You don't understand at all. A hypothetical question still works within the framework of logic and reason. You can't throw out assertions onto a figure you have yet to define, and then say that it answers the question. You have all your work ahead of you to demonstrate why a self-existent God is at all plausible and should be regarded as a reasonable answer to this question.
Right now, you're trying very hard to say that your answer of "he just is" is sufficient. I asked if the eternal attribute of God is at all logically possible, and you came back with "he's self-existent, so there". Zero explanatory value. Zero backup of assertions. Zero intellectual honesty.
Right now, you're trying very hard to say that your answer of "he just is" is sufficient. I asked if the eternal attribute of God is at all logically possible, and you came back with "he's self-existent, so there". Zero explanatory value. Zero backup of assertions. Zero intellectual honesty.
My blog: The Usual Rhetoric
