Question

[JonFromMinnesota]

Special pleading? I think not. It is God who created time and space. God exist outside of time and space.

You just said that everything that exists needs a God but in your very next post you say that God exists outside of time and space. Based on what? How do you come to this conclusion? You are special pleading. If you are going to say everything that exists needs a God and conclude that God exists, then you must explain where God came from otherwise you are disagreeing with your premise.

Perhaps you can explain where everything came from.

I don't know the answer to this question. I won't pretend to know that I do.

 

[-57]

Could you please clarify what "existing" is meant to communicate - in the absence of space and time?

It means God is the I Am. Stuff, space and time are not a requirement for God to exist. Stuff, space and time are one of God creations.
Perhaps you can tell us how stuff, space and time came about without a creator?

 

[-57]

You just said that everything that exists needs a God but in your very next post you say that God exists outside of time and space. Based on what? How do you come to this conclusion? You are special pleading. If you are going to say everything that exists needs a God and conclude that God exists, then you must explain where God came from otherwise you are disagreeing with your premise.



I don't know the answer to this question. I won't pretend to know that I do.

The argument is...Nothing would exist now if there wasn't a being that always existed.

 

[-57]

As soon as you explain how something has always existed.

How could something exist now if there wasn't a being that always existed?

 

[quatona]

It means God is the I Am. Stuff, space and time are not a requirement for God to exist. Stuff, space and time are one of God creations.

Now that you have supplied me with some Christianese phrases, would you care to answer the question.

Perhaps you can tell us how stuff, space and time came about without a creator?

No, I have no idea. I don´t even know whether "it came into existence" is an accurate description.
Now that we have clarified that you asked me to defend a claim I didn´t make, would you be willing to substantiate the claim you did make?

 

[-57]

Now that you have supplied me with some Christianese phrases, would you care to answer the question.

No, I have no idea. I don´t even know whether "it came into existence" is an accurate description.
Now that we have clarified that you asked me to defend a claim I didn´t make, would you be willing to substantiate the claim you did make?

I'll ask you also....How could something exist now if there wasn't a being that always existed?

 

[HitchSlap]

How could something exist now if there wasn't a being that always existed?

Well that's the great mystery, now, isn't it?

 

[-57]

Well that's the great mystery, now, isn't it?

Looks like we have an Atheist with some sort of faith. Perhaps the answer to the great mystery is God did it. Seems as if you can't rule that out.....perhaps you graduated to agnostic.

 

[quatona]

I'll ask you also....How could something exist now if there wasn't a being that always existed?

I´m giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are new to philosophical and logical discussion.

I don´t have an explanation how something could have always existed.
I have no explanation how something could have popped into existence from nothing.
I have no explanation how something could possibly exist without a cause.
I have no explanation how something can create something out of nothing.

If you can give an explanation how one of these ideas worked, I am all ears.

If, however, you are just ruling out three of them for lack of an explanation, and then accept the remaining even though it lacks an explanation as well, you are intellectually dishonest.

 

[HitchSlap]

Looks like we have an Atheist with some sort of faith. Perhaps the answer to the great mystery is God did it. Seems as if you can't rule that out.....perhaps you graduated to agnostic.

"Faith," in what, exactly? Perhaps it was god, Thor, FSM, Bob, or nothing, really can't say, can we. But it certainly doesn't add to our understanding if we just make poop up, though, does it.

Maybe you've graduated to agnosticism, if we're being intellectually honest, and all.

 

[quatona]

Perhaps the answer to the great mystery is God did it.

Yes, perhaps...along with a couple of competing equally exceptional claims.

Seems as if you can't rule that out.....

I´m not ruling anything out by means of applying double standards. You are.

perhaps you graduated to agnostic.

I have been and still am an agnostic ignostic atheist.

 

[-57]

I´m giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are new to philosophical and logical discussion.

I don´t have an explanation how something could have always existed.
I have no explanation how something could have popped into existence from nothing.
I have no explanation how something could possibly exist without a cause.
I have no explanation how something can create something out of nothing.

If you can give an explanation how one of these ideas worked, I am all ears.

If, however, you are just ruling out three of them for lack of an explanation, and then accept the remaining even though it lacks an explanation as well, you are intellectually dishonest.

Sounds like as a "seeker" ....maybe you realize there is a need for a God.

 

[bhsmte]

Sounds like as a "seeker" ....maybe you realize there is a need for a God.

Why don't you ask him, if he realizes a need for a God? You know, that is usually the best way to understand one's thought process.

 

[quatona]

Sounds like as a "seeker"

Yes, doesn´t it? I am open to consider any explanation - given that it´s been presented, in the first place.

....maybe you realize there is a need for a God.

So you admit you can´t present any explanation for this one exceptional claim out of several - the one you preferred to the point of airing it as a truth claim? Ok.

 

[-57]

Yes, doesn´t it? I am open to consider any explanation - given that it´s been presented, in the first place.

So you admit you can´t present any explanation for this one exceptional claim out of several - the one you preferred to the point of airing it as a truth claim? Ok.

I understand from complete nothing...you get nothing. Your thoughts would allow something to be and not be at the same time....which is quite a contradiction.

 

[-57]

Why don't you ask him, if he realizes a need for a God? You know, that is usually the best way to understand one's thought process.

I thought I did. Maybe I replied to the wrong person.

 

[quatona]

I understand from complete nothing...you get nothing.

Cool.
Now how about starting to give your explanation for your preferred exceptional truth claim - seeing that you criticized the competing options for their lack of explanatory power?

Your thoughts would allow something to be and not be at the same time....which is quite a contradiction.

Which of my thoughts specifically rest on the idea that something is and isn´t at the same time? You seem to know more about my thoughts than I do and than I have expressed.
Besides, it was you who claimed something to exist "out of time", so why couldn´t anybody else create equally counterintuitive premises?
Like, the universe exists out of time. Just to name the first.

 

[HitchSlap]

I understand from complete nothing...you get nothing. Your thoughts would allow something to be and not be at the same time....which is quite a contradiction.

"Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose."
-JBSH.

 

[quatona]

I understand from complete nothing...you get nothing.

Btw., could you describe the thought process that lead you to this conclusion?

 

[-57]

Cool.
Now how about starting to give your explanation for your preferred exceptional truth claim - seeing that you criticized the competing options for their lack of explanatory power?


Which of my thoughts specifically rest on the idea that something is and isn´t at the same time? You seem to know more about my thoughts than I do and than I have expressed.
Besides, it was you who claimed something to exist "out of time", so why couldn´t anybody else create equally counterintuitive premises?
Like, the universe exists out of time. Just to name the first.

...do you have a preferred exceptional truth? You've had time to present one.

How could "energy/matter" exist out of time?