What is wrong with this premise?

[Darkstar]

I often hear atheist ask that if it is possible that God has always existed why can't it be possible that the universe has always existed? Which is a good question(although I would use "reality" instead of universe).

Since the premise can be used to exclude reality from the cause and effect cycle it is not specific to God.

Okay, I'll bite. Let's say "reality" instead of "universe". So what you're saying is that god is exempt from cause and effect because he exists outside of reality? That makes sense. After all, if he's not real you can give him any attributes you want!

So, if we have to exclude something from cause and effect, why exclude a being and claim that he created reality rather than simply use a more direct approach and exclude reality itself?

[Animated Earth]

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

What is wrong with the above premise?

From Merriam-Webster dictionary:

Full Definition of CAUSE
1
a : a reason for an action or condition : motive
b : something that brings about an effect or a result
c : a person or thing that is the occasion of an action or state; especially : an agent that brings something about
d : sufficient reason <discharged for cause>

Your premise is only wrong if you can prove that something has come into existence without any reason or agency. This cannot be proved.

The implied "bigger" question is not one of black and white logic but rather one of judgement. Is it good judgement to concoct a cause for some change of condition or is it better to not judge at all until there is compelling evidence? Faith is making a judgement without compelling evidence.

[Heywood]

Okay, I'll bite. Let's say "reality" instead of "universe". So what you're saying is that god is exempt from cause and effect because he exists outside of reality? That makes sense. After all, if he's not real you can give him any attributes you want!

So, if we have to exclude something from cause and effect, why exclude a being and claim that he created reality rather than simply use a more direct approach and exclude reality itself?

The notion of God existing outside of reality is nonsensical. I never made that claim.....I never would make that claim.

[robvalue]

God can do anything but he can't exist outside of reality? Man he's slipping again

[Davka]

Okay, I'll bite. Let's say "reality" instead of "universe". So what you're saying is that god is exempt from cause and effect because he exists outside of reality? That makes sense. After all, if he's not real you can give him any attributes you want!

So, if we have to exclude something from cause and effect, why exclude a being and claim that he created reality rather than simply use a more direct approach and exclude reality itself?

The notion of God existing outside of reality is nonsensical. I never made that claim.....I never would make that claim.

Then does your "god" exist outside the universe?

[helyott]

Okay, I'll bite. Let's say "reality" instead of "universe". So what you're saying is that god is exempt from cause and effect because he exists outside of reality? That makes sense. After all, if he's not real you can give him any attributes you want!

So, if we have to exclude something from cause and effect, why exclude a being and claim that he created reality rather than simply use a more direct approach and exclude reality itself?

The notion of God existing outside of reality is nonsensical. I never made that claim.....I never would make that claim.

Where is he if God exists inside reality ?
If god exists inside reality what is the cause of god ?
If God have a cause he his no god because god must be over everything and created everything ?
He can't create himself.
Then who created god ?

[Heywood]

The notion of God existing outside of reality is nonsensical. I never made that claim.....I never would make that claim.

Then does your "god" exist outside the universe?

I have come to the conclusion that even if God doesn't exist, there must be more to reality than just the observable universe.

So yes...my God could very well exist outside the observable universe but He could not exist or ever exist outside of reality.

[helyott]

Then does your "god" exist outside the universe?

I have come to the conclusion that even if God doesn't exist, there must be more to reality than just the observable universe.

So yes...my God could very well exist outside the observable universe but He could not exist or ever exist outside of reality.

It s like the invisible pink unicorn.

[Heywood]

Your premise is only wrong if you can prove that something has come into existence without any reason or agency. This cannot be proved.

The implied "bigger" question is not one of black and white logic but rather one of judgement. Is it good judgement to concoct a cause for some change of condition or is it better to not judge at all until there is compelling evidence? Faith is making a judgement without compelling evidence.

Mathmatics is something and as far as I am concerned its existence is eternal. Nothing has ever caused 2+2 to equal 4. It just always been that. It requires no cause.

[Davka]

Then does your "god" exist outside the universe?

I have come to the conclusion that even if God doesn't exist, there must be more to reality than just the observable universe.

So yes...my God could very well exist outside the observable universe but He could not exist or ever exist outside of reality.

We have no evidence whatsoever of anything existing outside the Universe. I'm not sure what you mean by "observable," since most of the Universe seems to be made up of dark matter, which is not directly observable but only infer-able due to its gravitational pull.

I suspect that you have come to this conclusion based on nothing more than feelings. It "feels like" there must be something more, therefore there must.

But feelings are actually part of the observable Universe.