A god who existed forever

[Mike M.]

As my mind is really bogged down with studying for finals right now, I can't say that I'll be able to articulate my thoughts wonderfully, or even if this idea will make sense, but I'll try to present it to you.

My thought was, if god existed forever, couldn't we have never reached today, since there was an infinite amount of time before now in which god existed?

I think it makes sense, but I don't think it would be useful in debating a theist.  Whenever I bring this or the exclusiveness of omnipotence and omniscience up to my dad, he just replies, "God transcends time, normal rules don't apply."  In turn, whenever I ask him how he knows this, he simply replies, "Because the Catholic Church teaches it."  I was actually surprised the first time I heard him say this, as he is an extremely logical person, and even considered himself an agnostic a while back.  I've been trying to sway him away from religion for a while now  

But anyways, at this point I'm just rabbling on, so....have at it.

[Kylyssa]

I would skip that argument.  I'm an atheist and it doesn't work for me because it is when it is, obviously.

I wouldn't try to argue with someone like that, actually.  When their answer is, "Because the Catholic Church teaches it" there's not much chance you'll get through.

[Mike M.]

I wouldn't say we argue as much as just have casual debates.  That's actually the response that is the most "typical Christian" from him.  Most of his other points, although not founded in any fact, do at least make a better attempt to be logical than many many many other theist's arguments I've heard.  Some I've even been unable to respond to.  But about the god that existed forever, I wouldn't even think about using it in any serious debate.  As seen, a simple "time doesn't apply to god" will easily sidestep, at least in the eyes of the theist, the argument.

[Jack's Disciple]

My thought was, if god existed forever, couldn't we have never reached today, since there was an infinite amount of time before now in which god existed?

I think it makes sense, but I don't think it would be useful in debating a theist.  Whenever I bring this or the exclusiveness of omnipotence and omniscience up to my dad, he just replies, "God transcends time, normal rules don't apply."  In turn, whenever I ask him how he knows this, he simply replies, "Because the Catholic Church teaches it."  I was actually surprised the first time I heard him say this, as he is an extremely logical person, and even considered himself an agnostic a while back.  I've been trying to sway him away from religion for a while now  

That God transcends space and time is a fairly standard part of the definition of God.  God is posited as the cause of space and time themselves, and in order for that to be possible God must be "outside" of both.  (You cannot paint a picture if you are already in it.)  Interestingly, your argument that an infinite amount of time is an absurd concept is regularly used as part of some form of cosmological argument.

[Jack's Disciple]

I would skip that argument.  I'm an atheist and it doesn't work for me because it is when it is, obviously.

I wouldn't try to argue with someone like that, actually.  When their answer is, "Because the Catholic Church teaches it" there's not much chance you'll get through.

A fruitful line of attack might be to ask why the Catholic Church has any authority on truth.

[Joe Klooski]

As my mind is really bogged down with studying for finals right now, I can't say that I'll be able to articulate my thoughts wonderfully, or even if this idea will make sense, but I'll try to present it to you.

My thought was, if god existed forever, couldn't we have never reached today, since there was an infinite amount of time before now in which god existed?

I think it makes sense, but I don't think it would be useful in debating a theist.  Whenever I bring this or the exclusiveness of omnipotence and omniscience up to my dad, he just replies, "God transcends time, normal rules don't apply."  In turn, whenever I ask him how he knows this, he simply replies, "Because the Catholic Church teaches it."  I was actually surprised the first time I heard him say this, as he is an extremely logical person, and even considered himself an agnostic a while back.  I've been trying to sway him away from religion for a while now   Simple  

[elliebean]

Anyways, yes that is true. Infinite time means that nothing could ever existed because it would take infinity to get there.

Unless everything had always existed and things had always been happening.... er, right?  

[Mike M.]

According to this logic, though, things couldn't have existed forever, because by  the same thought process, it would take an infinite amount of time to get to today.  Very interesting.

[TheJackel]

According to this logic, though, things couldn't have existed forever, because by  the same thought process, it would take an infinite amount of time to get to today.  Very interesting.

This is false, and I can simply prove it without much effort.

