The universe existing is proof of God or atleast a Godlike entity existing

The universe existing is proof of God or atleast a Godlike entity existing.

1.Whatever begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist
3. Therefore the universe has a cause for its existence
4. Since everything that has began to exist needs a cause, then an uncaused creator must of caused it
5. Therefore a timeless, spaceless, beginingless creator exists

>but OP if everything needs a cause to exist then how did "space daddy" come to be

God never began to exist. He was always there.

If you wrote the entire history of the universe as a line, then God would be the paper you drew on.

This argument was first created Aristole and expanded on during the Middle Ages by Christian and Islamic theologians (Mind you, during the 800s the Arabs were expericing a golden age)

Religion is just explaining what God is, and our place in the world.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=J0QDc7baQfk
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Why can't the universe be the thing that was always there without a cause?

so wait, you're saying that god, of which we know nothing, can break this rule that 'something has to have a beginning'... but the universe, of which we know much, which indubitably exists, can't break this 'rule of having beginnings'.

yeah that's bullshit. its just circular logic and much more likely that that universe itself is uncaused and uncreated.

Because we have scientifically proven there was a cause.

Examples such as the Big Bang.

That's a theory

That's what I thought when I first heard it.

We can't (for right now at least) "prove" a God

But if you go through every single action, cause etc

This is the only logical conclusion.

The universe can't of created itself.

That literally breaks the laws of physics.

It always makes me laugh when christfags try to use logic. There is no reason the universe can't have always existed, there are many theories about this, that even include the big bang. If everything needs a cause, you can't have a god either. Grow up and out of your delusions.

There was no time before the universe, therefore there can't be a cause before the effect, because BEFORE didn't exist. It's an effect without a cause.

>1.Whatever begins to exist has a cause

[citation needed]
inb4 big bang

>4. Since everything that has began to exist needs a cause, then an uncaused creator must of caused it

Quite a fucking leap.

the big bang is just a theory, it's considered entirely plausible that no matter what time or place you're in, it 'looks' like the universe is moving away from you and the big bang happened about 12 billion years ago.

furthermore, there's no explanation for how a big bang happens that isn't mystical. and the most reasonable idea is that existence, or reality, or whatever, just keeps going bang and expanding and then crunch back down and going bang again on and on for eternity.

cause and effect is only human perspective. there's evidence coming to light that things may cause themselves retroactively. memes for example. but it's been known for a long time.

there's a good chance that if gods exist, then they were created out of the universe.

but the universe doesn't need to have been created. its called 'primacy'.

the concept of the universe always having existed has been the predominant form of thinking for milllenia.

its an argument but one that doesn't bear up under examination.

Well Mr. Neckbeard, if we want to use your logic, then the Big Bang created the universe.

>then what caused the Big Bang

If you say another thing, then what caused that

Eventually you lead to something that was always there without a cause

I think I may have fucked up my words, but exactly, an effect without a cause. It may be God or even just a universe spawning cloud. But it is there.

Sage this post went full retard

>an argument that has been around for 2.5 thousand years has been refuted by a 4channer.

Things can't cause themselves. Give me on example.

If things caused themselves then why don't we have horses spawning in our beds.

It's because that's simply not plausible.

Use your brain kraut.

its ironic how christians who are supposed to think that god created the universe in 7 days are so willing to use the satanic big bang theory when it suits them!

cause and affect is apparential.

we have no evidence of final cause, only interaction. for example, a man carves a cup. but we can't say that in the end there was "a cause". he made the cup because he was thirsty because he needs water because he's an organic being because water is a universal solvent that allows proteins to intermingle and form life because of atomic theory etcetera, in the end there is no 'first cause'.

cause and effect in this abstract sense is just a theory. and one that's looking worse for its age.

>germanics believe augustus was a blond haired pale skinned man

>Use your brain kraut.

>events that predate the existence of physical laws have to follow these laws

Get fucked mate.

>hurr durr newtonian physics is where it's at

I never said the earth was created in seven days. And you implied I'm Christian.

