There was no "before" before the Big Bang

[Black Dog]

It's not necessarily special pleading. Special pleading implies that one is offering an exception to a proposition without attempting to justify that exemption. Light of the East mentioned Aquinas' Five Ways, so it seems he is familiar with attempts to justify the idea that one entity is an uncaused cause to the exception of all others.

For example, if I were to say, "The North Pole is the only place on Earth where taking a step in any direction leads directly South," I would not be making a Special Pleading fallacy. There is ample justification for the North Pole's exception to rules of directionality which are generally true elsewhere on the Earth. Similarly, there are theists who believe that they have good justification for positing God's unique eternality. I disagree with their reasoning, but that does not imply that the argument necessarily falls prey to Special Pleading.

Hmmmm. OK, I'll let you handle this. ^^

EDIT: I went and skimmed the Aquinas Five Ways, and can't see where it fixes the problem of special pleading vis a vis God could be eternal, but the matter that makes up the universe couldn't be, or that God doesn't need a cause, but the universe does. I'll be interested to see how this develops.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

I do not believe your claims that deity exists, nor that there exists some repercussion for my disbelief, nor that "our civilization is a Christian one."

Christianity is the largest religion in the world. Islam is the second, and they believe in the same God. Jesus is the most quoted person in the Quran.
Our civilization is of the God of Abraham, and atheism/paganism is a vestige in comparison.

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

I have rigorous theory for your case. You are sick in your brain.

Lovely form of discourse, Dmitri. Tell me: do you find insulting and disrespecting people to be an effective means of evangelization? You know, it is entirely possible to have a conversation with someone who holds to an opposing viewpoint without resorting to this sort of fallacious posturing.

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

Christianity is the largest religion in the world. Islam is the second, and they believe in the same God. Jesus is the most quoted person in the Quran.
Our civilization is of the God of Abraham, and atheism/paganism is a vestige in comparison.

The fact that a large number of people are Christian does not imply that civilization, as a whole, is therefore Christian.

 

[Dmitri Martila]

Lovely form of discourse, Dmitri. Tell me: do you find insulting and disrespecting people to be an effective means of evangelization? You know, it is entirely possible to have a conversation with someone who holds to an opposing viewpoint without resorting to this sort of fallacious posturing.

Is the sickness in brain more insulting one, than sickness in a leg? Just fact:

Trying to teach a fool is like gluing a broken pot back together, like waking someone out of a deep sleep. Explaining something to a fool is like explaining it to a sleepy person; when you have finished, he’ll say, What was that again? We mourn for the dead because they have no access to light. We ought to mourn for fools, because they have no access to intelligence. In fact, we should go into deeper mourning for fools, because the life they lead is worse than death. The dead are at least at rest. For seven days we mourn the dead, but a foolish or ungodly person causes a lifetime of grief. Don’t visit stupid people or spend a lot of time talking with them. Avoid them; then they can’t contaminate you, and you can live in peace without being troubled or worn down by their foolishness. Such people are a heavier burden to bear than lead; and the only word that fits them is fools. It is easier to carry a load of sand, salt, and iron than to put up with a stupid person. (Sirach 22 GNT).

 

[Black Dog]

So it is now wise to reject God and go to hell?

Could be. The Bible is God's book. We haven't heard from the Devil yet. Maybe Hell is the better place, it's where most of the people I want to hang out with are going to be. An eternity with Jerry Falwell, Sarah Palin, and their followers? No thanks, I'll take my chances on Hell!

 

[Dmitri Martila]

The fact that a large number of people are Christian does not imply that civilization, as a whole, is therefore Christian.

The civilization is composed of the best people, not the suicidal criminals. The best people today are the Eastern Orthodox Christian. Others are pagans. All others are pagans. This is Verity. There can not be paganic civilization. There is civilization and its sickness - atheism.

 

[bhsmte]

I have rigorous theory for your case. You are sick in your brain.

Nice flame.

 

[Aman777]

Ummm, because I don't believe the earth is flat, supported by pillars, with a dome over it which has stars embedded in it, stars that will one day fall to earth. That's what the bible says and means. Modern books, books written by people who understand modern cosmology, who have a decent education, do not make these mistakes. Does that clear it up?

The Bible does not say what you think it says but here are some interesting facts:

Adam's Earth was Flat because it was dry ground on top of water. Gen 1:9-10
You have confused Adam's Earth with the present Planet Earth in the Milky Way Galaxy.

IOW, your interpretation of what Scripture teaches is totally False. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

Current science has only been able to look at other planets for life for a few years, and then only at the handful of stars in our solar system. Let's wait until we have been able to investigate a statistically significant number of stars before declaring life only exists on earth.

We will find life all over our Universe where we find liquid water. We will NOT find intelligent life in our Universe since there was only 1 Ark, which brought Adam's unique superior intelligence, to this planet of the common ancestor of Apes. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

Classically, theists do not believe that God "came into existence," at all. God, they assert, is eternal.

Amen. God is the invisible Spirit of Love and He is currently filling His perfect Heaven with perfect people who will never die. At one time, there was only Love but for God to be alone is to keep Him from sharing His Love with others. God exists physically in Jesus Christ, Who is the only Image of the invisible Spirit of Love.

