RE: Christian in need of help (feeling uneasy about God quote)!!
May 22, 2017 at 12:59 pm
(This post was last modified: May 22, 2017 at 1:07 pm by Drich.)
(May 22, 2017 at 9:16 am)Alex K Wrote:(May 22, 2017 at 8:31 am)Drich Wrote: To "create" describes an object's beginning. Which is confined by time. Meaning the word create always and can only describe an object within the encapsulation of time. God simply existed before time. Before there were any celestial events to mark the passage of time. It is only with in the confines of time does the demand of a creator exist..
So where did God come from? IDK where did the super dense basketball of pre-big bang come from? Again before either event time there need not be a creation nor creator, as the beginning of time would make the first of anything.
The word :INFINATE is a good clue.
what does being outside of time mean to you? being retarded?
Imagine a dvd representing the whole of time. now imagine on that dvd you know it's contents like any favorite movie. now take the dvd outside the player and place it on the table. You are now outside the "time line" of the dvd. did you suddenly become retarded (anymore than normal I mean?) What I am asking now just because you do not live at any central point on that dvd does it mean you know any less or more of the history on that dvd?
Now to answer a couple others with the same analogy imagine on the same dvd everything had a creation or birthing point of some kind. Now if you created the DVD would your creation then also be required to be on that DVD? No As you and your origins are pre time. As I said the DVD contains all of time and if you have it then you are outside of that time line, that dimension.
I get what you're saying, and I've mentioned that idea elsewhere here - but apart from the fact that there is zero evidence for this complicated construction, you are only moving the problem by positing a new timeline for God in which He moves. This then raises the same question about the creation of God in that timeline rather than ours.
This aspect of Time is a concept sport. Not a science, it is a somewhat loosely define concept that we use to measure a span or age before known/recorded time. When speaking of a concept of philosophy or better yet defining an aspect or quality of this age one does not need "scientific proof.' just a solid understanding of the philosophy of time.
To demand proof of existence before time or even before recorded time not possible.
All I am saying here in order for an infinite God to work all one need understand is God is supposed to be the author of time, not a product of it. Which simply means, before time there was only God.
(May 22, 2017 at 9:17 am)Alex K Wrote:(May 22, 2017 at 9:09 am)Drich Wrote: Or a 14.2 billion old universe.. or a 20.1 or a 5.5 or a 3.8 or a 10.45 One of these days your all might 'science" will give you a absolute true number, (Or have you forgotten how many times your number has changed in the last 20 years???) but I doubt it will be before God tells it to a scientist bold enough to ask.
It's 13.8. The value has changed bc. the error bars have shrunk. You know, that thing completely unknown to religious thinking with which scientists tell you their own level of certainty?
The values changed because they were wrong before... As they will change again because they are wrong now as well.. You just haven't been told to think that way yet.
The point being your 'answers' are only absolute till someone smarter simply says so and points to his new theory and it all starts again. All I am pointing out is the sand beneath your feet is as shifting as the sand beneath ours.
(May 22, 2017 at 9:26 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: lol, the self-correcting process of science is exactly why it is not only more trustworthy, but crowding religious creation stories right off the table.
Takes an idiot like Drich to double down on fantasy and take a swipe at science ... typing on a computer ... online ...
The only useful purpose I've found for Drich is practicing insults, but it's not fun with him. He's so dense they go right over his head.
I love it when the Rosie O'donalds of the world pipe up and compare the science that makes a computer work as being the same fringe science that few this far out beyond the big bang in the scientific realm will ever agree on as being the same 'science..'
It just goes to show that one does not need to know anything about industrial sciences and untested scientific postulations to be 'atheist.'.
