I am an orthodox Christian, ask me a question!

[Edwardo Piet]

I have explained all of this. Why Gods attributes are what they are, in numerous posts. But the specific ones you mention, are summarised in this post:

I've been through this and you've posted this enough times - this is not evidence! And scripture irrelevant here - arguing from scripture is fallacious - it's circular reasoning.

I know what you claimed. I skipped the word "being".

If you really know what I claimed you'll know I never misrespresented you and I have not commited the strawman fallacy. Unless you don't understand what a strawman is that is! Because I fail to see how you can assert to me that I'm making a strawman and I'm not...you're making a strawman out of me by doing this. Because I'm not misrepresenting you, you're misrepresenting me as such.

I didn't say you said explicitly he was temporal. Read what I said again.

Dude...look - I have read what you said it's not fucking rocket science here...you are claiming I'm at least implicity claiming it...that I'm implying it in some way....otherwise it's not a strawman! Because if I'm not in any way suggesting he's temporal then it's not a strawman because I'm not misrepresenting you.

What I'm saying is that temporal or nontemporal it makes no difference untill you provide evidence that it does. You keep pointing to posts....but can you actually give evidence please? And the bible is out the window here because that's fucking circular so don't poison your posts with that shit! Lmao.

You claim that if an atemporal being (actus purus) was temporal and arose from chance alone, this [being] would be complex.

..............no! Ever heard of hypothesising? How many times have I said that if he wasn't atemporal and was temporal he'd be complex...so I'm not talking about an atemporal God being temporal, that would obviously be a self-contradiction and I'm obviously not claiming that!! I'm saying that if he wasn't atemporal/nontemporal (Got that?! IF) then he would be complex....and if he is nontemporal/atemporal as you suggest...how is his complexity not analogous to if he was temporal? How is he any less complex? Untill you provide evidence you're just playing with words.

And by the way...you keep saying it's a strawman or non-sequiter on my part....you do realize that these things are basically completely different? A non-sequiter could be a fucking number of fallacies and you haven't pointed any out other than the strawman one....which I have refuted as by definition not being a strawman because a strawman is a misrepresentation - and I'm not doing that.

A non-sequiter means it 'does not follow' but what doesn't follow? It doesn't follow that I'm saying that nontemporal or temporal it makes no difference which untill you provide evidence that it does? I call that reason actually.

Again, you repeat exactly what I addressed. This discussion is worthless; you understand nothing.

I understand that you haven't provided one shred of valid evidence.

EvD