Aka Strawman fallacy

The man created the cup because he was thirst. That was his cause. He was thirsty because of his biological need. Why does have have the biological need? He needs it to live and reproduce etc etc

You keep unraveling all the events logically until this conclusion

there is no 'thing' that has a 'cause'. it's simpleminded to think that 'you exist because your mother gave birth to you'. because also, 'you exist because she was 10 minutes late for work and met your dad' etc.

we've never found a cause for ANYTHING. there's no actual evidence of causes, and there's no actual evidences for things-in-themselves as *product*. everything is becoming something else, forever. only a gradient in a process of change.

the argument that 'god created the universe' has only really ever been popular with arabs up until the recent cucking. the greek, pagan, roman, and asian thought was that the universe existed before all.

and none of that even addresses the fact that before you even started, you were positing a being that defies a rule you deem so absolute that nothing can defy it... which is a contradiction in terms. such a god is impossible. i'm not saying there might or might not be such a god, i'm saying that it is proven beyond doubt that any such being with such properties is impossible. if it was possible, cause and effect would be negated and you'd be back at square one.

lol this argument is literally the opposite of an axiom.

there is no god, never was, never will be

the existence of the universe from nothing has to do with the fact that it is balanced (there was a Black Science Guy video that explained it with physics) and that since it was balanced at zero, existing and not existing could occur or be destroyed since the balance remained zero.

either way, there is no god.

>inb4 1 post by this ID

this is my first and last post in this thread, just wanted to drop in my opinion

> yfw the universe is most likely a simulation
> yfw when Christcucks were right all along

there is zero evidence that a conclusion would ever be reached. you're assuming that you'd find such a conclusion, when no one has ever found one of those before or even gotten close.

furthermore its a limited perspective. what if having created the cup caused him to be thirsty in the past?

biological life is conditional. so for us it's necessary to identify patterns. but matter (latin mater = mother) is unconditional. the existence of matter and energy is without condition. mothers love is unconditional.

the same rules would apply to the universe we were being simulated in. and if one universe is simulated, they're all simulated.

i think that reality is simulated by infinite numbers of ghosts hallucinating in an infinite abyss of nothingness. real reality is just ghosts in nothing, but they're hallucinating our simulation.

A simulation implies intelligent design

If the universe can exist infinitely into the future in some form or another, it can also exist infinitely into the past. There is not necessarily a beginning or an end.

Do everyone a favour and don't "drop your opinion" in here again you fat heretic

The universe has always been, and will always be.
If we're going by cause and effect then each moment of the universe existing is the cause for the next moment, going to infinity

no, if we were living in a simulation, it'd be proof that no god exists, because if there was a god, or at least anything remotely like a christian one, then only he can create a soul, and souls are created for their trial and eventual salvation or damnation. if that god exists and this is a simulation, than we have no souls and the point is moot.

the ghosts that are hallucinating that reality exists are intelligent but not sophisticated.

Delusions?

Everything that is came from nothing.
That nothing exploded for some reason.
The explosion created order.
The order created life.
Life created consciousness.
Consciousness created morality.

From NOTHING.

ITT:

Amerifats try to claim ideas thought out thousands of years ago.

Nice.

You guys will develop a culture one day. Keep trying lads.

Cause and effect is reality. You're clearly not ready to deal with reality yet.

Watching the universe get stretched out by God would look very much like what we observe today.

Very much indeed.

Culture's for faggots.

existence of conciousness inside universe prooves only one thing:
universe doesn't know shit about itself and it developed mind and thought to understand itself.
we are the gods, because we're able to push our will over matter.

I can believe there's a god, I just doubt we would ever learn what it is really like, what it's reason for making us is or its purpose for us

>1.Whatever begins to exist has a cause

What is your evidence for this?

>2. The universe began to exist

The universe didn't necessarily "begin" to exist. The big bang "began" a state of rapid expansion in the universe but that's not to say that the universe didn't exist before it, albeit in an infinitely dense state.

>God never began to exist. He was always there.
By the same logic, you could argue that the universe (or the non-sentient mechanics that lead to its formation) were also "always there."

You're a grain of sand on a vast beach of people who've been trying to find definitive answers to the problem of our origins. You'll have to do better than watching a WLC debate.

cause and effect is apparent reality. you're clearly not ready to deal with substratitative epistemology.

