RE: Arguments Against Creator God
December 2, 2017 at 10:32 pm
(This post was last modified: December 2, 2017 at 10:32 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(December 2, 2017 at 10:11 pm)Grandizer Wrote:(December 2, 2017 at 9:44 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Grand, I don't understand your response to me. My existence began in 1986 when my dad's sperm and my mom's egg came together and formed my DNA, which prior to that moment, did not exist. That, we do have proof of.
What do you mean by eternalism?
I don't understand you saying that I have always existed. It makes no logical sense to me.
When you say it makes no logical sense, what you really mean is that it is not intuitive to you, not that you have been able to use logic to debunk it. Again, intuition and logic are two different things.
Anyway, eternalism is philosophy to do with the nature of time, and it has implications regarding the nature of reality itself as a result. If you want to know more about it, you'll have to do some Googling, but the gist of it is that time is not how we normally intuit it. Time, under eternalism, doesn't flow from past to present to future. Rather, it is just simply a coordinate (or dimension) of a "frozen" reality that presently contains not just all the whereabouts and locations in this present instance of time, but also those of past and future instances of time. They all exist simultaneously and have always been. That's what I mean when I say you have always existed.
You are looking at it from the angle of the "present-you" and assuming an actual flow of time. When I say we have always existed, I am looking at it from the angle of a hypothetical (and illogical) "outside observer", observing a 4D (or more) sort of unbounded "block" that is called "reality" or "cosmos".
Ok. I think I get the gist of your beliefs as much as I can. You're right, it makes 0 sense to me lol. I'll stick with the belief in a non physical force unbound by the laws of nature. Seems much more plausible imho.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh