Do you agree the first cause argument proves God's existence?
Do you agree that the first cause argument proves that God exists?
The first cause argument takes the existence of the universe to entail the existence of a being that created it. It does so based on the fact that the universe had a beginning. There must, the first cause argument says, be something that caused that beginning, a first cause of the universe.
I do believe that the first cause argument proves God’s existence.
This is because the universe consists of a series of events stretched across time in a long causal chain. Each one of these events is the cause of the event that comes after it, and the effect of the event that comes before it. As a result something must have been at the top of the chain that caused everything which I believe is God. In addition the first cause argument tells us that the past cannot stretch back into infinity but rather must have a beginning. The argument then proceeds by suggesting that if the universe has a beginning then there must be something outside it that brought it into existence. This being outside the universe, this Creator, the first cause argument tells us, is God.
However some people may disagree with my idea that the first cause argument proves that God exists. One reason for this is because of the big bang theory (not the T.V series). This theory tells us that matter was once concentrated in a really small point. This began to enlarge rapidly in a hot explosion and it’s still expanding today. Unlike the first-cause argument, this argument is not self-refuting because it does not imply that god has a cause. If god had no beginning in time, he need not have a cause. Moreover, this argument doesn't deny the possibility of an infinite causal chain. It simply denies that the actual chain of causes is infinite. Another reason could be that not everything has a cause. As scientists have observed some events that have no apparent cause, that appear to be entirely random. Subatomic particles behave very strangely
The first cause argument takes the existence of the universe to entail the existence of a being that created it. It does so based on the fact that the universe had a beginning. There must, the first cause argument says, be something that caused that beginning, a first cause of the universe.
I do believe that the first cause argument proves God’s existence.
This is because the universe consists of a series of events stretched across time in a long causal chain. Each one of these events is the cause of the event that comes after it, and the effect of the event that comes before it. As a result something must have been at the top of the chain that caused everything which I believe is God. In addition the first cause argument tells us that the past cannot stretch back into infinity but rather must have a beginning. The argument then proceeds by suggesting that if the universe has a beginning then there must be something outside it that brought it into existence. This being outside the universe, this Creator, the first cause argument tells us, is God.
However some people may disagree with my idea that the first cause argument proves that God exists. One reason for this is because of the big bang theory (not the T.V series). This theory tells us that matter was once concentrated in a really small point. This began to enlarge rapidly in a hot explosion and it’s still expanding today. Unlike the first-cause argument, this argument is not self-refuting because it does not imply that god has a cause. If god had no beginning in time, he need not have a cause. Moreover, this argument doesn't deny the possibility of an infinite causal chain. It simply denies that the actual chain of causes is infinite. Another reason could be that not everything has a cause. As scientists have observed some events that have no apparent cause, that appear to be entirely random. Subatomic particles behave very strangely