'what it looks like' is more in line with scientology than christianity.

> if there was a god, or at least anything remotely like a christian one, then only he can create a soul, and souls are created for their trial and eventual salvation or damnation. if that god exists and this is a simulation, than we have no souls

I'm not really following

The universe did not begin at any point and nor will it ever end. God is the universe.

>Things can't cause themselves
>God is the thing without a cause

the basic theory of abrahamic religion is that life in the universe is the result and intent of god. therefore, if god created a universe with life in it, with souls, and those people created a simulation universe (us) then we wouldn't have souls. our creator was not god, but man. if there is an afterlife then it's the product of mens imagination.


thanks for showing up, spinoza. this is a reasonable argument. if somewhat superfluous.

with that logic what created god ? if he exist what brought this about ? if you always need a creator then you end up with super god who made god and super gods creator was mega god who was made by ultra god

its like reading the book of genesis in the bible with the so and so begot so and so shit for like 2 pages

ITT: First year philosophy course discussion that hasn't expanded on the most common argument and counterargument

God doesn;t need to exist within time and space, even if the universe is infinite in time and space, since its creation by definition would have occurred in a manner extrinsic to the properties which now constitute its being.

Infinite regression? Never works with them, because "everything that exists has a cause" always excludes god because ... reasons.

Shitty bait.

Why wouldn't we have souls in a simulation though?

It exists because sun. Without it, no life. Maybe a different life, but not this life as we know it.

FOR U

>eskinigger doesn't know the difference between the universe and the solar system

Go have a vitamin D deficiency somewhere else.

because only god can create souls. only god can create life. or so they say.

The truth is there are multiple gods. No god is the best at everything.

Your one god religions are Jewish myths.

String theory supports this.

The definition of the 10th dimension matches the definition of a traditional "God."

If the 10th dimension has a consciousness (in order to negate paradoxes) it would literally be God.

Example: In one universe, I made a machine that destroyed all other universes. Or, I made a machine that I used to travel to other universes to give myself a high five.

Those didn't happen, but an infinite amount of possibilities means it happened.

Something had to make the choice to allow or deny certain universes to exist.

>inb4 laws of physics means you can't do that

There are an infinite amount of universes with infinitely different laws that govern them.

This is just what I believe though.

Go get raped by mudslime dick to another solar system, you fucking cuck

>4. Since everything that has began to exist needs a cause, then an uncaused creator must of caused it
Compelling.

Yeah the premise is god created everything. Souls are what we now call subconscious mind though

>exist within time and space, even if the universe is infinite in time and space, since its creation
Under Spinoza's interpretation though, God IS time and space. There cannot be anything that exists outside of God, because it is everything in its entirety. God is not limited to being within or outside of anything, because God is not limited. Even if the universe was created at some point and has a definite beginning, it's still God.

How long after attending church should I approach the priest to inquire about baptism? (Not roman catholic, so no RCIA or anything like that).


Tired of being unbaptized heathen.

I so hope your butchered word there isn't a reference to that retarded "bare particulars" theory.

thats illogical are you really that dense to think that?

That's incorrect though.

Let's use the big bang theory. The explosion should have created equal parts matter and antimatter that would have annihilated each other. This didn't happen. For every billion atoms of antimatter, there was a billion and one atoms of matter.

We can assume a force acted upon the big bang either before, or during the initial explosion in order to disrupt the homogeneity of particle creation.

However, if the big bang is the entire known universe at the time, then you could assume a force outside the known universe acted upon it.

I will admit, this only applies to our limited understanding of antimatter, but if it has an opposite (anti) effect on gravity, there should be an equal distribution of antimatter pushing the universe away from it.

Something to think about.

first you have to follow the example of your pope and wash muslims feet.

You're a slave of your own nature as a human being and our hugely limited capabilities of understanding things. We can not apprehend what the true nature of the Universe is, and the fact that you present an explanation is absurd.

No. John Mackie. He's your man. Argued the universe couldn't have been otherwise . No need for god.

>Just a theory

There's a difference between a hypothesis and a theory.

