Apologetics open challenge

[Whateverist]

If Tuesday, then Istanbul (not Constantinople).

Ringer!

[vorlon13]

But JESUS !!!

[Mystic]

I will be first making argument for a creator.

1) Time is temporal (came to being).
2) Something that existed without time, had to bring it to being.
3) That something has to have will, as it was not inevitable that time comes to being through a physical thing.

As for premise 1. I say the following proofs for it.

Argument 1:

1) Each point of time is temporal (came to being).
2) If time consists of each point of time, that all of it came to being (due it being consisted of only things came to being).

Argument 2:

1) If time was infinite each point of time is preceded by a point of time
2) If time was infinite, the whole of time would not be preceded by a point of time.
3) This is a paradox, and hence time being infinite is impossible.



These are sufficient, even though there are more arguments. 

As for premise 2. That something that existed without time, had to cause it to come to being.

It can be argued that there is no more north to the north pole, but this suggests that there is no going back before the first point of time, but not that anything didn't ontological precede it or that it was always there and didn't need to come into being. Therefore it makes sense something without time brought it into being.

As for premise 3. That it needed will.

I take it as manifest that a physical thing cannot cause a wondrous thing as time to exist and just make it appear after not existing. This is clear and manifest, and just needs to be thought about. A lifeless force simply cannot do this. It has no magical power.

A being with will and magical power, is the only being capable of doing this.


So far this says nothing about the Creator other then what I stated (which wasn't much). However, I feel once you accept the Creator, things like the soul existing becomes more manifest to you and then with the signs of divine light and soul, you can witness divinity, the absolute source of greatness and absolute great Lord.

Peace.

[Longhorn]

Butt JESUS !!!

fixt it for you

[Minimalist]

My old classic.

Jesus was a man
Stimbo is a man
Therefore Stimbo is blown out of Min's arse!

Sorry Stim, just trying to get a point across, your name came up.

There is no evidence for your initial premise.

[The Grand Nudger]

I will be first making argument for a creator.

1) Time is temporal (came to being).
2) Something that existed without time, had to bring it to being.
3) That something has to have will, as it was not inevitable that time comes to being through a physical thing.

As for premise 1. I say the following proofs for it.

Argument 1:

1) Each point of time is temporal (came to being).
2) If time consists of each point of time, that all of it came to being (due it being consisted of only things came to being).

Argument 2:

1) If time was infinite each point of time is preceded by a point of time
2) If time was infinite, the whole of time would not be preceded by a point of time.
3) This is a paradox, and hence time being infinite is impossible.



These are sufficient, even though there are more arguments. 

As for premise 2. That something that existed without time, had to cause it to come to being.

It can be argued that there is no more north to the north pole, but this suggests that there is no going back before the first point of time, but not that anything didn't ontological precede it or that it was always there and didn't need to come into being. Therefore it makes sense something without time brought it into being.

As for premise 3. That it needed will.

I take it as manifest that a physical thing cannot cause a wondrous thing as time to exist and just make it appear after not existing. This is clear and manifest, and just needs to be thought about. A lifeless force simply cannot do this. It has no magical power.

A being with will and magical power, is the only being capable of doing this.


So far this says nothing about the Creator other then what I stated (which wasn't much). However, I feel once you accept the Creator, things like the soul existing becomes more manifest to you and then with the signs of divine light and soul, you can witness divinity, the absolute source of greatness and absolute great Lord.

Peace.

You never got around to stringing 1, 2, and 3 into a logically valid form for assessment. When will you be making the argument for a creator, as claimed? What we have thusfar is a list of assertions and nothing more. What is it that you are hoping we conclude, and by what rule of inference?

[robvalue]

If time was infinite, the whole of time would not be preceded by a point of time.

This is a tautology, and why is it a problem? Why must there be a point in time before all other points in time?

I have no idea what "time came into being" is supposed to mean.

I take it as manifest that a physical thing cannot cause a wondrous thing as time to exist and just make it appear after not existing. This is clear and manifest, and just needs to be thought about. A lifeless force simply cannot do this. It has no magical power.

This is just an assertion based on your imagination and awe. The argument from incredulity. You can't imagine how something without a will that isn't magic could be this "creator". You don't need to be able to imagine things for them to be true.

But kudos for stepping up to the challenge, I don't know if I'm going to get any other takers.

[Mystic]

If time was infinite, the whole of time would not be preceded by a point of time.

This is a tautology, and why is it a problem? Why must there be a point in time before all other points in time?

There doesn't need to be a point of time before all point of time if time is finite, but all points of time in an infinite time line would have to be preceded by a point of time (that's by it's definition) yet at the same not be preceded by a point of time from perspective of it's whole being...so it's paradoxical as all points of time would be preceded by a point of time and not as well by definition.

[robvalue]

If time was infinite it would still have to be preceded by a point in time? Why? Because it's hard to imagine an infinite past? I agree with you there. Hard to imagine. Doesn't make it untrue, though.

If you just assume there must be a beginning, you're assuming your conclusion.

[Mystic]

This is just an assertion based on your imagination and awe. The argument from incredulity. You can't imagine how something without a will that isn't magic could be this "creator". You don't need to be able to imagine things for them to be true.

But kudos for stepping up to the challenge, I don't know if I'm going to get any other takers.

That was worded bad. What I'm stating is we know by the nature of physical things, that lifeless force, cannot bring something like time into being after it didn't exist. It's impossible. Irrational. And we know this.

If someone said "this dollar" creates my soul, you would ask him "do you believe it's a magical dollar? What's special about it?" You obviously know that he wouldn't be assuming a physical normal dollar can be creating your soul. And it's bad enough to believe in a magical dollar creating your soul, but it's beyond irrational to believe it has no magical power, no spirit, nothing, and it's creating his soul. The 2nd is a whole level of irrational higher then the former.

The same is true of a lifeless entity (physical thing) creating time.