Everything we observe in the universe operates through cause and effect. Every effect has a cause, and every effect can become the cause of another effect. Follow this chain backwards and eventually we reach the question: What caused reality itself? There are two possibilities.1. Something caused reality.If something caused reality, then there exists a causation whose effect is the creation reality itself. The ultimate causation responsible for the existence of everything is what we would call God.2. Nothing caused reality.Absolute nothing means no matter, no energy, no space, no time, no laws and no causation. If everything came from absolute nothing, then reality came into existence without causation and outside the natural rules governing reality. Something creating everything from nothing, outside the rule of causation, is supernatural. That is what we call God. So either reality is the effect of an ultimate cause, or everything emerged from nothing through a supernatural event. Whichever option you pick is confirmation of the existence of God.
You all chose to be here. You were told "it's gonna feel like 80 or 90 years" and you all said "okay".
>>542847874Cool story, is your god called Yahweh?
>>542847964>bro youre an eternal soul star dust special sparklolno
>>542848053Nigger we are in a computer right now and I have Admin privileges. Don't piss me off.
>>542847874You have defined something as God, but haven't yet shown how this relates to actual belief in daily life, as practiced by Christians etc.
>>542848154you got nothing kiddo
>>542847874>God exists prove it without using your Bible or saying "look at the trees". Use actual evidence
Your model, [not your fault, this was programmed into you, by everyone, since forever] for how the present is after the past, and the future comes after the present, is provably incorrect.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isdLel273rQBoth the past and the future is "flowing into the present like two thick fluids getting poured into the same cup" and so your illusion of the present coming from the past, is false.The Present is the Center, the Past is up and away and to the left, pouring into the present like a vessel, and the future is also up and to the right, pouring into the present like a vessel, and the present bursts into existence from the force of impulse of these two ongoing operations. All of which is shaped into a circle, the life formed by this arrangement advances until such time as the entire arrangement can recreate itself, making it alive in the same way we are. your rigid subscription to logic is from a faulty model, and I can prove that beyond all doubt if you help me help you.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqY8fY0TqaQThe past isn't in the past, and the future isn't in the future.It's a bowl, and the past and future are like a subscription to two youtube channel. One subscription shows you the infinite regress of all the things that happened to get you here, and the other subscription is the one that shows you all the things that might happen if you do a thing in the present.Time is an imaginary dimension, and physicists are more and more eliminating it from their equations, to much success since it fucks away nonsense infinities and fixes many impossible obstructions for things that cannot be.Your palestinian dune manual from Syriapalestina is not helping us with any of these real honest to god advances in science.
>>542847874you will only ever be ever to contemplate god philosophically. you were not meant to understand. it's hubris to try how can a part know the whole?i'll throw a bone though. you live and collect memories. they're stored somewhere in your brain physically. when you die something is lost but the brain and memories remain in it. when you decay in the earth those memories are jumbled up, consumed, obsorbed by nature and you can say that one became all (all is one, get it?)Does it satisfy you? i doubt it. that is not what you wanted.
>>542847874who says this is reality champ?
>>542848186You just earned yourself another Turkish earthquake. Have fun locating your family members.
KEKcause and effect is not proven
>>542847874>GodWhat god?
>>542848168The argument isn't intended to prove Christianity. It's intended to establish God as the ultimate cause of reality.
>>542847874>GOD IS WHATEVERNo. God is a man made concept about a guy that is all powerful who made mankind in his image. It's not whatever. It's not a form of energy, a 4th dimension of whatever. It's a specific concept: an anthropomorphic being that is all powerful and will save believers while damning non-believers. I reject that concept entirely. it's fucking stupid and not true.
The Double Slit Quantum Erasure experiment proves beyond all shadow of a doubt that the past can be changed to make the present come out to what the diceroll landed it to be, in the same as the future path is picked from the present when, again, the diceroll landed it to be.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgsThis makes both the past and the future a "created thing" which flowers up and out of the present, like a soil which emerges a tree, the tree makes a load bearing branch to one side, for the addition of structure and strata, and the other emits a petal for photosynthesis to explain how we got here and collect power from long ago.Ready to have your mind blown?The past is in the future. And the future is in the future.The now() is creating the past to be what it needs to be, to explain how it turned out. The Christians got one thing right by accident, It's like minecraft, the past and the future chunkloads in a non-temporal way, that's made to look old, so that the game is playable.It appears to be some kind of game.
