#6 Atheists, what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of the existence of God?

Question

The necessity for a “First Cause” that relies on nothing else for its own existence.
All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence. This would include the largest known physical & gaseous thing which is the universe itself. The things which perhaps caused the universe to exist such as the Big Bang likewise also need a cause for its existence. No matter how far back you go, whether you speak of other universes in a cycle, other dimensions with universes of their own, membranes producing countless universes they ALL need a cause for their existence. Saying that there is an infinite number of causes and effects or an infinite cycle of universes is illogical because without an ultimate starting place for the existence of the physical there would be infinite nothingness. Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause which depended on nothing else for its own existence which created or set in motion the cause or causes of the universe.

We can make numerous logical deductions as to the nature of this ultimate first cause, but that may be another question.

Answer 1

"All physical and gaseous things

need a cause for their existence."



That is an unsupported assertion.



We have explored the laws of nature

within only about a nanosecond after the Big Bang.

We don't know what the rules of nature are

at higher levels of energy than that.

They may transition to something completely different

than what rules nature since that time.



In effect, yours is an argument from ignorance.



I am honest in admitting my ignorance,

in cases where I have no testable facts.

When you can demonstrate the physics

of an uncaused cause,

I will take a look.



--

Regards,



John Popelish

Answer 2

All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence.



- Try reading something intelligent. Science has proved that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed, it is eternal.



the Big Bang likewise also need a cause for its existence.



- Yes, heat an pressure overcame the atomic forces and quantum gravity and expanded. You will learn this stuff when you get into high school.



they ALL need a cause for their existence.



- And since matter/energy is eternal, it has always existed.



Saying that there is an infinite number of causes and effects or an infinite cycle of universes is illogical



- And yet you say that your fantasy deity is not "illogical". Try actually proving that.



because without an ultimate starting place for the existence of the physical there would be infinite nothingness



- your opinion, try saying something intelligent.



Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause



- No one has ever said that the universe was "logical".

Answer 3

Although the concept of an eternal God may be hard to grasp, we can see that it makes sense.



If someone else had created God, that person would be the Creator.



As the Bible explains, God is the one who created all things. Furthermore, we know that the universe at one time did not exist. Genesis 1:1, 2



Where did it come from? Its Creator had to exist first. He also existed before there were any other intelligent beings, such as his only-begotten Son and the angels. Colossians 1:15



Clearly, then, he existed alone first. He could not have been created; nothing was in existence that could have created him.



Our own existence and that of the entire universe testifies to the existence of an eternal God.



The One who put our vast universe in motion, the One who established the laws to control it, must have always existed.



Only he could have breathed life into everything else.

Answer 4

Even if someone was to rise from the dead they would not believe.

Answer 5

Ben: "There is no special set of words that's going to magically pop god into existence."



---



There you have it folks. Atheists: impossible to reason or have dialogue with, don't waste your breath.



Uninterested in logic and facts, and of course: too smart for books, with their "special sets of words".

Answer 6

The universe is created by the observer.

Answer 7

I've always thought the First Cause argument is contradictory. The idea is that EVERYTHING has a cause. Therefore, because EVERYTHING has a cause, there must be something that didn't have a cause. Doesn't that sound inconsistent?



Its like saying that EVERYTHING we know is empirical, based on observation and experiment. So therefore there must be stuff we know DESPITE evidence.

Answer 8

Your logic fails, no matter how many times you throw around the word 'logic' or use absolutes.



If everything needs a first cause, then what was the first cause of God?



If at some point, something could exist without a first cause, then that the first cause must have been a God (let alone your God) is merely an assumption.

Answer 9

In my opinion the honest answer is "I don't know".

I don't know how the universe came to be and I don't pretend I do.

One could argue a "godless scientific" cause, or one could argue a religious stance... such as a god did.

Either way, nobody really knows for sure.

So, "I don't know" is at least... honest.

Answer 10

"All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence."

Do they? I have never been around when matter began to exist, so I wouldn't know. Matter is just a form of energy. Perhaps energy has always existed. Causality as we know it depends on the existence of time. If time had a beginning, causality as we know it would not apply.

Answer 11

so what is the first cause that created your god

Answer 12

"first cause"?



This is the same as the absurdity of the "uncaused causer", "unmade maker", "unmoved mover" FALLACIES OF LOGIC.



Philosophical ponderings of an old bigoted man (pope) is not evidence of gods.

Answer 13

The only way primitive religion exists today is through the child abuse of forcing it into very, very young children but thanks to better education and growing intellects so many teens are able to discover the truth, throw off the indoctrination and step into the real world!



So atheism is not a conscious decision or a belief but a realisation!



The first person to produce a single tiny little piece of verifiable evidence for any god will become world famous and mega rich!



Academia states that in the absence of any sort of evidence of the existence of something it must be deemed not to exist until verifiable evidence is found - thus god is held not to exist pending some sort of verifiable evidence.



The bible is what is called "Faction” A fictional story set in a factual time and place. Thus the time, place and real historical characters are all correct but the fictional characters and stories are not!



There is not one single mention of Jesus in the entire Roman record - that is right - not one! At the same time as he was supposed to have been around there were a number of Jews claiming to be the messiah - all of whom are well recorded!



There is not a single contemporary record from any source and even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!



He was supposed to have been a huge problem to the Romans and produced wonderful miracles but still not one contemporary record?



Even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!



