Does the universe need a cause? (Creator, theist, eternal, point of view)

[michel]

Originally Posted by pandamonk

So are you saying that you don't believe God created nature and the unvierse?

No I don't; to me God is 'Nature'

[pandamonk]

Originally Posted by Willamena

Well said.
Except, of course, then what causes existence?

Nothing. It has always existed. Or maybe it came to exist naturally. But then what caused natural laws? NOTHING!!! Because it is only a natural law which states that everything has a cause, so if at one point that law doesn't exist, then i could never exist.

[pandamonk]

Originally Posted by michel

No I don't; to me God is 'Nature'

Ok, ok

[Fluffy]

The only thing I can think of as a possible criticism to this argument is that it seems unnecessarily complicated. Additionally, it appears to place the burden of evidence on the sceptic rather than the believer.

In my mind, it would be preferable to ask the person who believed (via the cosmological arguments) that God was the first cause two questions "Why do you stop your investigations at God?" and "Why can't the universe be the first cause?" since these destroy the cosmological arguments, place the burden on the believer and avoid creating an argument which can subsequently be attacked by the believer.

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by pandamonk

Nothing. It has always existed. Or maybe it came to exist naturally. But then what caused natural laws? NOTHING!!! Because it is only a natural law which states that everything has a cause, so if at one point that law doesn't exist, then i could never exist.

*blink*

Well... if "maybe" it came to exist naturally, then that's still saying it had a cause. "Only a natural" cause is still a cause.

[pandamonk]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

The only thing I can think of as a possible criticism to this argument is that it seems unnecessarily complicated. Additionally, it appears to place the burden of evidence on the sceptic rather than the believer.

In my mind, it would be preferable to ask the person who believed (via the cosmological arguments) that God was the first cause two questions "Why do you stop your investigations at God?" and "Why can't the universe be the first cause?" since these destroy the cosmological arguments, place the burden on the believer and avoid creating an argument which can subsequently be attacked by the believer.

I very much agree with you. I just saw this argument thought it was good, and decided to post it.

[pandamonk]

Originally Posted by Willamena

*blink*

Well... if "maybe" it came to exist naturally, then that's still saying it had a cause. "Only a natural" cause is still a cause.

But when you something has a cause(to be created), it is implied that there is a causer(creator).

[Radio Frequency X]

Originally Posted by Willamena

Well said.
Except, of course, then what causes existence?

Nothing causes existance. Existence is the original set of propositions. Everything that exists is depandent on the fact that existence is reality, and that there is no difference between the two.

[pandamonk]

Originally Posted by Radio Frequency X

Nothing causes existance. Existence is the original set of propositions. Everything that exists is depandent on the fact that existence is reality, and that there is no difference between the two.

I think i understand what you are getting at, but could you explain.

[stemann]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

In my mind, it would be preferable to ask the person who believed (via the cosmological arguments) that God was the first cause two questions "Why do you stop your investigations at God?" and "Why can't the universe be the first cause?" since these destroy the cosmological arguments, place the burden on the believer and avoid creating an argument which can subsequently be attacked by the believer.

Exactly, the reason your argument works is because the Cosmological Argument is flawed. Its flaw is that it begins with the God of Classical Theism and sets out to prove it, rather than starting from the Universe and thinking backwards logically- if somebody with no concept of any God tried to think about the Cosmological Argument, they would come up with "If there was a beginning, what was before the beginning?"