#6 Atheists, what would be your LOGICAL rebuttal to this evidence of the existence of God?

"All physical and gaseous things

need a cause for their existence."

That is an unsupported assertion.

We have explored the laws of nature

within only about a nanosecond after the Big Bang.

We don't know what the rules of nature are

at higher levels of energy than that.

They may transition to something completely different

than what rules nature since that time.

In effect, yours is an argument from ignorance.

I am honest in admitting my ignorance,

in cases where I have no testable facts.

When you can demonstrate the physics

of an uncaused cause,

I will take a look.

--

Regards,

John Popelish

All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence.

- Try reading something intelligent. Science has proved that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed, it is eternal.

the Big Bang likewise also need a cause for its existence.

- Yes, heat an pressure overcame the atomic forces and quantum gravity and expanded. You will learn this stuff when you get into high school.

they ALL need a cause for their existence.

- And since matter/energy is eternal, it has always existed.

Saying that there is an infinite number of causes and effects or an infinite cycle of universes is illogical

- And yet you say that your fantasy deity is not "illogical". Try actually proving that.

because without an ultimate starting place for the existence of the physical there would be infinite nothingness

- your opinion, try saying something intelligent.

Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause

- No one has ever said that the universe was "logical".

Although the concept of an eternal God may be hard to grasp, we can see that it makes sense.

If someone else had created God, that person would be the Creator.

As the Bible explains, God is the one who created all things. Furthermore, we know that the universe at one time did not exist. Genesis 1:1, 2

Where did it come from? Its Creator had to exist first. He also existed before there were any other intelligent beings, such as his only-begotten Son and the angels. Colossians 1:15

Clearly, then, he existed alone first. He could not have been created; nothing was in existence that could have created him.

Our own existence and that of the entire universe testifies to the existence of an eternal God.

The One who put our vast universe in motion, the One who established the laws to control it, must have always existed.

Only he could have breathed life into everything else.

Even if someone was to rise from the dead they would not believe.

Ben: "There is no special set of words that's going to magically pop god into existence."

---

There you have it folks. Atheists: impossible to reason or have dialogue with, don't waste your breath.

Uninterested in logic and facts, and of course: too smart for books, with their "special sets of words".

The universe is created by the observer.

I've always thought the First Cause argument is contradictory. The idea is that EVERYTHING has a cause. Therefore, because EVERYTHING has a cause, there must be something that didn't have a cause. Doesn't that sound inconsistent?

Its like saying that EVERYTHING we know is empirical, based on observation and experiment. So therefore there must be stuff we know DESPITE evidence.

Your logic fails, no matter how many times you throw around the word 'logic' or use absolutes.

If everything needs a first cause, then what was the first cause of God?

If at some point, something could exist without a first cause, then that the first cause must have been a God (let alone your God) is merely an assumption.

In my opinion the honest answer is "I don't know".

I don't know how the universe came to be and I don't pretend I do.

One could argue a "godless scientific" cause, or one could argue a religious stance... such as a god did.

Either way, nobody really knows for sure.

So, "I don't know" is at least... honest.

"All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence."

Do they? I have never been around when matter began to exist, so I wouldn't know. Matter is just a form of energy. Perhaps energy has always existed. Causality as we know it depends on the existence of time. If time had a beginning, causality as we know it would not apply.