Before God began to create His perfect 3rd Heaven, there was NOTHING in physical form and God knew that to bring into existence physical beings with a mind like His Gen 3:22 and a Free will, would take Billions of years, to make perfect. He works today, at the end of the present 6th Day (Heb-period of labor) to create New Creatures in Christ, Spiritually. Just ask ANY Gospel preacher?

After the present 6th Day is finished or brought to perfection, which is the end result of ALL of God's work, and Heaven is filled with it's host, which includes the last Christian to be born again Spiritually, God will rest (Heb-Cease) from ALL of His work of creating. Amen?

Gen 2:1 ¶ Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and ALL the host of them.
Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day from ALL His work which He had made.

God is still working today because it takes the AGREEMENT of the Trinity to "CREATE" a new Christian according to Gen 1:26 AND John 14:16. Amen?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

A system is a region of space; a state is an arrangement of particles in a given system; causality is the act whereby the rules of the universe are applied to a system so that the system goes from one state to another over a duration of time.

We are all in general agreement that the universe had a beginning - whether that was the Big Bang or Genesis 1:1 - and that the rules of the universe were initialized in this event.

How, then, does causality exist when the laws of the universe do not exist? To say that the universe had or required a cause is entirely nonsensical because causality does not exist unless the universe does.

Your argument is that causality created itself? Or that God caused causality to exist? Circular and nonsensical.

 

[Anguspure]

It's special pleading to claim that God is uncaused if everything requires a cause.

If it is true that everything requires a cause, it is special pleading to claim that the cause of the universe did not have a cause.

But it is not true that everything requires a cause.

Only things that begin to exist require a cause.

If a thing does not begin to exist it does not require a cause.

In the case of the universe it has been demonstrated that it began to exist, therefore the universe requires a cause.

Some sort of other thing (quantum vacuum, multiverse) maybe invoked as a cause that in itself began to exist however and a cause for this thing might be invoked in turn, but because of the nature of entropy in reverse we will eventually reach a point where we must either suggest that everything comes from nothing (an ideological absurdity, not falsifiable and definitely not scientific in any sense) or we must recognise the causeless cause, the source of all that is, that did not begin to exist.

If the cause for the universe did not begin to exist then it is not special pleading to suggest that the cause for the universe is Himself without cause since He did not begin to exist.
He simply IS.
He says of Himself I AM THAT I AM.
This is the name that Moses was given at the burning bush (Exodus 3:14) when he asked the name of the One who sent him, and it is the God of all who believe in Christ Jesus.

 

[Black Dog]

The Bible does not say what you think it says but here are some interesting facts:

Adam's Earth was Flat because it was dry ground on top of water. Gen 1:9-10
You have confused Adam's Earth with the present Planet Earth in the Milky Way Galaxy.

IOW, your interpretation of what Scripture teaches is totally False. Amen?

No, the bible says what I said. Modern Christians don't like to admit it, because it brings into question the divine origins of the bible.

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

We are all in general agreement that the universe had a beginning

I actually do not agree that the universe had a beginning; however, I do agree that the notion of causality is incoherent in the absence of the universe.

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

In the case of the universe it has been demonstrated that it began to exist...

No, it actually has not been demonstrated that the universe began to exist.

 

[Black Dog]

If it is true that everything requires a cause, it is special pleading to claim that the cause of the universe did not have a cause.

But it is not true that everything requires a cause.

Only things that begin to exist require a cause.

Actually, at the start of the Big Bang event, no one knows if there was a cause/effect relationship, so things could have begun to exist without a cause. Hope that helps clear up that point

 

[Black Dog]

No, it actually has not been demonstrated that the universe began to exist.

You seem very knowledgeable. AFAIK, physicists can't look back to the beginning of the Big Bang, and they don't know what laws etc. might have been in effect. So an effect might not have required a cause. In your opinion, is this correct?

 

[Aman777]

No, the bible says what I said. Modern Christians don't like to admit it, because it brings into question the divine origins of the bible.

Have you noticed that Genesis teaches:

That we live in a multiverse made up of at least 3 heavens or universes? Gen 1:8 and Gen 2:4
That the Big Bang of our Cosmos was on the 3rd Day of the Creation? Gen 2:4
That the First Stars did not put forth their light until the 4th Day. Gen 1:16 Science has recently learned that it was some 550 Million years AFTER the Big Bang before the first Stars lit up. This was announced in February 2015.

Answer those and I have a lot more which NO ancient man could have possibly known thousands of years BEFORE Science, and yet it's been in front of our noses for thousands of years now. It's empirical (testable) evidence of the Literal God. Amen?

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

You seem very knowledgeable. AFAIK, physicists can't look back to the beginning of the Big Bang, and they don't know what laws etc. might have been in effect. So an effect might not have required a cause. In your opinion, is this correct?

It's on the right track. It's not so much that we don't know what laws might have been in effect. Rather, the mathematics which we use to describe the universe break down as we attempt to extrapolate backwards, beyond a certain point. When the math breaks down, we don't really know what's going on. It generally means that something in our model is either incorrect or lacking.