The first cause argument

Whenever I get into a religious debate (which happens more and more frequently as people try to save my soul) it isn’t long before the first cause argument comes up. Everything that exists has a cause, therefore god must be the cause that first caused things to exist. I saw the original quote from William Lane Craig (I believe it was him anyways) who expands the concept out to an almost algebraic equation.

But I’m not impressed with it. Here’s why…

First, the first cause argument makes the assumption that god exists without a cause, because… well, he’s god or something. This one point alone blows the first cause argument. If your god exists without a cause then causeless existences are possible.

But a bigger problem I have with the first cause theory is that it’s a human idea. The question I ask is, is it possible for nothing to exist? We have nothing but philosophical ideas of what an existence of nothing is like. I don’t think it has ever existed, nor do I believe a state of nothing exists. I have no evidence to suggest it’s even possible.

Even the big bang theory says we exploded from a dense starting point – but it says nothing about the non existence of that matter that we started from. As far as I can tell, our starting point always existed in some form.

Perhaps like popcorn kernels in a microwave we were only one of many “bangs” and kernels continue to pop all over the exo-universe, if I can make up a word. A mutiverse of magnificent proportions. With as many universes as we can see stars- or, more likely, an infinitely greater number of universes than we can see stars.

Think about that for a little while… does it blow your mind?

Me too…