(May 13, 2016 at 8:43 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(May 13, 2016 at 8:02 am)The Reality Salesman Wrote: Do you see that there is a counter intuitive quality in making statements such as this? When you say that God decided to create "x", you imply a state in which God existed, but "x" did not, and then an event occurs that leads to a state where both God and "x" exist. If something is "timeless", there is no timeline or series of events. You have to reconcile this or revise...
Actually, my understanding is; that is part of the argument for a personal cause or one capable of intention. And if time is relational to the physical world, and not separate, then also for a non-physical cause.
The questions, and I don't think we have any point of reference to answer them, is can a non-physical entity act outside of time. However, if the evidence points to a beginning of time, then I think that the answer has to be yes. Otherwise we wouldn't be asking the question "why is there something; rather than nothing".
Not everyone is asking that, as it might be a completely nonsensical question in the first place. Putting "why" in front of it doesn't necessarily render it legitimate. It's kind of like question begging I think.
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
