(August 14, 2018 at 9:12 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(August 14, 2018 at 8:52 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: If God exists eternally in the past, he's a past-infinite himself, and the same argument against the universe ever occurring because the past is infinite applies to God. Making God 'timeless' is clearly an attempt to have your cake (eternal God) and eat it too (can somehow begin a universe without time being involved beforehand). It has the advantage of sounding profound and the disadvantage of not making any additional sense if you think about it for ten seconds.
Thanks for clarifying my mistake. There is some scripture which suggest that God is not bound by time and interacts with time differently, but it’s not nearly as strong as his eternalness. In any case, this doesn’t remove the arguments against a past infinite number of events, and not being able to traverse an infinite. If time is a physical property of the universe (which I believe), then it would have began with the universe. It would also follow that something which is non-material, would not be constrained by time if it is a physical property.
Then you are using a definition for the word "exists" that is completely incoherent.
Existence is necessarily temporal and spacial. So, how can your god exist without a space, or without any time to do it in?
If you are defining existence in such a way that does not require time or space, please explain.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.