Thomas Aquinas Proof for God

[krymsonkyng]

I don't think I'm following all the arguments about composition in this thread, but this is my take on what is at stake.

The first statement is: "Everything that begins to exist has a cause." If something doesn't begin to exist then I think it should be called "eternal" and so doesn't need a cause.

The second statement is not a conclusion from the first, but a statement of fact assuming the big bang theory is correct: "The universe began to exist."

So if one accepts current science, the conclusion follows: "The universe had a cause".

My take on the conclusion is that there is more to reality than the stuff that came out of the big bang.

Of course, one can come up with a competing theory to the big bang. That competing theory would test the current theory and either replace it or make the current theory stronger.

---------------

Regarding a post I made earlier about vacuum fluctuations, since they involve particles that come to exist until they annihilate each other, these particles that began to exist must have a cause which I take is the vacuum space. Then I wonder why did the vacuum make these particles come into existence at some particular point in time? Was it chance? Or is chance just a short-hand way of saying: "We don't know."

Ok, that makes sense then. The second is a premise independent of the first. There is no composition then. Thanks for clearing all that up

[Rores28]

---------------

Regarding a post I made earlier about vacuum fluctuations, since they involve particles that come to exist until they annihilate each other, these particles that began to exist must have a cause which I take is the vacuum space. Then I wonder why did the vacuum make these particles come into existence at some particular point in time? Was it chance? Or is chance just a short-hand way of saying: "We don't know."

Chance is always a short hand way of saying "we don't know."

If you flip a coin, you say the chance of it landing it heads is %50. In actuality the chance is 100% that it lands on what it will land on. If you knew the strength of the flick, the weight of the coin, the humidity, wind, acceleration due to gravity, initial angle of coin, etc etc ... you would be able to tell precisely how the coin would fall.

The chance is merely a way of averaging all the variables of which we are unsure.