The First Cause

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
So be it.

Good,

Your question was:

Do you think it is true that a microwave oven created the universe?

My answer is every item excluded from the domain could be a possible creator (or cause to be accurate) of the universe.

If you agree with this then tell me what you think about the following:

1- We can say there will be only one cause of the universe. So only one of the excluded items is the cause.

2- The cause of the universe can't be part of the universe. Any part of the universe depends on the uninverse on its existance. If it doesn't depend on the universe then it is not part of it.
(I feel a problem in this one but I will wait for you)

3- When the Microwave oven came to be known , then it will be included in the domain, and so it will not be the creator or the cause.

4- If the cause of the universe included in the domain (because we managed to know it), then that cause itself have another cause.

-----------------

Tell me what you agree with of the previous four points....

Originally posted by ahosyney

Tell me what you agree with of the previous four points....

I think they are full of equivocation and betray much confusion on your part.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I think they are full of equivocation and betray much confusion on your part.

So is that the end....

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I think they are full of equivocation and betray much confusion on your part.

You edited your post:

I didn't understand. What I should I do to make them full of equivocation. If you like make any modifications.

If you don't like to continue it is ok, I enjoyed the discussion any way, thank you for your help.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
How do you like this...

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_schick/bigbang.html

Excellent, thanks.

Originally posted by ahosyney
So is that the end....

Look, I offered to help you understand why Aquinas is unsound. I didn't offer to help you figure out the origin of the universe, and until you think it through some more and present a more lucid set of premises, there's not much I can do to help you along that path.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Let's us begin here, at the first premise you posit.

Premise 1: Every thing is caused.


The following is a valid argument utilizing your own premise.

Every thing is caused.
Hence, God is caused.


Do you agree that this is a valid argument?

Yes, that is a valid argument utilizing my own premise.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Yes, that is a valid argument utilizing my own premise.

Do you agree that the conclusion of this valid argument contradicts the conclusion of Aquinas'?

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Excellent, thanks.

I did some reading in this paper, it seams it it has a problem itself:

Example:

1- Finally, a universe created by an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good being should be perfect.

This is an assumption. There is no reason this should be true.

2- Another example, when talked about quantum mechanics and particles, his concolusion about the cause doesn't make any sense.

These particles have a beginning in time, but they have no cause because vacuum fluctuations are purely random events

The fact that actions being random doesn't mean they have no cause.

Actually the word purely random is not accurate in the domain of Quantun Theory. In Quantum theory Random means not possible to predect due to the measurement method.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Look, I offered to help you understand why Aquinas is unsound. I didn't offer to help you figure out the origin of the universe, and until you think it through some more and present a more lucid set of premises, there's not much I can do to help you along that path.

I understand , thank you...

I asked you if you like to continue and thought you agreed, sorry for that.

Originally posted by ahosyney
I understand , thank you...

I asked you if you like to continue and thought you agreed, sorry for that.

I did, but then I reneged. But hey, isn't that just what you'd expect from an infidel?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I did, but then I reneged. But hey, isn't that just what you'd expect from an infidel?

🙂

That is not what I expected from a philosopher!!!!

I think you made a lot of reading. But also I don't think you did read about Islamic philosophy . They are written in Arabic of course, and not all of them translated. Early Muslims have a big deal in these maters many years before Saint Thomas's argument. And there are a lot of books in that field.

--------------------------
Of course you know why I do all of this, I want you to be Muslim.... 😀

Originally posted by ahosyney
🙂

That is not what I expected from a philosopher!!!!

I think you made a lot of reading. But also I don't think you did read about Islamic philosophy . They are written in Arabic of course, and not all of them translated. Early Muslims have a big deal in these maters many years before Saint Thomas's argument. And there are a lot of books in that field ...[text shortened]... ---------------------
Of course you know why I do all of this, I want you to be Muslim.... 😀

I say this in all Christian love: he will always be an infidel.

Originally posted by kirksey957
he will always be an infidel.

I'm just as God made me.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
I'm just as God made me.

So you believe in God?