1) -1 energy is not possible
2) -1 spatial space is not possible
3) everything including empty space is all energy... The universal set of all sets is energy itself from zero base energy (which is likely not measurable)..
4) Energy self-osculates and is also the reason why absolute zero is impossible according to the 3rd law of thermodynamics.
5) existence exists because non-existence can not be a literal person, place, thing, object, or substance... Hence, it can not have mass, matter, or energy..
6) E=MC2 means all energy can convert into matter and all matter can convert to energy. Hence, everything is made of energy!.. A simple example via analogy is that water converts to Ice and Ice converts to water.. And this is essentially a literal example as well.
7) You can pretty much define a GOD as only the source origin of existence itself without needing to imply it's some conscious deity.. In this case we can state that Energy is GOD, and it's infinite in volume, and represents all time and space, or all mass, matter, and energy..
all information is completely comprised of energy
9) you can not even so much as think, communicate, or do anything without energy.
10) It takes more cause to support consciousness than it does to support unconsciousness, and thus any conscious deity, life form, or thing can not be the source origin to time, and space, or existence!

So when I hear a theist try and state that their deity is outside of time, space, and material physicality, all I can do is sit and wonder why they can't comprehend that they are basically saying their GOD exists in a place of no place to which is comprised of no time, substance, or material, and doesn't have any space to exist in.. This is essentially telling us that their GOD doesn't exist while they claim it exists LOL.. Hence, theists are talking self-contradictions, and they don't even realize it :O

[Jack's Disciple]

1) -1 energy is not possible
2) -1 spatial space is not possible

What do you mean here?  What is "-1 energy" and "-1 spatial space"?

[TheJackel]

1) -1 energy is not possible
2) -1 spatial space is not possible

What do you mean here?  What is "-1 energy" and "-1 spatial space"?

Energy can not exist in the form of a negative existence.. Hence a -1 energy is literally not possible just as a -1 spacial space is not possible.. Can you collapse a sphere into a negative existing sphere, aka -1 dimensional sphere? NO, because it's not possible. You can not have capacity to have existence, or contain anything in a negative capacity. This is why non-existence can not exist as a form of an existing person, place, thing, object, or substance. To put in simple terms, existence exists because the opposite simply doesn't and is impossible to literally exist.

1) Trying to state that -1 energy exists is like trying to state that a non-existing substance can exist as a substance. This is simply not possible. Hence, this is like saying nothing can be a substance .

2) Stating that a -1 spatial space or -1 dimensional space can exist is like saying non-existing space can exist as a space of existence.. Well, that isn't possible either..

Now our "Universe" has been measured to be flat with only a 2% margin of error.. This shows that our observable Universe is shaped like a disk much like our own Milkyway galaxy floating about in a much larger spatial space, or volume of space.. And since a -1 dimensional space is impossible most agree that space or the unobservable Universe that extends beyond the Observable Universe is likely infinite in volume.. Hence most of space is entirely zero base energy. And this would be regardless of how many dimensions one might think there are, or aren't.. The fact remains that everything is entirely comprised of energy.

So the magical questions I can use to completely debunk the notion of a GOD that created everything is as follows:

1) What is your GOD made of? It surely can't be nothing.
2) Where did this substance come from if your GOD can't create so he himself can exist?
3) What boundaries separate you as an individual from said being?
4) Mind containment? What contains your GOD's mind apart from yours?
5) Where? Every mind requires a place to exist in, so where is your GOD in relation to you, us, or Earth?
6) How does you GOD design and create a place so he himself can exist, or be ->IN<- existence?
7) Time is a fickle thing, How does one create time without taking the time to create it? Without forward inertia there can be no thoughts, choices, or decisions to be assessed, processed, and executed.
How does one design and create knowledge, and information giving one would be slave to it and in need of it just to know oneself even exists? So where does information really come from?

There a ton of questions I can lay out that totally devalues the notion of a "Creator", or "GOD".. Sorry, no being can be the source origin of existence when itself is slave to the need of existence and the substance of existence in order to exist, or even be aware that itself exists.. It's Folly, pure and simple.

[KDbeads]

Negative values of energy and space are not possible.

Wait, he got here before me...  

[Jack's Disciple]

Energy can not exist in the form of a negative existence..

From what you have written, it's not clear to me that "negative existence" is even a meaningful concept.  What does "-1-dimensional" actually mean?  Can you have "2-dimensional existence" or "3-dimensional existence"?  What exactly is the connection between existence and dimensionality that you are implicitly referring to?  Basically, I haven't a clue what it is you're talking about.  

[Tank]

sits back to watch the fun, don't mind me.

[Jack's Disciple]

:pop: sits back to watch the fun, don't mind me.

I have a feeling this is going to be the most mind-boggling thread ever.  Negative existence, "self-osculating energy", ...   :hmm: