INDISPUTABLE Rational Proof That God Exists (Or Existed)

[Koldo]

I mean whatever science will eventually conclude created the universe.

That's not even close to what you said in that sentence. But, okay...

 

[Koldo]

Because it's a supreme being. Everything needs a cause except for what set the first domino in motion. There must be one exception. If there wasn't an exception, then there would be an endless line of dominos because you'll always need one to knock down the next. And the dominos would never fall because there would need to be a cause for the first effect, that didn't have a cause. Or else that would need a cause and that would need a cause etc. There must be an exception.

If the first piece is inclined towards the second piece from the start, once time starts it will fall down and cause a chain reaction leading all the other pieces to fall.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Because it's a supreme being. Everything needs a cause except for what set the first domino in motion.

Can you demonstrate that the Universe falls into this category?

There must be one exception.

Why isn't the Universe an exception? Why do you have to invent something that is an exception to the rule in order to demonstrate the rule? If there's an exception to the rule then we already know the rule isn't universal and can be contradicted, so your argument defeats itself.

If there wasn't an exception, then there would be an endless line of dominos because you'll always need one to knock down the next. And the dominos would never fall because there would need to be a cause for the first effect, that didn't have a cause. Or else that would need a cause and that would need a cause etc. There must be an exception.

But your logic is based on nothing except "this is what I think". You haven't demonstrated that there is an exception, nor have you even demonstrated that you need one. You've just claimed that everything needs a cause (which isn't necessarily true as far as we know), and claimed that this cause must be an exception to the very rule you use to claim it exists. Your argument is completely lacking in logic.

 

[kevino434]

If the first piece is inclined towards the second piece from the start, once time starts it will fall down and cause a chain reaction leading all the other pieces to fall.

and why would that piece be inclined?

 

[Koldo]

and why would that piece be inclined?

Are you asking for a reason? There is no reason.

 

[kevino434]

Can you demonstrate that the Universe falls into this category?


Why isn't the Universe an exception? Why do you have to invent something that is an exception to the rule in order to demonstrate the rule? If there's an exception to the rule then we already know the rule isn't universal and can be contradicted, so your argument defeats itself.


But your logic is based on nothing except "this is what I think". You haven't demonstrated that there is an exception, nor have you even demonstrated that you need one. You've just claimed that everything needs a cause (which isn't necessarily true as far as we know), and claimed that this cause must be an exception to the very rule you use to claim it exists. Your argument is completely lacking in logic.

everything else needs a cause. Ok so. There are no proven exceptions in the universe that we know of. Theres things science can't explain yet, but nothing science can prove that doesn't obey the laws of the universe. So, everything we know of today obeys the laws of the universe. The universe cannot create itself because it is currently obeying the laws of the universe and to create itself it would have had to disobey the laws of the universe. by laws of the universe i means gravity etc. The exception, doesnt obey the laws of the universe, because its an EXCEPTION. And the exception doesn't invalidate these laws of the universe because it isnt part of the universe. It isnt equivalent to anything in the universe. This exception isnt part of our universe so it doesnt make it so there can be other exceptions in the universe. And you can't just say "why cant the universe be an exception?", because the universe isnt a single cause/effect. its a multitude of causes and effects.

 

[kevino434]

Are you asking for a reason? There is no reason.

so youre saying the first cause happened because it just did? if that piece fell for no reason, then why do all the other pieces need a reason to fall?

 

[Falvlun]

The universe cannot create itself because it is currently obeying the laws of the universe and to create itself it would have had to disobey the laws of the universe.

If the universe created itself, that means it created itself before it, or anything within it including the laws, existed. You can't disobey a law that didn't exist yet.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because it's a supreme being.

It is so because you define it so?

Everything needs a cause except for what set the first domino in motion.

Why must there be a first?
There could also be a cycle without beginning or end.
This is what you propose for a supreme being.
One could propose the same for the natural world.

If there wasn't an exception, then there would be an endless line of dominos because you'll always need one to knock down the next. And the dominos would never fall because there would need to be a cause for the first effect, that didn't have a cause. Or else that would need a cause and that would need a cause etc. There must be an exception.

No exception is needed if the natural world is eternal in one form or another.

 

[Falvlun]

so youre saying the first cause happened because it just did? if that piece fell for no reason, then why do all the other pieces need a reason to fall?

The same reason why your first cause doesn't need a reason?

Also, and this is just a philosophical question of my own, how do we know, I mean really know, that everything has a cause? How do we know that there aren't more "exceptions" out there? Wouldn't they just appear like everything else to us?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

everything else needs a cause.

How do you know?

Ok so. There are no proven exceptions in the universe that we know of.

But we're not talking about the Universe we know of - we're talking about the origin of it, which would coincide with the origin of the physical laws included within our Universe, such as cause and effect. Just because there are no exceptions (or, at least, we have no exceptions) doesn't mean you can apply a given rule in a situation where we have no idea if the rule applies or even exists yet.

Theres things science can't explain yet, but nothing science can prove that doesn't obey the laws of the universe.

Again, how do you know this? How can you make any assertions whatsoever about what science can and cannot explain? Science is an ongoing process and new applications and discoveries are made through science practically every day.

So, everything we know of today obeys the laws of the universe. The universe cannot create itself because it is currently obeying the laws of the universe and to create itself it would have had to disobey the laws of the universe.

