God is timeless

[pocaracas]

That translates to: mental masturbations about what time is abound... eventually, physics will be able to accurately explain time and we'll realize that one of those countless masturbations was correct.
Excuse while I'm not impressed...

says the one so closed minded he can't spare 18 minutes to watch a couple vids before he judges.

LOL
WLC videos?
Watched a lot of those already... no thank you.

[Rational AKD]

LOL
WLC videos?
Watched a lot of those already... no thank you.

in other words, you've seen one and that's all your tiny intention span can handle...

[pocaracas]

LOL
WLC videos?
Watched a lot of those already... no thank you.

in other words, you've seen one and that's all your tiny intention span can handle...

I've seen several, and I've had my fill of BS and mental masturbation... yes.
However, in the meantime, I've put these videos on play and listened to them...
Lots of mental masturbation, as expected.

That part, in the second video, where this entity, god, destroys the black box where time exists, and creates another such box... then, for some reason, WLC says that the first box existed before the second box... but they are in two different time lines, so one before the other makes no sense...

[Rational AKD]

I've seen several, and I've had my fill of BS and mental masturbation... yes.
However, in the meantime, I've put these videos on play and listened to them...
Lots of mental masturbation, as expected.

That part, in the second video, where this entity, god, destroys the black box where time exists, and creates another such box... then, for some reason, WLC says that the first box existed before the second box... but they are in two different time lines, so one before the other makes no sense...

his point in that segment is that such a thing would be logically impossible. God can't destroy the universe and say it did not exist before, so once God has created time he can't stop it. you really have a hard time grasping this stuff, no wonder you hate his vids.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I've seen several, and I've had my fill of BS and mental masturbation... yes.
However, in the meantime, I've put these videos on play and listened to them...
Lots of mental masturbation, as expected.

That part, in the second video, where this entity, god, destroys the black box where time exists, and creates another such box... then, for some reason, WLC says that the first box existed before the second box... but they are in two different time lines, so one before the other makes no sense...

his point in that segment is that such a thing would be logically impossible. God can't destroy the universe and say it did not exist before, so once God has created time he can't stop it. you really have a hard time grasping this stuff, no wonder you hate his vids.

And it's entirely speculation because nobody has evidence that any of these god thingys even exist!

Hence mental masturbation. It's the same as saying "Suppose X exists. Let's invent all the attributes that X must have!"

So you'll forgive us for not caring about all the superfluous attributes of something that doesn't have any evidence it's even there to have superfluous attributes.

I've also had quite enough of WLC. I hear enough of the theology students at my university talking about him (I am at the same University doing a PhD where he attained his - Shocking, I know, and it's actually a pretty damn good University too).

[Rational AKD]

And it's entirely speculation because nobody has evidence that any of these god thingys even exist!

Hence mental masturbation. It's the same as saying "Suppose X exists. Let's invent all the attributes that X must have!"

So you'll forgive us for not caring about all the superfluous attributes of something that doesn't have any evidence it's even there to have superfluous attributes.

postulating possibilities and implications of those possibilities is important to philosophy. whether you think it's useful or not is irrelevant. I posted the vids to answer the OP, not to prove the existence of God and the vids successfully answer his question without diverting or bringing up meaningless analogies.

[Minimalist]

Enrico suffers from a language problem.

He speaks Lunatic.

[pocaracas]

I've seen several, and I've had my fill of BS and mental masturbation... yes.
However, in the meantime, I've put these videos on play and listened to them...
Lots of mental masturbation, as expected.

That part, in the second video, where this entity, god, destroys the black box where time exists, and creates another such box... then, for some reason, WLC says that the first box existed before the second box... but they are in two different time lines, so one before the other makes no sense...

his point in that segment is that such a thing would be logically impossible. God can't destroy the universe and say it did not exist before, so once God has created time he can't stop it. you really have a hard time grasping this stuff, no wonder you hate his vids.

Oh I did grasp it, alright...
But I still say that makes no sense.
If you have the power to create a space-time enclosure and the power to annihilate it, the time in that enclosure becomes non-existent.
So temporal causality of a timeline that does not exist makes no sense.

It's like... your god creates two Universes, each with their own space-time. There is no way to claim that one event in Universe1 happens before or after any other event in Universe2. They are not correlated. Their times are different.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

And it's entirely speculation because nobody has evidence that any of these god thingys even exist!

Hence mental masturbation. It's the same as saying "Suppose X exists. Let's invent all the attributes that X must have!"

So you'll forgive us for not caring about all the superfluous attributes of something that doesn't have any evidence it's even there to have superfluous attributes.

postulating possibilities and implications of those possibilities is important to philosophy. whether you think it's useful or not is irrelevant. I posted the vids to answer the OP, not to prove the existence of God and the vids successfully answer his question without diverting or bringing up meaningless analogies.

I 100% agree with you. So long as whatever a god is remains entirely in the realm of 'possibilities'. But you missed the point of my analogy. But that's ok.

Now you can obfuscate your response however way you want and claim that the thread (and your response) has nothing to do with evidence, but the fact remains is that you believe (I presume) that a god of some sort (again, whatever that is) exists and does 'things' the world/reality we inhabit. Right?

The assertion in the OP is "God is Timeless". What's the presumption there? That [a] god exists, naturally. So, to play the game, we have to start from that assumption and go from there.

My analogy was to say there's no more reason to accept that presumption either scientifically or philosophically than, say, whether a chair cares about seeing our arses every day when we sit down on it.

The fact that people not only talk about god on a philosophical plane, but a further, a scientific plane, and further interweave the two. means that this conversation isn't and never has been purely about "possibilities" and the implications of those "possibilities". It's started from a statement of scientific and objective fact, and built presuppositions on that.

That is why we dismiss it, and we ask why we should care about it.

Can you give us a reason?

[Rational AKD]

Oh I did grasp it, alright...
But I still say that makes no sense.
If you have the power to create a space-time enclosure and the power to annihilate it, the time in that enclosure becomes non-existent.
So temporal causality of a timeline that does not exist makes no sense.

It's like... your god creates two Universes, each with their own space-time. There is no way to claim that one event in Universe1 happens before or after any other event in Universe2. They are not correlated. Their times are different.

that is why he says he doesn't have the power to destroy it. there are a couple possibilities of how God created space-time (if subscribing to B theory of time). one is the static theory that he created it as a block that is static to him but dynamic to us. with this theory, he would not be constrained by the block. but what he later explores is the possibility that he created the universe and time while simultaneously becoming dynamic in time itself. if he created time and became a part of it, then he could not become timeless again. this is what he's speaking of.