What is wrong with this premise?

[Heywood]

Premise: Everything that has come into existence has had a cause.

What is wrong with the above premise?

[Silver]

Premise: Everything that has come into existence has had a cause.

What is wrong with the above premise?

Nothing.

It is when you make the insupportable claim that god is the cause that the problems arise.

[Darkstar]

Premise: Everything that has come into existence has had a cause.

What is wrong with the above premise?

We have never observed anything coming into existence that had a discernible cause, so we cannot say that this is true.
We have observed particles coming into existence without any definable cause, however: Quantum fluctuation

[Alex K]

By default I don't see why your premise should be true.
But can you specify what your definition of a cause is, and what you mean by something coming into existence.

[Mudhammam]

Premise: Everything that has come into existence has had a cause.

What is wrong with the above premise?

For one, it's unsupported by any evidence. 2ndly, if causality only relates to entities that exist because in order to change --- which is what casualty is --- something must be for it to change from or into, then to say that causality involves change from nothing to something while yet nothing is at least the propensity to be, is to refute the notion that nothing is in fact not something.

[Heywood]

By default I don't see why your premise should be true.
But can you specify what your definition of a cause is, and what you mean by something coming into existence.

I would accept the premise as true because in my experience everything which has come into existence has had some cause.

[Darkstar]

By default I don't see why your premise should be true.
But can you specify what your definition of a cause is, and what you mean by something coming into existence.

I would accept the premise as true because in my experience everything which has come into existence has had some cause.

What in your experience has come into existence? And before you answer that question you need to very specifically define what you mean by 'come into existence' so everybody understands what we're discussing, and nobody tries to move the goalposts later in.

[Heywood]

I would accept the premise as true because in my experience everything which has come into existence has had some cause.

What in your experience has come into existence? And before you answer that question you need to very specifically define what you mean by 'come into existence' so everybody understands what we're discussing, and nobody tries to move the goalposts later in.

A Harry Potter movie has come into existence.

The movie didn't exist 100 years ago and now it does.

[reiemdis]

Premise: Everything that has come into existence has had a cause.

What is wrong with the above premise?

We have never observed anything coming into existence that had a discernible cause, so we cannot say that this is true.
We have observed particles coming into existence without any definable cause, however: Quantum fluctuation

How do we know that these particles are not caused by existence, I.e. their cresttion is inherent within the physical laws of existence.

[Heywood]

We have never observed anything coming into existence that had a discernible cause, so we cannot say that this is true.
We have observed particles coming into existence without any definable cause, however: Quantum fluctuation

How do we know that these particles are not caused by existence, I.e. their cresttion is inherent within the physical laws of existence.

I would sooner believe that the cause is non-local rather than they come into existence un-caused.