>because "everything that exists has a cause" always excludes god because ... reasons.
>"everything that exists has a cause"

There's the problem, you've set up a strawman.

The premise is "Whatever BEGINS to exist has a cause."

never mind misread your post i thought you where refuting the creation of the universe with its always been their argument
im the dense one

So you read som Aquinas foo im still balls deep in your mom

"beginning" implies a point in time and a progression from that point onward.
Since time is did not exist before the universe, it is utterly meaningless in this context.

This. Welcome to 800 years ago faggot.

>1.Whatever begins to exist has a cause
>God never began to exist. He was always there.

nice try fag

>look at my logic chain
>God never began to exist. He was always there.

Way to throw it overboard.

Why do you try to argue with logic when at the next step you offer something way beyond that realm?

OK...who made the paper then?

I said I'm not roman catholic.

The universe is not eternal. Even if we ignore the big bang and say it might not have been the beginning, if an infinite amount of time had passed then entropy would have made all the energy unusable by this point.

Not even a fedora but

> Implying time is empirical.

I'm still curious what the fuck it was that you were trying to stutter up there. Could you explain your "substratitative" epistemology in human words, maybe?

If God is the paper who is the pen?

> The universe is not eternal
What does it mean? When the universe ceases to be, what will "be" there? And "beyond" it? An "empty" universe is still a universe and potentially suitable for life forms different from those dependent on a certain proximity of yellow dwarves

>Two lesbos in charge in charge of the Multiverse.
Fucking scary

What are you saying? Because time didn't exist before the universe, the universe therefore didn't have a beginning?

>whatever begins to exist has a cause
>except god

HURRR DURRRR BLFBLFBBLFLBLFLBLFF ZNGNNGNZNGNZNGNZNG HGYHGYHGYHGHgHY

you think that "putting hot pocket in microwave = cause" and "hot pocket gets hot = effect" while we're discussing the existence of god and the universe. you're not ready to discuss epistemology. you're just not cut out for it. you're not at at that level. you're not smart enough.

>failing to understand causality

Here let me spell it out and reinforce OP.

Temporalism is a property of space-time insofar as time is a measure in the change of the state of entities within a spatial dimension.

That which caused spatialism and therefore temporalism to come into existence MUST exist without these characteristics.

That which is non-temporal cannot, by definition, have a cause.

Well, wouldn't you say it's a bit illogical to claim that temporal changes (a shift from nonexistence to existence in this case) could exist *prior* to there being a time?

It may last forever into the future but it has not lasted forever into the past. If you go back far enough you will reach the beginning.

>blah blah blah
Seriously, define "substratitative" for me, you embarrassing windbag.

What "was" before the beginning?

youtube.com/watch?v=J0QDc7baQfk

The only thing I needed to see to become Christian desu.

God is not a created being.

God had no beginning.

God is eternal.

...

>making assumptions
This is all we know of, we don't know why we're here or what caused us to be here, everything else is hearsay or a meme.

Most of you are in your 20s and just barely getting used to adult life, me included.

If we believe a god happens to exist, he is intrinsically outside of the universe. As far as we know (based off the big bang theory), the creation of time, space, and matter was caused by the big bang.

You're attempting to apply a set of laws that may only exist in our universe to an entity that by definition exists outside those laws. It's useless, that's why the whole "Yeah but who caused the thing that caused the thing that cause god?" argument is retarded and never gets anywhere.

>That which is non-temporal cannot, by definition have a cause.

And that has to be god right? Because, it cannot possibly be anything else.

>Reinforce OP
The only thing you're reinforcing in him is his dick. How about you go choke on it faggot.

Professing to be wise, they became as fools....

Its a process user. Rome wasn´t built in one day. 12 billion years is long fucking time to develop all those things in a evolutionary manner.

>4. Since everything that has began to exist needs a cause, then an uncaused creator must of caused it
0/10 kys

Weak copypasta.

having to do with substance, you illiterate eunich.

next in line please.

This. Who's to say something can't emerge from nothing? Why must it have a beginning? Is the Big Bang really the beginning or just another stage in an endless loop?

Whatever person or thing created the universe.