>>542848391no, you have chosen to label the cause of reality 'god', but even assuming their was a cause there is no evidence it still exists. perhaps it burned itself out creating everything, and if that's the case there is certainly no reason to label a burned out match 'god'
>>542848331
>>542848335I didn't claim causality has been mathematically proven as a universal metaphysical law. I'm starting from the observed fact that known physical events arise from prior physical conditions. If you're proposing that reality itself arose without any cause or prior condition, then you're proposing an origin outside the causal framework we observe. One I addressed in my post.
>>542847874Something something talking snakes and Jewish zombies.
>>542848662Whether the cause still exists is irrelevant to the argument. If a causation occurred whose effect was reality itself, then that causation existed. Calling that ultimate causation 'God' does not require it to still exist, be conscious, intervene in the universe, or be religious. Your burned-out match would still be the ultimate cause of reality—and that is precisely what I am calling God.
>>542847874>God existsThen show him.
>>542848996
>>542848937it isn't irrelevant, because the term 'god' has much greater connotations than a burned out match
>>542849496I'm using God to mean the ultimate cause of reality. That's it. I'm not claiming that cause is conscious, immortal, moral or anything else associated with religion. If you'd rather call it the "ultimate cause" instead of God, fine - the argument stays the same. Whether that cause has any of the other attributes associated with God is a completely separate question.
>>542848614It is provably possible, by repeatable experiment, to posess and later destroy information, and this absolutely causes things in the past to be, and then not be, in the past.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgsWhich I take to be a proof that we are in a simulation, since the infinite past, and the infinite future, are "and so on" mobius strips which are fake. There is a motherfucking yiddish imperial shit ton of memory and compute for our simulation, but it is NOT infinite, this is also the case for locality, and other things like the infinite capacity for heat and the mysterious rule that if you want to go fast, then the universe has to stop behaving.jfc.Your dune manual from palestine does nothing be prevent moving forward in discovery of these new sciences.The past is a "just in time" created dimension just like the future is a "just in time" created dimension.The Double Slit Quantum Erasure proves that a behavior in the future can make something that did exist in the past, stop existing in the past.If this doesn't make your head explode, then you need to read it again.
>>542849676>I'm using God to mean the ultimate cause of realityand you should use a different word, because 'god' has bigger implications than that
>>542849676I can define apples as a kind of bird, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to most people with how they use "apples" and "bird", which is what actually defines these words by any reasonable standard.Considering how most people use the word "God", your use of "God" is nonsensical.
>>542850003I’ve already said exactly what I mean by ‘God’ faggot. You can change the word but not the argument
>>542850161That's not comparable. "Ultimate cause of reality" has been a conception of God in philosophy for thousands of years. I'm not randomly redefining an unrelated word like calling an apple a fucking bird. I'm just not claiming that establishing an ultimate cause automatically establishes all the other attributes people associate with God.
>>542850165YOU changed the word, retard
christkikes are all one or more>junkies>sexual predators>criminals>frustrated virgins>liars
>>542847874>The ultimate causation responsible for the existence of everything is what we would call Godnot really, "God" has typically entailed Personhood, this is still an a-personal principle
>>542848238>A Brown subversive from Gaza has something to say about the scientific properties of the Physical Universe and the Physics engine that runs it.Bokerface.https://youtu.be/-IgAVQdHJQ4?t=18
>>542850319>"Ultimate cause of reality" has been a conception of God in philosophy for thousands of years.That some people have thought about God in that way doesn't mean that most people in history, or users on /pol/ specifically, think about it in that way.If some loonies think men can be women, that doesn't make it immediately reasonable to change the definition of man and woman
>>542850582Personhood is an additional claim about the nature of the ultimate cause, not part of the causal argument itself. Aristotle's Unmoved Mover and other philosophical conceptions of God show that "God" hasn't always meant a human-like person. I'm arguing for an ultimate cause first. Whether that cause has personhood is a separate argument.
>>542850771>Aristotle's Unmoved Mover and other philosophical conceptions of Godsee that's what I'm getting at, the unmoved mover was not considered a "god"/θεός in these original Greek philosophical conceptions, so that's an obvious counter example and at the very origin of the concept
>>542847874>You have sinned. I don't like sin. Give me your son's foreskin. Give me animal blood.
