wrote in news:1157402593.718005.37150
@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
josephfg@hotmail.com wrote:
Immortalist wrote:
Atheism: The Case Against God
George H. Smith
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/087975124X/
You have simply renamed God, "Existence." As stated explicitly, above:
"Existence-not "God"-is the First Cause.
Are not the premises of the first-cause argument a claim which say
something about something that exists outside of existence? This is a
contradiction if we claim that the universe or universes are all
oexistence.
Correct. It's a special pleading fallacy.
Does the universe require a causal explanation?
Good point. Causes and effects happen within the universe. There is no
evidence or even reason to think that causes and events are meaningful to
the background of reality. A further problem is that empirical evidence
shows that events do occur which are uncaused such as radioactive decay.
In considering the causal argument as a whole, one contradiction
immediately stands out.
The first premise of this argument states that everything must have a
cause, and the conclusion asserts the existence of an uncaused
supernatural being. But if everything must have a cause, how did god
become exempt?
No problem - just throw in a dose of special pleading ;-).
Klazmon.
<Further good arguments snipped>
<SNIP>
.
