• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Cosmological Argument

M

mohammed_beiruti

Active Member
Dan4reason said:
(1) Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.
(2) The universe has a beginning of its existence.
Therefore:
(3) The universe has a cause of its existence.
(4) If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God.
Therefore:
(5) God exists.

Are there any errors in this reasoning?
Click to expand...


true, definitly no Errors
 
A

Awoon

Well-Known Member
Falvlun

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Dan4reason said:
(1) Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.
(2) The universe has a beginning of its existence.
Therefore:
(3) The universe has a cause of its existence.
(4) If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God.
Therefore:
(5) God exists.

Are there any errors in this reasoning?
Click to expand...
As others have noted, my issue too is around #4. What reason do we have to claim that God is the cause? (Unless, of course, you are simply defining "God" as "the cause of the universe").

Although, Meow Mix's issue is definitely much cooler. After all, if we are willing to consider the existence of a causeless, timeless God, why couldn't we also imagine a timeless, causeless universe?
 
Last edited:
M

mohammed_beiruti

Active Member
Dan4reason said:
Here is the error. We don't know if the universe had a beginning. We also don't know if this universe is all there is. If it is not, then it is possible that something else caused our universe to exist, and that thing might not be God.
Click to expand...

the universe is group of created things, isn't it?
 
9Westy9

9Westy9

Sceptic, Libertarian, Egalitarian
Premium Member
mohammed_beiruti said:
Allah told us that he created every thing.

did any one else claim that?
Click to expand...

The magical pink unicorn also claims to have created every thing.

Now we have two powerful beings claiming authorship. I wonder which actually made it? There's only one way to find out.... FIGHT!!
 
Willamena

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Dan4reason said:
Here is the error. We don't know if the universe had a beginning. We also don't know if this universe is all there is. If it is not, then it is possible that something else caused our universe to exist, and that thing might not be God.
Click to expand...
If we define "universe" as "all that is," then we do know that the universe is all there is.
 
Dan4reason

Dan4reason

Facts not Faith
Willamena said:
If we define "universe" as "all that is," then we do know that the universe is all there is.
Click to expand...

If we define the universe as all that is, then since God is part of all that is, God is part of the universe, and since the universe has a beginning and a cause, God has a beginning and a cause, so God cannot be the causeless cause of the universe.
 
Willamena

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Dan4reason said:
If we define the universe as all that is, then since God is part of all that is, God is part of the universe, and since the universe has a beginning and a cause, God has a beginning and a cause, so God cannot be the causeless cause of the universe.
Click to expand...
And that's rational. Some of the more interesting ontological arguments equate God, us, and existence.
Existence is a single, objective and simple reality, and there is no difference between its parts, unless in terms of perfection and imperfection, strength and weakness… And the culmination of its perfection, where there is nothing more perfect, is its independence from any other thing. Nothing more perfect should be conceivable, as every imperfect thing belongs to another thing and needs to become perfect. And, as it has already been explicated, perfection is prior to imperfection, actuality to potency, and existence to non-existence. Also, it has been explained that the perfection of a thing is the thing itself, and not a thing in addition to it. Thus, either existence is independent of others, or it is in need of others. The former is the Necessary, which is pure existence. Nothing is more perfect than Him. And in Him there is no room for non-existence or imperfection. The latter is other than Him, and is regarded as His acts and effects, and for other than Him there is no subsistence, unless through Him. For there is no imperfection in the reality of existence, and imperfection is added to existence only because of the quality of being caused, as it is impossible for an effect to be identical with its cause in terms of existence.
- Mulla Sadrā
Click to expand...
 
Satyamavejayanti

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
Dan4reason said:
Thanks for the input. I will be posting some definitions.

A thing's material cause is the material of which it consists. (For a table, that might be wood; for a statue, that might be bronze or marble.)

A thing's efficient or moving cause[4] is "the primary source of the change or rest." An efficient cause of x can be present even if x is never actually produced and so should not be confused with a sufficient cause.[5] (Aristotle argues that, for a table, this would be the art of table-making, which is the principle guiding its creation.)[2]

Lets say we have Nebula. Gravity begins pulling the gas in to one region and forms a star. So the material cause is the gas, and the efficient cause is gravity. So the efficient cause does not have to be an intelligence.

Also how do you know that efficient causes don't need causes themselves? You had an interesting response however I disagree with the philosophy.
Click to expand...

Excellent thought, i had totally missed the sufficient cause, my fault. here is my revised thought.

As for Material cause i agree with you there, it is the material required to construct something.

Now as for this entire universe:

The material cause has to be present and will include gravity and gases and time required to make a nebula as one complete material cause, the efficient cause and the sufficient cause will be the consciousness and be the source of change (GOD), and the efficient cause and sufficient cause need to exist as one complete cause (GOD), and if the material cause is eternal and infinite therefore the sufficient and effective cause will need to be eternal and infinite, but if the material cause starts off from one point in time, that will mean that the effective cause will also have to start at that point, but the sufficient cause will need to exist prior to both the other causes but has to be started in some point in time also.

so,
if the universe was created at the beginning and did not exist before, then it cant be eternal, as everything that is created needs to decay, then that means the GOD who created the universe must have been created prior to the creation of the universe as the universe was created only after the god thought about it. then when the universe decays the GOD will also decay that's if you scrutinise the biblical creation theory.

my scriptures tell me, that the raw material needed to form this universe existed for infinity and is unconscious, that requires a efficient and sufficient cause which is conscious, to construct and de-construct the universe into this form we have today. And if the material is eternal and infinite then the causes are also eternal and infinite. and if the universe is eternal and only undergoes changes caused by OM (GOD) that means that OM (GOD) does not require a cause.
 
Corkscrew

Corkscrew

I'm ready to believe
The questions bring up an interesting thought. If the universe had a beginning, what existed prior to the universe? If it was nothing, what is nothing? I imagine “nothing” to be void of time and space. A reality we cannot even grasp. Maybe such a reality is not possible.
 
javajo

javajo

Well-Known Member
Dan4reason said:
(1) Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.
(2) The universe has a beginning of its existence.
Therefore:
(3) The universe has a cause of its existence.
(4) If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God.
Therefore:
(5) God exists.

Are there any errors in this reasoning?
Click to expand...
None. Everything that had a beginning had a cause. The universe had a beginning because of entropy, that is the 2nd law of thermodynamics, that the amount of energy in the universe available for work is running down so entropy is increasing to a maximum.

According to Einstein's general relativity, since time is linked to matter and space, time also had a beginning along with matter and space at the beginning of the universe. Since God created it, he is outside time and so had no beginning in time so he doesn't need a cause. That's foolproof proof of God, brotha!
 
Corkscrew

Corkscrew

I'm ready to believe
javajo said:
None. Everything that had a beginning had a cause. The universe had a beginning because of entropy, that is the 2nd law of thermodynamics, that the amount of energy in the universe available for work is running down so entropy is increasing to a maximum.

According to Einstein's general relativity, since time is linked to matter and space, time also had a beginning along with matter and space at the beginning of the universe. Since God created it, he is outside time and so had no beginning in time so he doesn't need a cause. That's foolproof proof of God, brotha!
Click to expand...

If God “created” the universe that means time was involved. Creation implies taking some sort of time, but you say God is outside of time. How does that work?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top