>>542850917This thread and attempt at being intelligent made me genuinely realise that I’m fucking stupid. I shouldn’t try to think of things beyond myself. Thank god I’m at least smart enough to realise that I’m stupid. I will not be responding here anymore
>>542847874Youre main premise that something came from nothing is a logical fallacy. there has never been a point where there was nothing. Nothing cannot and does not exist outside of the subjective experience. empty space still contains space and quantum fluctations. There has álways been something
>>542848154get me some hoes with ur admin cheatcodes preferable not woke or jewish thanks anon
>>542848032oh good, you figured out the IDF is using Irish VPNs today
>>542847874But does he actually care? With the lack of miracles and the rampant degeneracy for the past hundred years I'm starting to believe that he just doesn't. Probably fucked off and started over somewhere else.
>>542851580I'm glad you learned something. you should go one step further and ask yourself, even if there was a creation force way back when, does it actually matter to here and now. the answer is no. this is mental masturbation, at best, and not really worth anyone's time, unless you are creating a cult to bilk people out of money or sleep with young girls
>>542847874follow that chain back more than a few steps and you walk out of truth and into fictionpure logic is just a word game, you must anchor it to some real metrics or it floats right up into fancy and falsehoodand your dichotomy is tilted, there is no such thing as nothingness first off but the opposite of something caused reality isn't that a substantive 'nothing' caused itthe opposite would be zero cause, no start point
1pstbyid AI Slopppp
>>542847874>GOD COULD BE REAL THEREFORE YOU NEED TO WORSHIP A DEAD JEW FROM 2000 YEARS AGO!Ban all Christcucks from society.
>>542847874Is that your hand on my Ass?
>>542847874causality is a meme
Pascal's wager does a better job of convincing people to believe in God through logic. Also, we don't know if the Universe was created or not. We just know the data we have exists now. Can't even prove the big bang, that's why it's all just a theory. Everyone assumes there'll be some great entropic event, but we don't know how the universe works, we're retarded apes doing our best to understand data sets without even understanding how the universe works, could be a cycle of death and rebirth. Could be a hole in the walls of other dimensions for all we know. Could've been created by God. Could've existed outside of time and space and was introduced like a data asset and then whoever God is hit play.
>>542847874> Absolute nothing means no matter, no energy, no space,Space is nothing. Christcucks are literally retarded people.
>>542851857It doesn’t say christians it says gentiles. Christians always have to make everything about them with their victim complex (just like jews)
>>542847874Yes, very few people deny God entirely.The actual question is, what God wants.
>>542847874Paddy my friend you're a mental speculator
>>542851335Peanut brain take
>>542847874There is no man in the sky Luigi, sorry. No Santa tho
>>542853728>It doesn’t say christians it says gentilesIdiotically wrong. "gentile" is an imaginary Latin wordjews would never use it in their religious text
ok but why is he jewish
>>542847874I'm not even an atheist but using Plato's "unmoved mover" as an argument for the existence of God is dumb and gay.All it proves is either our current working model of physics is still highly underbaked or that there is some sort of force in the universe somewhere that exists outside of the chain of cause and effect which you can call God I guess but its so abstract it doesn't really tie it to any religion in any meaningful way. It doesn't suggest anything about what objective morality should look like or if this God cares about humanity at all or any questions people would want a religion to answer.
>>542851639There are two issues with your perspective. First, quantum foam is a theoretical feature of quantum gravity (which notoriously does not work), and there's plenty of exploration about where these fields come from that would make them "caused" rather than intrinsic. Second, cosmological arguments don't quite go away even if you propose an atemporal framework, as the argument is fundamentally one of cascading explanations rather than something strictly time-dependent. Ex nihilo creation is just as problematic for a materialist with God as without.I think you can cobble together some idea that true nothingness would lack even the rules required to keep a universe from spontaneously forming, which might conceptually do something similar, but I don't think most atheists are prepared to accept the unavoidable downstream consequences of an infinitely prolific void. There are also many important questions that it precludes an answer for.
>>542857795>but its so abstract it doesn't really tie it to any religion in any meaningful way.Because it's an ontological argument, and no, it is leveraged by multiple religions.>or that there is some sort of force in the universe somewhere that exists outside of the chain of cause and effect which you can call God Well, that's the very argument being made.>It doesn't suggest anything about what objective morality should look like or if this God cares about humanity at allNone of that, but to lead you there, you need to believe in God first, and for that sake, this and many other ontological arguments were leveraged in religious books.
>>542847874Even if god existed at one point, history has shown that he is either:>Dead/Completely absent from the universe>Neither all powerful or all knowingGod hasn't intervened in earthly affairs since we (the jews) killed his sonThat's why little kids get cancer and earth is rotting in a hell of its own creationGod doesn't give a fuck. You can openly curse his name and literally nothing happens.A real god would be all knowing and strike you dead.
More spiral worship, yawn.
