Please see the first reply to Otto.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
Well, you, in error, assume that since some things appear to have a discernable cause, that all things must, even when they appear not to. It is you who is too hasty.
I brought up a boom-and-bust cycle of big bang/big crunch. Do you even read the posts you quote? It is a perfectly possible theory, and we cannot prove or disprove it since we do not know what happened “before” the big bang, or even if there was a “before”.
And while I’m here…
[Moderator Hat ON]
Please do not quote the entire post if you are only responding to a few points that can be excerpted; you have quite a habit of doing this. It is annoying to those who read your posts, not to mention it makes your posts unnecessarily lengthy.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
See the first reply to Otto…
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
Not really sure what you are saying. I think my first reply to Gaudere will answer what you are asking/questioning.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
Does anyone read before they post? See my reply to Gaudere, on the infiite regress problem.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
Ok, in your area, I believe ZOOM! is on channel 32.
If you don’t have anything worthwhile to say, don’t bother.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
Pashley
Just because you say everyting must have a beginning does not make it so.
You say this and so your logic says there must be a cause.
Nobody I know and probably nobody you know has the ability to understand what existance completely outside time is like.
For anything to have no beginning and no end it must exist outside the constraints of time if if that is possible.
If you can provide proof of how this has been achieved you would have the ear of every scientist on earth.
Even if it is possible to exist in such a manner this does not provide proof of God the creator it merely proves the existance of another environment.
Pashley, the reason people keep asking you the same question is that your “first reply to Otto” doesn’t answer it. You essentially say that things which exist must have a cause because they must.
That’s neither logical nor an answer.
I read your response to Otto.
I know that you assert that everything that Exists must “NECESSAIRILY” have a cause.
I just want to know why?
Perked Ears indicate curiosity - Know Your Cat
JINX!!
Can you name me something that appears not to have a discernable cause? How can you rationally argue that things can come into being on their own? Absurd.
I guess what you’re saying is…no, i don’t have a guess.
If you are espousing the Big Bang, how did the material that “banged” come to be? Just happened out of nothing? No.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
pashley preached:
This simply isn’t true. Astrophysicists cannot know what happened prior to the Big Bang, but they don’t rule the “Big Crunch” out. True, there doesn’t appear to be enough mass to reverse the current expansion of the universe, but perhaps we just don’t know enough yet.
Pashley, you think God came into being without a creator, scientists think the universe did. Believe in an invisible, imaginary deity all you want, but don’t make yourself look foolish by trying to prove its existence logically.
Yes, everything that has a beginning MUST have been caused by something to cause it to be. Nothing comes into being without something causing it to come to be. It’s illogical, not just my say so.
And if you read earlier posts, you’d see that I argued that this agent that created our world must exist outside of it.
You last statement is puzzling. How can an “environment” create another world? Not sure where you are going with that…
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
I did in my very first post! Electrons and anti-electrons will appear out of a vaccuum. Also, quatum effects appear to happen without cause. Some things appear to have a cause; some things appear to not have a cause. I don’t know why you accept the appearence of causality and reject the appearence of non-causality. (Well, aside from poor logic.)
BTW, I appreciate you quoting excerpts, instead of the whole post. 
Yet another instance in which your belief is false. How appropriate.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
I have answered their concerns.
And yes, things that exist came into existence by another agent. That is logical and valid. If you disagree, A) give an example of something that comes from nothing, and B) explain how that happens.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
Physician, heal thyself. You might have spared the world this entire thread.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
Hardcore, have you read my arguments? I’m assuming you haven’t, or else you would not have posted this.
Patrick Ashley
“For those who believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who don’t believe, no evidence is enough.” -Unknown
[pashley cap on]
All things that exist must have had a cause.
It is illogical to think otherwise.
The universe exists and must have a cause – this cause is God.
Regression of first cause would make my position uncomfortable, therefore God must exist “outside of time” and “in itself”.
I do not need to explain what this means or how it answers questions of what caused “God” – see my first response to Otto.
[pashley cap off]
Oh, you want something worthwhile. How about this? There is no God. People made him up. They told stories to each other to try to make sense of a complicated world or to enforce rules of morality on themselves and their neighbors or to justify their murderous forays into other lands. You may or not be aware that other people have made up entirely different Gods for the same purposes. They don’t exist, either. The God to whom you refer did not create the universe, he did not kill everyone in the world after a temper tantrum, he did not murder the firstborn of Egypt, he didn’t knock up any virgins. He is exactly as real as the tooth fairy.
You, having been brainwashed by people who want to control your life by fooling you into believing that you will be tortured forever if you don’t sing songs to the tooth fairy once each week, are now trying to repeat the process with us by inventing from whole cloth a “proof” that some sort of evil being exists.
Here, we have a higher standard than that. If you want to believe, believe. Heck, some of my favorite people, including many on this board, one of whom is posting to this very thread, believe. But don’t you dare come around and try to co-opt logic and science to try to “prove” that the tooth fairy exists. If you are so insecure in your alleged “faith” in this monster that you feel you have to twist into knots the precepts of logic and science, that’s your problem.
Dammit, where’s Polycarp? I actually kind of liked his God.