It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Russian media say jailed U.S. soldier pleads "partially guilty" to theft
Russian reports say U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Gordon Black told a court he inadvertently stole some money, but did not threaten a Russian...
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
If we are to agree, however, that the cause-effect principle is universal, then I do not see why non-things would be exempt from it. How does one define "thing" anyway? Is electromagnetic field a thing? I a time period a thing? I electron's charge a thing? Is electron a thing? How is god fundamentally different from these entities?
I do not necessarily disagree with your argument; I am just pointing out that it might need some clarification.
  Considerate: 97%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.62  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
A person might responded by simply saying we asking others to help hold a united state on an opinionated definition of God. A religion abstract of god is not the limit set to a principle of all GOD as single public state.
Does religion have a right to be free? Without cost, including human sacrifice, without charge as dictation of what must be paid to others.
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.32  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: united state    human sacrifice   opinionated definition of God   cost  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
"Does God have a cause?"
The Religious and the non Religious both utilize God, through their own expressed viewpoints.
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 34%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 70%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.54  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 77%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 88%  
  Substantial: 71%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.46  
  Sources: 4  
  Relevant (Beta): 63%  
  Learn More About Debra
If everything needs a cause, then god needs a cause. If some things don't need a cause, then the universe probably created itself.
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .
All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  Considerate: 92%  
  Substantial: 86%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.42  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: outside time    things   world   existence  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 72%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.86  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 26%  
  Learn More About Debra
At one point, time didn't exist, or perhaps more accurately the time it took for anything to take place was infinitesimal, because as Einstein concluded, time is relative and this is a proven fact.
The point is, how can we say (without evidence) that a god needs to exist for their to be a universe, when nothing created god?
The physics in the early stages of the universe were very different than today, so we still have not proven that the universe did not cause itself which is very possible and nullifies the causality problem, or that the universe didn't just always exist.
Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
Through a long process of evolution this life developed into the human race.
Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .
All of that so we can argue about nothing.
  Considerate: 93%  
  Substantial: 89%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.6  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: proven fact.The point    early stages of the universe   universe   point  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
The ultimate mystery is inspiring new ideas and new experiments.
No one knows how the first space, time, and matter arose. And scientists are grappling with even deeper questions. If there was nothing to begin with, then where did the laws of nature come from? How did the universe "know" how to proceed? And why do the laws of nature produce a universe that is so hospitable to life? As difficult as these questions are, scientists are attempting to address them with bold new ideas - and new experiments to test those ideas.
Understanding how the universe began requires developing a better theory of how space, time, and matter are related. In physics, a theory is not a guess or a hypothesis. It is a mathematical model that lets us make predictions about how the world behaves. Einstein's theory of gravity, for example, accurately describes how matter responds to gravity in the large-scale world around us. And our best theory of the tiny sub-atomic realm, called quantum theory, makes very accurate predictions about the behavior of matter at tiny scales of distance. But these two theories are not complete and are not able to make accurate predictions about the very earliest moments when the universe was both extremely dense and extremely small.
Some of the best minds in physics are working on a new theory of space, time, and matter, called "string theory," that may help us better understand where the universe came from. String theory is based on new ideas that have not yet been tested. The theory assumes, for example, that the basic particles in nature are not point particles, but are shaped like strings. And the theory requires - and predicts - that space has more than the three dimensions in which we move. According to one version of the theory, the particles and forces that make up our world are confined to three dimensions we see - except for gravity, which can "leak" out into the extra dimensions.
String theory has led to some bizarre new scenarios for the origin of the universe. In one scenario, the Big Bang could have been triggered when our own universe collided with a "parallel universe" made of these extra dimensions. Scenarios like these are very speculative, because the string theory is still in development and remains untested, but they stimulate astronomers to look for new forms of evidence. https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/seuforum/bb_whycare.htm
The Holy Spirit has clearly articulated origin and who - what - where - when - why and how and He has told you that you're "without excuse" if you deny our Creator and His work evidenced by Nature.
  Considerate: 92%  
  Substantial: 80%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 91%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.12  
  Sources: 6  
  Relevant (Beta): 6%  
  Learn More About Debra
Whenever there is a debate on creationism, religious people make an argument that God is the first cause. This argument is based on the principle that everything has its cause. However, the existence of a divine being that does not need a cause is incompatible with the cause and effect principle. In order to avoid the contradiction, theists argue that because God is not a thing, the cause and effect principle does not apply to him.(I have seen theists make such kind of arguments when confronted by the argument that God needs its cause.)
One may find it tempting to tell the theists that they should be able to accept the idea that the universe may not have a cause if they can fully accept the idea that there is a first cause(God). However, the theists will then simply reply that the universe is a thing while God is not, so the universe must have been created by God, an entity that is not a thing. Now, if the theists want to make their 'God is not a thing' argument valid, they would have to tell the difference between a thing and non-thing as clearly as possible. So far, I have only seen them make a distinction between a thing and non-thing by saying that one(a thing) is made by God and the other(a non-thing) is not. Is this distinction valid enough to make 'God is not a thing' argument valid?
  Considerate: 92%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: vague statement    religious people   first cause   thing  
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 91%  
  Substantial: 33%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 82%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 3.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: nbsp    thread      
  Relevant (Beta): 93%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 17%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 90%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 2.08  
  Sources: 0  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: Human mind    God   cause   nbsp  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 91%  
  Substantial: 25%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.4  
  Sources: 2  
  Entity Sentiment Detection: origin of the human mind    causation   nbsp    
  Relevant (Beta): 99%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra