Why is the First Cause Argument Flawed?

[Wicked Pilot]

Zues was the first cause.

God was created by Zues to be his sex slave. Spending the last 6000 years taking Zues' lightening bolts up your ass is not fun. That is why God condemns homos in the Bible so much.

[EvilGrey]

Zues was the first cause.

God was created by Zues to be his sex slave. Spending the last 6000 years taking Zues' lightening bolts up your ass is not fun. That is why God condemns homos in the Bible so much.

Adept at humor you are not.

[Darth Wong]

Zues was the first cause.

God was created by Zues to be his sex slave. Spending the last 6000 years taking Zues' lightening bolts up your ass is not fun. That is why God condemns homos in the Bible so much.

Adept at humor you are not.

Who said it was strictly humourous? Please try to disprove that assertion, meeting the same standard of proof that you demand from us.

[Wicked Pilot]

Adept at humor you are not.

I'm serious. You worship Zues' little bitch. Do you suck dicks too?

[Kuroneko]

Take a number and keep dividing it by two forever. Not impossible, correct? ;)

Certainly. And depends on which number (and number system) I pick, it can be nonzero also.

Take a candy bar, cut it in half, and continue to halve each piece forever and ever.

Eventually you will no longer be able to cut it in half. The constituent elements become so small you cannot possibly halve them. :D

Red herring. A temporal interval is not a physical thing. To show that it cannot be infinitely divisible, there needs to be an empirally-adequate scientific theory that contends that time is quantized. And guess what? You're out of luck. All of the currently empirically-adequate theories make the assumption treat time as not quantized.

[EvilGrey]

Take a number and keep dividing it by two forever. Not impossible, correct?

Certainly. And depends on which number (and number system) I pick, it can be nonzero also.

Take a candy bar, cut it in half, and continue to halve each piece forever and ever.

Eventually you will no longer be able to cut it in half. The constituent elements become so small you cannot possibly halve them.

Red herring. A temporal interval is not a physical thing. To show that it cannot be infinitely divisible, there needs to be an empirally-adequate scientific theory that contends that time is quantized. And guess what? You're out of luck. All of the currently empirically-adequate theories make the assumption treat time as not quantized.

Who said anything about time?

[LadyTevar]

Take a number and keep dividing it by two forever. Not impossible, correct?

Certainly. And depends on which number (and number system) I pick, it can be nonzero also.

Take a candy bar, cut it in half, and continue to halve each piece forever and ever.

Eventually you will no longer be able to cut it in half. The constituent elements become so small you cannot possibly halve them.

Red herring. A temporal interval is not a physical thing. To show that it cannot be infinitely divisible, there needs to be an empirally-adequate scientific theory that contends that time is quantized. And guess what? You're out of luck. All of the currently empirically-adequate theories make the assumption treat time as not quantized.

Who said anything about time?

Since you were attempting to compare CandyBars to Time, I'd say you did.

Now, about Dividing God into Three Persons, Blessed Trinity...?

[EvilGrey]

Zues was the first cause.

God was created by Zues to be his sex slave. Spending the last 6000 years taking Zues' lightening bolts up your ass is not fun. That is why God condemns homos in the Bible so much.

Adept at humor you are not.

Who said it was strictly humourous? Please try to disprove that assertion, meeting the same standard of proof that you demand from us.

The word "God" refers to that which is the greatest. Zeus cannot be above God, thus, Zeus is quite incapable of violating God.

Unless you wish to call God "Zeus," in which case God/Zeus is merely violating Himself.

[EvilGrey]

Certainly. And depends on which number (and number system) I pick, it can be nonzero also.
Red herring. A temporal interval is not a physical thing. To show that it cannot be infinitely divisible, there needs to be an empirally-adequate scientific theory that contends that time is quantized. And guess what? You're out of luck. All of the currently empirically-adequate theories make the assumption treat time as not quantized.

Who said anything about time?

Since you were attempting to compare CandyBars to Time, I'd say you did.

Now, about Dividing God into Three Persons, Blessed Trinity...?

I am using candy bars as a means to demonstrate the logical absurdity of an infinite regress of actualized causality.

[SirNitram]

Adept at humor you are not.

Who said it was strictly humourous? Please try to disprove that assertion, meeting the same standard of proof that you demand from us.

The word "God" refers to that which is the greatest. Zeus cannot be above God, thus, Zeus is quite incapable of violating God.

Unless you wish to call God "Zeus," in which case God/Zeus is merely violating Himself.

Bzzzzzt. God does not refer to 'that which is greatest'.

The word god means this:

a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality

Oops! You're a moron!

[SirNitram]

I am using candy bars as a means to demonstrate the logical absurdity of an infinite regress of actualized causality.

As opposed to a peice of outmoded superstition, vis a vis, God.

Time and space divide infinitely, as has been shown by forays into QM. Please do not pass go.

[EvilGrey]

Who said it was strictly humourous? Please try to disprove that assertion, meeting the same standard of proof that you demand from us.

The word "God" refers to that which is the greatest. Zeus cannot be above God, thus, Zeus is quite incapable of violating God.

Unless you wish to call God "Zeus," in which case God/Zeus is merely violating Himself.

Bzzzzzt. God does not refer to 'that which is greatest'.

The word god means this:

a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality

Oops! You're a moron!

That would be a demigod, my inimical friend.

[LadyTevar]

Since you were attempting to compare CandyBars to Time, I'd say you did.

Now, about Dividing God into Three Persons, Blessed Trinity...?

I am using candy bars as a means to demonstrate the logical absurdity of an infinite regress of actualized causality.

So, in that cause, since God can be split into Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, can he not also, as an actualized causality, be split further down?

[EvilGrey]

I am using candy bars as a means to demonstrate the logical absurdity of an infinite regress of actualized causality.

As opposed to a peice of outmoded superstition, vis a vis, God.

Time and space divide infinitely, as has been shown by forays into QM. Please do not pass go.

And this is relevant why?

[SirNitram]

Bzzzzzt. God does not refer to 'that which is greatest'.

The word god means this:

a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality

Oops! You're a moron!

That would be a demigod, my inimical friend.

Wrong again. THIS is the definition of Demigod:

a mythological being with more power than a mortal but less than a god

[LadyTevar]

I am using candy bars as a means to demonstrate the logical absurdity of an infinite regress of actualized causality.

As opposed to a peice of outmoded superstition, vis a vis, God.

Time and space divide infinitely, as has been shown by forays into QM. Please do not pass go.

And this is relevant why?

I love how he will answer every comment but the one I'm most interested in....

[EvilGrey]

Since you were attempting to compare CandyBars to Time, I'd say you did.

Now, about Dividing God into Three Persons, Blessed Trinity...?

I am using candy bars as a means to demonstrate the logical absurdity of an infinite regress of actualized causality.

So, in that cause, since God can be split into Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, can he not also, as an actualized causality, be split further down?

The first cause, an actualized cause, or any other cause, cannot be split. A series of causes can be on the other hand.

[EvilGrey]

Bzzzzzt. God does not refer to 'that which is greatest'.

The word god means this:

a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality

Oops! You're a moron!

That would be a demigod, my inimical friend.

Wrong again. THIS is the definition of Demigod:

a mythological being with more power than a mortal but less than a god

Never took a philosophy course, eh?

[SirNitram]

That would be a demigod, my inimical friend.

Wrong again. THIS is the definition of Demigod:

a mythological being with more power than a mortal but less than a god

Never took a philosophy course, eh?

Multiple ones. None of them rewrote the English language as you are feebly attempting to.

God is merely a powerful being, in most cases, derving it's power from the worship of mortals. Demigod are merely powerful mortals, often sons of gods that are potent enough to actually incarnate. Since yours is apparantly incapable of this feat, it's understandable you can't fathom the idea.

[LadyTevar]

I am using candy bars as a means to demonstrate the logical absurdity of an infinite regress of actualized causality.

So, in that cause, since God can be split into Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, can he not also, as an actualized causality, be split further down?

The first cause, an actualized cause, or any other cause, cannot be split. A series of causes can be on the other hand.

Then how, sir, do we have The Father. The Son, and the Holy Spirit? Surely they were all there in the beginning, and yet they are split. If, as you say, any cause cannot be split, but must be a series of causes, which one created the universe, in your opinion?

[EvilGrey]

Wrong again. THIS is the definition of Demigod:

a mythological being with more power than a mortal but less than a god

Never took a philosophy course, eh?

Multiple ones. None of them rewrote the English language as you are feebly attempting to.

God is merely a powerful being, in most cases, derving it's power from the worship of mortals. Demigod are merely powerful mortals, often sons of gods that are potent enough to actually incarnate. Since yours is apparantly incapable of this feat, it's understandable you can't fathom the idea.

Brahman is a powerful being?

Tao is a powerful being?

Both are made powerful through worship?

[EvilGrey]

Then how, sir, do we have The Father. The Son, and the Holy Spirit? Surely they were all there in the beginning, and yet they are split. If, as you say, any cause cannot be split, but must be a series of causes, which one created the universe, in your opinion?

Lady, are you female?

[SirNitram]

Never took a philosophy course, eh?

Multiple ones. None of them rewrote the English language as you are feebly attempting to.

God is merely a powerful being, in most cases, derving it's power from the worship of mortals. Demigod are merely powerful mortals, often sons of gods that are potent enough to actually incarnate. Since yours is apparantly incapable of this feat, it's understandable you can't fathom the idea.

Brahman is a powerful being?

Tao is a powerful being?

Both are made powerful through worship?

Sorry, EvilGrey, you made a blanket statement involving the word God. I proved you wrong, using no actual thought, only a dictionary. The mature and logical thing for you to do is admit defeat. Instead, you'll try to throw red herrings.

[LadyTevar]

Then how, sir, do we have The Father. The Son, and the Holy Spirit? Surely they were all there in the beginning, and yet they are split. If, as you say, any cause cannot be split, but must be a series of causes, which one created the universe, in your opinion?

Lady, are you female?

What does that have to do with it? Yes, I am. Do you want to see my certificate of baptismal too?

[Kuroneko]

Red herring. A temporal interval is not a physical thing. To show that it cannot be infinitely divisible, there needs to be an empirally-adequate scientific theory that contends that time is quantized. And guess what? You're out of luck. All of the currently empirically-adequate theories make the assumption treat time as not quantized.

Who said anything about time? :?

Foolish. Causes temporally precede their effects. That's the principle of causality. If time is no longer an issue, there would no be any possible problem of having an infinite regress of causes at all--after all, then there is nothing to prevent all of the causes from happening at precisely the same time.