me completely batshit fucking insane about theists like you, it's the complete, arrogant, bull headed, oblivious arguments that you make, without ever actually thinking through them.

How fucking dare you ridicule my position, which is based on evidence and reasoning, as being "something happening for no reason" and then turn around, quick as you like, and claim that your god does exactly that? You dishonest fucker!

Lemme guess, you got this Kalam bullshit from William Lane Craig or some other moron and didn't bother actually thinking it through, right? It just confirmed the belief you already had, so it got a free pass, yeah? Ever fucking considered it for even a second?

Well, lemme put it to bed right now, probably futilely, because I doubt you have it in you to change your mind: let's say I accept your conclusion that everything that begins to exist has a cause. You're willing to accept a thing that doesn't begin to exist (and don't even get me started on the utter crime against meaning that phrase is). Okay, fine: how the fuck can you demonstrate that the universe itself isn't the thing that didn't begin to exist? Where do you get off adding god to that?

Oh right, because you don't care about truth or logic, just ramming your bible into every gap in knowledge you have. Trust me, there probably aren't enough bibles in the world to accomplish that task for you.

You know what, how about you go and educate yourself on why this falls down, pokey? I know learning makes you nervous, but at least try it, okay? The temptation will be there to just say "godidit" again, but try and keep it down until the end of the page, alright?

[The Reality Salesman01]

You are reduced to two responses.

God made the universe from 'X'

God made the universe from himself

Either one you pick lands you in the market for a new religion. You do have to be smart enough to understand why. That means you may have to take off your foil hat.

[StuW]

Philosophical proof. All effects have a cause, no effect can be uncaused. The ultimate first cause of all the effects that exist everywhere in reality must not in itself be caused by anything itself. God is the uncaused cause which must therefore exist for anything else to exist.

I've posted on this before, I can't find the exact post atm, but it went something like this..

There is no reason why cause has to precede effect "outside" this universe as time is a property of THIS universe. Taking this to the next illogical step (yes i mean illogical) it's possible that the thing that "caused" this universe hasn't even happened yet and may even be of our own doing, making your god surplus to requirements.

[Jackalope]

I wonder if our friend has run off to see what WLC has to say about our objections?

[Jackalope]

Not proof.

Philosophical proof. All effects have a cause, no effect can be uncaused. The ultimate first cause of all the effects that exist everywhere in reality must not in itself be caused by anything itself. God is the uncaused cause which must therefore exist for anything else to exist.

In case you were unaware, this is what is called "proof by assertion", and is no proof at all.

[Silver]

It seems every time SoC disappears, discipulus appears.

[Bad Writer]

I bet that's just coincidence.

Speaking of effects before the cause, I just remembered the Star Trek Voyager episode called "Parallax" where the cause for an effect actually took place in the future and was reflected back in time. Not saying this is true, but postulating such occurrences is what drives our greater understanding of the universe. It's partially what gives credence to the phrase "uncaused cause".

[The Reality Salesman01]

Touché salesman...

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Not proof.

Philosophical proof. All effects have a cause, no effect can be uncaused. The ultimate first cause of all the effects that exist everywhere in reality must not in itself be caused by anything itself. God is the uncaused cause which must therefore exist for anything else to exist.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading

Also, you've formed a contradiction in your reasoning. 'Everything is caused except this one thing that isn't'. That is fallicious reasoning, even in philosophical discourse.

No philosophical proof can be seen in your post. Maelstrom's point holds as valid as, even if a 'cause' were to be evidenced, it does thus not follow therefore that it is your assertion that is correct.

[Cyberman]

Any explanation for something makes far far far more sense than literally no explanation at all.

Not if the explanation is wrong or requires more and more ad hoc rationalisations to prop it up. I'm reminded of the old epicycles explanation for the movements of the outer planets, back in the days of the geocentric Universe, or the Cosmic Aether as a medium to propogate lightwaves through Space. Merely changing the perspective corrected these and other false conclusions. Seems like we still have a way to go.

But if you truly believe that any explanation is better than none, then I hope (for the purposes of illustration) that you find yourself being convicted and sentenced for a crime you did not commit by a justice system that believes the same way. After all, they've got their guy -or at least 'a' guy - and closed the case. Any explanation beats having none at all, right?

If we all thought like you, based on what you share here, then we would never have learned how to make fire. We'd still be sitting in a forest, praying for the next lightning bolt.