Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Isn't the idea of miracle contrary to the causal principle?
In as much as this is a debate forum I would hope so.Why, are you looking for an argument?
No, because there is an identifiable cause ie GodIsn't the idea of miracle contrary to the causal principle?
Every thing must have a cause, right from the moment that It generated the illusion of the universe through will.In as much as this is a debate forum I would hope so.
And in answer to frbnsn, if miracles actually existed my guess would be that they wouldn't pop up for absolutely no reason whatsoever, and therefore be caused for a reason. So I don't see them as being contrary to the causal principle at all; the causal principle stating that everything is deterministic.
.
Every thing must have a cause, right from the moment that It generated the illusion of the universe through will.
No, because there is an identifiable cause ie God
Only by a process of elimination which is admittedly problematic since we couldn’t rule out natural causes without a comprehensive knowledge of natural causes.can you identify god?
Only by a process of elimination which is admittedly problematic since we couldn’t rule out natural causes without a comprehensive knowledge of natural causes.
ETA which is part of the reason I don’t place much faith in miracles
Do you mean the law that states that energy cannot be created or destroyed?Nope. The laws of thermodynamics, including the 1st law which accounts for causality did not exist until after this universe was formed. Therefore it it possible that our universe was uncaused.
Do you mean the law that states that energy cannot be created or destroyed?
What does this law state in 30 words (not more)?My error. The second law of thermodynamics accounts for causality.
What does this law state in 30 words (not more)?
You are the person who is convinced that it told you all about the philosophy of causality.I can do it in one word, "google" i can only educate for myself, i cannot learn for you.
You are the person who is convinced that it told you all about the philosophy of causality.
Things were not as they are and they will change tomorrow: they were different yesterday, and the month before etc going back 14.5 billion years to the Big Bang such that every development was caused through evolution of the universe on whatever preceded it: do you accept that much?Causality is not a philosophy. And you are the one laying down limits on how many words you will accept as education. And you are the one making claims that everything must have a cause.
So how about you stating in 30 words or less why everything must have a cause
Things were not as they are and they will change tomorrow: they were different yesterday, and the month before etc going back billion years to the Big Bang such that every development was caused through evolution of the universe on whatever preceded it: do you accept that much?