To me the problem here lies not in unprecise wordings, but in the absurdity of the claim.JBrian said:
Whatever that might mean.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
To me the problem here lies not in unprecise wordings, but in the absurdity of the claim.JBrian said:A bad way of putting it I know.
Whatever that might mean.However, the creation of the universe was not in time, it was the creation of time.
To me the problem here lies not in unprecise wordings, but in the absurdity of the claim.
Yes, I did. The way you put it was self-contradictory. Try to find a wording that is consistent, try to explain a bit more what it is you actually mean to say, and I will have a starting point.JBrian said:Can you show why it is absurd?
quatona said:Yes, I did. The way you put it was self-contradictory. Try to find a wording that is consistent, try to explain a bit more what it is you actually mean to say, and I will have a starting point.
JBrian said:The universe did not always exist. Therefore time did not always exist. Once the universe was brought into existence by God time also came into existence.
This is a fast and unsophisticated way of putting it, but let's go from here.
Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:If something did not always exist, it never existed and will not come into existence.
JBrian said:This is true, unless it is brought into existence by something else.
Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:1.Anything that is born or brought forth,must also have a source or a cause.
2.When cause leads to an effect, how can it remain without change ?
If God is the material cause, how can He remain unchanged?
If God is not the material cause, how did this world come forth?
Either God is the material cause, in which case God changed and hence does not fit His definition
or
God created the world out of something which already existed, in which case things existed before God's creation
or
Nothing ever happened. That is to say, creation did not take place. Existence is eternal and is not brought forth or bring forth something else.
JBrian said:First of all, God is the efficient cause. Please demonstrate why it is necessary for God to change for an ex nihilo creation to take place.
Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:I think many posters have clearly demonstrated that 'creation ex-nihilo' is an impossible situation.
If before the point when creation began, there was absolutely nothing, then creation took place on its own, if at all it took place, since there is no God in absolute nothingness.
JBrian said:The reason I always ask you (and others) to point something out is so I can see your argument more clearly. In "absolute nothingness," I simply mean that the universe does not exist. That does not mean that God does not exist. I am arguing that God created the universe, including time.
What is "always/not always" supposed to mean if taking the pov from outside time. These words are meaningful only in reference to time.JBrian said:The universe did not always exist. Therefore time did not always exist.
"Once" refers to a point in time.Else I don´t see what this word could possibly mean. It implies a before and an after. Even if you avoid to word it explicitly, you are referring to something before time. This, for all I know, is a self-contradiction.Once the universe was brought into existence by God time also came into existence.
Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:We cannot just define 'absolute nothingness' for our own conveniences.
God is not 'nothing'. In fact He is everything.
Omnipresence is one of His attributes.
How can time and space exist outside of Him?
If I argue in God's favor, I would argue that God is inside time and also outside of it.
How can something exist outside of God?
Is God just a powerful being, just more powerful than anything else, or is He all-encompassing outside of whom nothing exists?
Your definition of God makes Him very limited
in His attributes.
quatona said:What is "always/not always" supposed to mean if taking the pov from outside time. These words are meaningful only in reference to time.
"Once" refers to a point in time.Else I don´t see what this word could possibly mean. It implies a before and an after. Even if you avoid to word it explicitly, you are referring to something before time. This, for all I know, is a self-contradiction.
On another note "creating" as used here appears to point to an action, an event, an incident. These things require time to be present. You cannot drive a motorcycle in the absence of time, and you cannot "create" something in the absence of time.
JBrian said:to the contrary. God is not subject to time. God created time like he created the universe. He is unlimited in every respect; also unlimited regarding the constraints of time. He is not temporal; He is eternal.
I don´t think that this has been established.JBrian said:The universe is not eternal.
Doens´t change anything about the fact that creation process must be a temporal one (i.e. happen within time), if there is a state of the universe not existing and a state of the universe existing (and both are not eternal themselves). Whether it was "decreed from all eternity" (whatever that might mean) or not, doesn´t help to solve this dilemma.God decreed from all eternity to create the universe.
The contradiction is there, as soon as you ascribe temporal actions to this being outside of time.Since God is outside of time and not subject to it this is not a contradiction.
I agree fully. This renders already the ideas of "time existing", "existing outside time" or "time being created" pretty questionable.Time is not some "thing." It can only "exist" or measure material, changing entities.
Ok, I would really be interested to understand your idea.I will have to write more later.
Same to you, and happy easter!Thanks for your thoughts.
Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:Something eternal should be the only thing there is.
How does something temporal like time and universe exist separate from this eternal.
Do you mean to say that this universe is an illusion?
I don´t think that this has been established.
Doens´t change anything about the fact that creation process must be a temporal one (i.e. happen within time), if there is a state of the universe not existing and a state of the universe existing (and both are not eternal themselves). Whether it was "decreed from all eternity" (whatever that might mean) or not, doesn´t help to solve this dilemma.
The contradiction is there, as soon as you ascribe temporal actions to this being outside of time.
JBrian said:The only other alternative is to say that the universe is infinite, namely without a beginning. But what exists must have a cause. The series of causes cannot be infinite, for that would not account for the effect, namely, the universe. There must be a cause that does not need a cause. However, this cause must be uncaused, and unchanging, that is, outside, or not subject to time (eternal).
JBrian said:What is eternal is necessarily outside of time. Whatever is outside of time is also outside of change, since change only occurs within time, that is, there is a before and an after. The universe is changing, therefore the universe is not outside of time (eternal), and is temporal.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?