>>542858183Plenty of people would disagree and believe with absolute confidence that God is active in the world today. Those people likely hold that belief with far more conviction than you do yours.
>>542858367>believe with absolute confidence that God is active in the world today.Why? Then he's neither all powerful or all knowing. Or worse he is a malevolent god that jews have elevated over the actual gods of antiquity. Which is worse?Why would you worship a jewish war god to begin with?
>>542852535>Canadian>Poo brown>Seething about ChristSorry that his arrival made your cow shit demon rituals stop working.
>>542857795>it doesn't really tie it to any religion in any meaningful wayIt invalidates polytheism and mandates God is unchanging, which are very meaningful revelations. These revelations eliminate probably 99% of religions throughout history. I've only heard of a handful of monotheistic religions where God has a truly unchanging nature.
>>542858565Because they have personally experienced miracles. Whether you believe them is another matter, but I'm no more inclined to believe your claims to the negative than theirs to the positive.
>>542847874NoThe perception of what 'supernatural' is, has been shifted so far in 2000 years and that's what's driving people away from believing in god.If you went to the past showing everyone your phone you'd be considered a heretic and killed, because your device is clearly supernatural and only you know how to work it, hence it's considered dark magic. Because nowhere in the bible it is mentioned.That is why the amish refrain using it. And also why people 10000 years ago would have reacted the same if they saw a cart with wheels.
>>542858858So the benefits of worshipping a jewish war god are a really small chance of getting saved from a burning building or car crash or something? Just to get cancer and die anyways? What a shitty usesless god. Fuck it.
>>542847874Why can't it just be eternal? It was never created because it always existed.
Hollywood PANICSThey Can't Destroy Mel Gibson https://youtu.be/aj-peRn2c_U
>>542859000Christ said our victory is not of this world but in heaven. I truly believe Europeans carried so many wins and dominance for hundreds and hundreds of years is because we centered everything around Christ. After the two world wars, Europe and European countries have become more and more secular, which is why we’re all being punished with mass immigration, whoreness, jewish dominance, etc. Open your heart before it’s too late
>>542848331Kek, nice one
>>542847874>Absolute nothing means no matter, no energy, no space, no time, no laws and no causation. If everything came from absolute nothing, then reality came into existence without causation and outside the natural rules governing reality. Something creating everything from nothing, outside the rule of causation, is supernatural. That is what we call God.if god can come from nothing why can't the universe? your argument is self defeating.
>>542859035Evidence shows the contrary. It would be a denial of science to affirm that the universe is eternal (which is itself a supernatural claim).
>>542847874>we reach the questionno you don't reach that question, it's not a logical question. everything always existed. there is no cause outside time. time started with the big bang you see, you cannot have cause-effect outside time itself.the question of what caused big bang is nonsensical, religious in nature.matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed, they always existed. creation is a myth not based in logic or science but religion
>>542847874God caused baby rape because he loves baby rape.
>>542860703>matter and energy cannot be created or destroyedmatter can be destroyed, energy cannot.
>>542860806Only depraved minds (like yours) would ever think of corrupting God's Order.
>>542860703>everything always existedDo you have proof?
>>542860861they are the same thing, matter is condensed energy in a way. they change form if you will. nevertheless, they cannot be created or destroyed, you can just play with existing stuff and cannot get rid of it. >>542860988of-course, it's quite banal. if time started with the big bang, then matter and energy existed ever since, ever since time started. thus it logically follows that they always existed, for as long as time was a thing. logically.it's not even hard to understand. I think the confusion here is you thinking about a time that goes infinitely back, instead of being finite. nevertheless, still always applies to it. since it encompanses ALL time. that was. your confusion arises from the wrong expectations
>>542861173matter is a collection of energy that can be broken into a lower energy state. matter can be destroyed, it's the underlying energy that cannot. you can take a knife a melt it down, the metal still exists but the knife doesn't.
>>542861173Since you understand that the universe is created then it also follows that the universe was once not-created for it had a beginning (only that which is eternal has no beginning and no ending).Ergo, the Universe has a creator and we give this creator the title of God.Quite easy logic, pretty simple to understand.
>>542861452I...am not sure I understand your point. you cannot destroy matter or energy, you can only interchange them. what part of this statement are you having trouble with?>>542861501>Since you understand that the universe is createdno, I did not say it was created. I do not believe it was created. it always existed. that is the only logical statement you can make. creation is a myth that is not founded in science, reason, or logic. it's a nonsensical concept, because you cannot logically have a cause outside of time.cause or effect are what define time itself. time is a measure of change, of...cause/effect. if time started with the big bang, you cannot logically have a cause for the big bang, because it doesn't follow, it's outside of the definition. it's not a coherent concept. it's a string of words without meaning because they are wrongly used.>Quite easy logic, pretty simple to understand.ooooookay.... welp, I did my best.
