so your logic is everything needs a cause, expect the original cause, there is a cause for everything expect that which needs no cause?
you are violating your principle, if you can violate everything needs a cause why can't I?
Quite the deal, Imagine you have a kid, you say to that kid, look at everything I gave you, here is how I want you to live and if you do not you are will burn in hell, makes perfect sense, true love!!! I bought you a bike but don't ride it, you willl cause everyone to potentially burn in hell, makes sense dad, thanks!!!
virtual particles pop in and out of existence all the time, cause is not required, hence you argument doesn't make sense in reality, not everything needs a cause, your brain is adding that pattern.
No, not everything needs a cause, but only things that have a beginning. God is eternal. That is the definition of God. God does not need a cause because God did not have a beginning.
God will not send good people to hell. Hell is not for good people. Hell is for bad people.
Virtual Particles?
"...In this chapter, Krauss gives evidence for entities called virtual particles. They are called virtual because they have never been directly observed due to their fleeting lifetimes (less than Planck time). However, the existence of virtual particles is allowed by quantum mechanics, from the uncertainty principle. There is indirect evidence for their existence. The calculated energy levels associated with the orbitals of hydrogen differ slightly from experimental measurement. However, if a virtual particle pair is assumed to be located around the hydrogen nucleus, the calculated energy levels match experiment exactly. They are believed to convey the strong force between quarks in protons and neutrons. Virtual particles are usually invoked in strong fields (electromagnetic, gravitational). Hawking radiation, predicted to be a mechanism by which black holes could ‘evaporate’, depends on the existence of virtual particles, but has not been observed so far. Krauss says a universe where the total mass/energy is balanced by the potential gravitational energy has zero net energy and so could pop into existence from nothing without violation of the first law. Such a universe should, however, collapse and disappear in periods shorter than the Planck time unless inflation allows it to exist beyond the Planck time. Krauss also says that this proves you can get something from nothing given the energetics of empty space and the law of gravity. So he says you can get a universe from nothing if you can start with empty space with nonzero energy and the laws of gravity and quantum mechanics. He admits empty space with nonzero energy is something! A quantum theory of gravity would mean quantum mechanics applies to space, not just to objects in space. Then we could say that spacetimes pop in and out of nothing if the total energy is zero. But we don’t yet have a quantum theory of gravity. Krauss concedes that this speculation does not prove our universe arose from nothing, but says it makes such a scenario more plausible. And plausibility is apparently all he needs to justify rejection of God. So much for basing his worldview on hard, cold facts alone. The energy calculated for empty space assuming virtual particles is (10 to the 120th power) times greater than that observed. This is a longstanding unsolved problem."
Damn. You were thinking all this when you were six years old? I was thinking about Transformers and GI*Joe!
So you were thinking all those deep thoughts at 6 and then at 20 you were taking philosophy and thinking the above garbage? What happened between six and twenty? Did you suffer a traumatic brain injury?
Those thoughts are not deep. They are the thoughts of a self-willed person who lives for their own desires, who refuses to believe in a God who demands obedience. They are the thoughts of an infant child with a reprobate mind.
