Now and before.

[Angrboda]

The special case is what I would go for, in terms of the existence.
That's why we can't define God; only he can define himself.

I think you mean 'special pleading', not 'special case'.  Special pleading is a logical fallacy.

If we can't define God, then we can't even think about God, it's as simple as that.  Try to think about anything - poetry, a cheese sandwich, a duck, anything at all - without having defined it first.

Boru

Bollocks. Words are slippery things that we have but an evanescent grasp upon. If I were to ask you to give me a definition of 'table', your definition would include things that are not tables, and exclude things that clearly are tables. The idea that if you can't define it that you can't think it is bogus. We have plenty of words about which we only have vague 'feelings' of applicability without any definite definition. The major definitional themes of what God is or means are laid out fairly plainly by the world's major religions. That is as much as we ask for any other word that we use, yet for God the standard applied is different. That's just an example of special pleading.

As long as you gave the example, define 'poetry' without quoting a dictionary.

---

I take it that you are in support of the "big bang" as scientific fact. Yet there are secular scientist who have considerable doubt about this assumed fact.

Name six.

Big Bang Theory Busted By 33 Top Scientists