Pilate is recorded in the Roman record as a somewhat lack luster man but no mention of a Jesus, a trial or crucifixion that would surely have been used to make him look brighter!



At best he was an amalgam of those others but almost certainly never existed!



Not one word of it is contemporary with the period and was not written until several hundred years after the period the story is set in!! How did the apostles write their books more than a hundred years after they would have been dead?



Christianity is an invention of the Italians and that is why it came from the Holy ROMAN Catholic church!



Please realize that those claims for the Old historians are worthless since they were not even born until long after everyone in the stories would have been so long dead!



Josephus AD 37 – AD 100

Tacitus AD 56 – AD 120

Suetonius - 69 – 130 AD

Pliny the Younger, 61 AD – 112 AD

Justin Martyr (Saint Justin) AD103–165 AD

Lucian - AD 120 -180 AD but he was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it.

Pamphilius AD 240-309 AD

Eusebius AD 263 – 339 AD

Photius AD 877 – 886 AD



Thallus - But there are no actual record of him except a fragment of writing which mentions the sack of Troy [109 BC] Showing that he was clearly not alive in biblical times.



Some even try to use Seneca. 4 BCE – 65 CE but as a Stoic Philosopher he opposed religion yet made not a single mention of a Jesus or Christianity!



Even funnier is trying to claim Celsus AD ? – 177 AD Who said that Jesus was a Jew who’se mother was a poor Jewish girl whose husband, who was a carpenter, drove her away because of her adultery with a Roman soldier named Panthera. She gave birth to an illegitimate child named Jesus. In Egypt, Jesus became learned in sorcery and upon his return presented himself as a god.





Research shows whilst education reduces religious belief each year of further education reduces religious belief by up to 10%!

Answer 14

So who "caused" god?

Answer 15

• "All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence."



What proof do you have that that premise is true? You can't just assert that that's so. If your argument depends on it, then you have to prove it.



Quantum mechanics has revealed that in the vacuum of space, virtual particles and anti-particles are constantly popping into existence and almost instantly annihilating each other. We don't yet know what causes pair production. How can you rule out the possibility that these physical particles are "uncaused"?



• "This would include the largest known physical & gaseous thing which is the universe itself."



That's a category error. The universe isn't "the largest thing", it's _everything_.



• "... without an ultimate starting place for the existence of the physical there would be infinite nothingness."



That does not follow.



• "Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause which depended on nothing else for its own existence which created or set in motion the cause or causes of the universe."



No, it doesn't. That does not follow either.

Answer 16

So God needs a cause for his existence

Answer 17

I would have to ask which of the 'gods' your questioning.

Answer 18

Nothing you state here is proof that God exists, only that you believe its logical that God exists.

Answer 19

Philosophical arguments aren't EVIDENCE, they are logic. Rationalism versus empiricism. At least understand the definitions of words you're using, kid.



This rests on a false premise. It asserts everything needs a cause. We don't know this. The standard model of physics says things don't need causes and all evidence so far as we can tell, supports the Standard model of physics. You really need to stop using arguments invented before the whole of modern physics.

Answer 20

The fact that you have to hide behind clouds of "logic" to try and explain something that you claim becomes self evident by looking at a puppy / rainbow, tells me that you're on extremely shaky ground.



And even if you were to (which you probably will) dismiss everyone's answer out of hand, that wouldn't change the fact that people spend centuries upon centuries committing the most terrible atrocities in order to force other people to believe in something you claim can be proved with "logic".



You lose, good day Sir.

Answer 21

"All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence." You can not know or investigate that, that right there is a baseless claim without evidence.



"membranes producing countless universes they ALL need a cause for their existence." Then by your own logic, the cause would also require a cause.



"Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause" Even if that was so, it does not imply that that cause is a god. OR that it is the Christian god. OR that the cause is even sentient at all.



What you did here is not logic, it is just mental gymnastics. You have assumed a whole bunch of stuff based on no evidence and then shoe horned your god in there.

Answer 22

The problem with all of these arguments is that they are predicated on an assumption that "God" exists, and then try to salvage "evidence" to support a claim that will convince no one who doesn't already accept the claim in the first place.



Usually things that exist do not need convoluted arguments in favor of their existence because they are self-evident. The only thing arguing for the existence of "God" is the human imagination, and what arguments it can try to come up with. "God" presents no evidence of existence, nothing that passes the test of self-evidence. And of course you will argue and argue and do no more than convince yourself and others who already accept the existence of deity.



But that ain't evidence. Case closed.





Edit: The honest Christian bases their belief in the existence of deity on faith alone. To try to hold a supposedly omnipotent and omniscient deity to the demonstrations of concepts is actually contradictory to the claims of ultimate supremacy and authority.



I think Christians would get a lot more respect if they admitted their beliefs on the basis of personal faith alone, without the constant need to try to "prove" to others the correctness of their beliefs.



After all, how powerful can a Christianity be that seems to need the constant validation of all humanity....?

Answer 23

Because physicists have not yet formulated a consistent theory that explains how gravity operates on extremely small scales (like those present at the instant of the Big Bang), cosmologists are unable to formulate theories as to what happened before about 10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang. Our universe may have originated as a pointlike entity with nearly-infinite density, or perhaps something else. Our mathematics, instruments, and scientific methodologies may need to be substantially improved before any further progress is made.

Answer 24

There is no special set of words that's going to magically pop god into existence. Forget the oh-so-clever arguments and show us proof of your magical, invisible Sky Daddy.