Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (9517)	11/7/2010 4:28:46 PM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

"I am politely asking you" This as a new first for you. Of course if you wanted to be polite then you wouldn't put outrageous, gratuitous and inflammatory insults in virtually every post. I would be delighted if you would finally grow up enough to have a civil discussion. So in that spirit I'll answer your question. Let's just see how long you can go without resorting to your usual tactics. I'll refer this post back to you if you do. Here again is the statement that I made. I did not cut and paste that from Craig and it's only one part of the traditional Kalum Cosmological argument which Craig did not invent. Major Premise: Everything that has a beginning has an antecedent cause. Minor premise: The universe had a beginning. Conclusion: The Universe has an antecedent cause. Cosmological Argument - History "'First cause arguments' were set forth by Plato and Aristotle in the 4th and 3rd centuries BC. These arguments maintain that everything that exists or occurs must have had a cause. So if one would go back in time far enough, one would discover a first cause. Aristotle, a deist, posited that this first cause was the creator of the universe. Thomas Aquinas, a Christian, then expanded on Aristotle's ideas in the 13th century AD and molded the first cause-concept into a framework in which the cause of the universe itself is uncaused: the First Cause is God. Founded on similar reasoning, the Kalam Cosmological Argument was developed by Muslim philosophers in the Middle Ages, but has not lost any of its philosophical power over the centuries. In recent years, Christian philosopher William Lane Craig has brought the Kalam Cosmological Argument back into the spotlight." allaboutphilosophy.org You are using "everything" in a way that I have not. I already answered your question: "Does the universe include everything?" <<<No, the Physical universe is separate from it's antecedent cause.>>> So to answer your question directly. "Does everything include the universe?" Yes, but the universe does not include everything. Of course there very well may be things that are not part of the created physical universe that also had a beginning. In that case I see no reason that those "effects" would not also fall under the first premise: "Everything that has a beginning has an antecedent cause." Happy now?