But before the Universe existed (if such a concept as "before the Universe is even valid) we have no basis to assume the laws of the Universe apply, so how can you say it cannot?

by laws of the universe i means gravity etc. The exception, doesnt obey the laws of the universe, because its an EXCEPTION.

And why can the Universe not be the exception? Why does there NEED to be an exception in the first place? How can you just invent an exception to a rule in order to prove an exception to the rule? That makes no sense.

And the exception doesn't invalidate these laws of the universe because it isnt part of the universe.

Then how did it create the Universe?

It isnt equivalent to anything in the universe. This exception isnt part of our universe so it doesnt make it so there can be other exceptions in the universe.

So you admit that there could be exceptions to the rule in the Universe? Therefore the rule can be contradicted and your initial cause argument is not longer valid.

And you can't just say "why cant the universe be an exception?"

And you can't claim that there's a rule then invent an exception to the rule in order to prove an exception to the rule.

because the universe isnt a single cause/effect. its a multitude of causes and effects.

How does that mean it couldn't qualify as an exception? How do you quantify or demonstrate what is an exception to the rule and what isn't? You just appear to be throwing arbitrary exceptions to the rule wherever you need them, but saying that the Universe is an exception is no different to claiming that anything else is. You still haven't demonstrated a single thing you've claimed.

Yeah, this argument is extremely poor. I come across it very regularly and every time it ends up being more like a fallacy than an argument.

 

[kevino434]

If the universe created itself, that means it created itself before it, or anything within it including the laws, existed. You can't disobey a law that didn't exist yet.

But now you're generalizing the universe. The universe is everything in the space we know of. How could something create itself that didn't exist before?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

But now you're generalizing the universe.

But that's what you've been doing this whole time with your argument that everything "needs a cause".

The universe is everything in the space we know of. How could something create itself that didn't exist before?

How can something create a Universe that isn't a part of that Universe?

 

[Falvlun]

But now you're generalizing the universe. The universe is everything in the space we know of. How could something create itself that didn't exist before?

The same way your first cause did it.

Maybe just some random glitch in the matrix.

Or maybe the universe is eternal.

 

[Falvlun]

I do have to congratulate you, kevino, for picking a thread title (as a newbie to boot!) that we atheists would find irresistible. Undeniable rational proof of God? Pure catnip!

Though I do wonder if you still find your proof "indisputible".

 

[kevino434]

The same reason why your first cause doesn't need a reason?

Also, and this is just a philosophical question of my own, how do we know, I mean really know, that everything has a cause? How do we know that there aren't more "exceptions" out there? Wouldn't they just appear like everything else to us?

But we know that causes and effects exist, everything in our universe that we know of happens because of a cause and effect, or if it doesnt then that just mindf***s this whole debate but thats a whole nother debate. The reason the first cause didnt need a reason is because it is God. God, is the name for the exception. The universe was created by a chain of outbranching causes and effects, and there must be an exception to this chain of causes and effects. We know all the dominos arent slanted, but one must have been (or pushed over etc) to start the chain, thus God.

 

[Koldo]

so youre saying the first cause happened because it just did?

Yes.

if that piece fell for no reason, then why do all the other pieces need a reason to fall?

Because they aren't/weren't inclined.

 

[kevino434]

But that's what you've been doing this whole time with your argument that everything "needs a cause".


How can something create a Universe that isn't a part of that Universe?

But everything does need a cause. You type on the keyboard because of your muscles moving because of electrical impulses from your brain etc etc etc.

Something can create a universe it isnt part of because it isnt anything tangible we can understand. It is the only exception. Thats what we consider God. its not just another regular cause and effect, its something different.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

But we know that causes and effects exist,

Correct.

everything in our universe that we know of happens because of a cause and effect

Correct. The operative phrase being "that we know of".

or if it doesnt then that just mindf***s this whole debate but thats a whole nother debate.

I think this debate is already sufficiently mindf***ed.

The reason the first cause didnt need a reason is because it is God.

That's completely arbitrary. You could claim it is anything.

God, is the name for the exception.

Again, arbitrary. You could name it whatever you want.

The universe was created by a chain of outbranching causes and effects, and there must be an exception to this chain of causes and effects.

Based on what? We've already explained that this is baseless.

We know all the dominos arent slanted, but one must have been (or pushed over etc) to start the chain, thus God.

Again, baseless and arbitrary. You cannot just make a claim - you have to have a basis for it, and so far you've yet to show a logical basis for most of your claims.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

But everything does need a cause.

How do you know? Have you analyzed everything that exists or everything that can possibly exist?

You type on the keyboard because of your muscles moving because of electrical impulses from your brain etc etc etc.

I know how cause and effect works. I'm asking you how you know that it is an absolute Universal constant and can even be applied in a sphere in which the law may not have existed.

Something can create a universe it isnt part of because it isnt anything tangible we can understand.

This is called "making stuff up". You've not actually explained anything, just made more claims that you don't have to support. An explanation has to be tested based on it's explanatory power, but your claim doesn't explain anything - it just raises more questions.

It is the only exception.

How could you POSSIBLY know that? Again, "making stuff up".

Thats what we consider God.

Why should we consider it "anything" if we can't understand it or explain it?

its not just another regular cause and effect, its something different.

You really need to stop making claims you cannot support.