None of you exist.I am the only existence and I made everything up.
>>542861866>it always existed>but it had a starting point (cause)>It's eternal despite having a beginning>It had a cause that started it but it also didn't have a causemake up your mind. I do not accept this cognitive dissonance.
>>542861866I'm having trouble with you stating matter cannot be destroyed. It can. Matter is the arrangement of energy and that arrangement can be destroyed. I think you're are having trouble discerning the difference between matter and energy.
God is an emergent property of every iteration of the universe.Seen only by the spirit of man.
>>542862099I believe this is as simple as it can get:Creation did not always exist, so how and why did Creation come to exist? God knows the answer best (God has always existed).Created things are not eternal, while God alone is eternal and uncreated.
>>542862099You cannot seem to understand the words that I used.When I say "always" it includes all time that ever existed. If time popped up with the big bang, then the word "always" covers the whole span of time since when you read this until the big bang. That is simple and logical. Always cannot encompass more than time because it...makes no sense. >Always is an adverb meaning at all times or invariably. It indicates that something happens every time or continuously without exceptionAlways is a word bound by however long time existed for. In our case back to the big bang.>>542862216>I'm having trouble with you stating matter cannot be destroyed. It can.No, that's a ludicrous proposition. It changes form it isn't destroyed. So strange you people keep getting tangled in words and miss the concept they are meant to represent. I do not understand why it gives you so much trouble.>>542862216>Matter is the arrangement of energy and that arrangement can be destroyedNo, matter is that energy in another form. You cannot destroy it, you can merely change its form.If I give you a spoon and I ask you to destroy it, you can't, you will always be left with something. It wont' be a spoon, but it will be something else.Thus you didn't really destroy the matter the spoon was made out of, you merely changed it into something else, energy in this case.For example, we use a matter spoon + antimatter spoon = full total TRANSFORMATION of matter spoon and antimatter spoon to energy. You didn't destroy the matter, you changed its form. You destroyed the spoon but that is not matter, that is a human word to describe a matter arrangement, nothing more.If you destroy the shape you do not destroy the matter. You cannot make it so there is nothing, you are always left with something from whatever you are doing. If no matter then obligatory energy. Thus you are not destroying anything, merely transforming into something else.
https://youtu.be/H51cXk7aiw4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass
>>542863174https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy
>>542848335How could it not be proven? Do you believe things just happen from supernatural causes or at random? Everything in the world we can observe now is the result of a reaction chain. Not referring to it's creation because I don't presume to know how that happened.
>>542847874Sure, but what does any of this have to do with the fact that he can make a tabernacle (a tent made out of animal skins), the black cube at mecca (literally a 1-story mud-brick shack) or the 3rd temple (not impressive by any standard) his true home?Or how about this? You are definitely not talking about the God of the Bible/Torah, because nothing you've described is at all characteristic of the God found within these texts? No-thing (a vacuum, black body) can create particles. But you'll find that it's impossible to create No-thing, since it's the same as achieving absolute zero.
>>542862912>No, matter is that energy in another form. You cannot destroy it, you can merely change its form.So if you take a knife a melt it down into it's base metal it's still a knife? the knife representing matter and the metal representing energy.
>>542863931This must be a troll but I'll bite>So if you take a knife a melt it down into it's base metalYou have some metal still> it's still a knifeNo. What you call a knife is an arrangement of metal. Not any metal shape. For example a spoon is not a knife. They are both same metal. But you differentiate them by shape/use. Obviously. I think this is something your parents should have taught you early on. Or at least schooling.>the knife representing matterThe knife is not matter, it's a word representing the shape of matter.>and the metal representing energyThe metal can be transformed into energy, as metal it's called matter.I am sorry that you are confused by all of this and you find it hard to understand anon. When you become adult and go to higher schooling you will learn this from someone you trust, some authority figure teaching you.You can still ask LLM if you roll that way.
>>542847964I feel like a lot of key details were omitted from me
>>542847964Very few people will understand your post. I for one appreciate it.
>>542848614the yin yang dichotomal decision tree is like a zero point field gravitational warp drive propelling somethign somewhere idk though kinda hungry
>>542847874Agreed. But it’s not the semitic god of the abrahamists.
