Aliens

[gracedwithlife]

Eternity is not a duration. You cannot use the mere fact that it is eternity to come to the conclusion that I would have happened sooner.

If you, along with many atheists, propose an infinite regress of cause and effects then by definition of an infinite number of past cause and effects, you would have had an infinity to come into being before now, so you should have already happened. Therefore, nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated.

God provides this proof of Himself by observing nature that is simple enough for all to understand so that you are without excuse when He sends you to Hell for rejecting His only begotten Son.

There's also the hidden assumption here that I can only happen once.

It is explicit fact, nothing hidden, that the you that you are now in this moment is the only moment that you are you now.

Without that temporal structure, nothing can create the universe

Your theory is not supported by the evidence, for nature, both its space and time, can't always have existed, for if they had you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so.

[Hakurei Reimu]

Eternity is not a duration. You cannot use the mere fact that it is eternity to come to the conclusion that I would have happened sooner.

If you, along with many atheists, propose an infinite regress of cause and effects then by definition of an infinite number of past cause and effects, you would have had an infinity to come into being before now, so you should have already happened.

Eternity is not a duration. You cannot use the mere fact that it is eternity to come to the conclusion that I would have happened sooner.

If you want to propose different, let's see some math. Not rhetoric, math. Define what it means for me to "have already happened," and prove it with mathematical rigor.

There's also the hidden assumption here that I can only happen once.

It is explicit fact, nothing hidden, that the you that you are now in this moment is the only moment that you are you now.

The current instance of me obviously is, but it does not preclude the possibility that I have happened before and don't remember it. Until you're able to get me to agree that I have happened once and only once, your proof fails. So let's see some math.

Without that temporal structure, nothing can create the universe

Your theory is not supported by the evidence, for nature, both its space and time, can't always have existed, for if they had you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so.

The only time that is proven to exist is the time of the universe, which does not apply to the theoretical exo-verse that the universe supposedly exists within. Without a temporal structure in that exo-verse, any discussion of the cause of the universe is empty rhetoric. First prove that temporal structure of the exo-verse, then you get to talk about causes of the universe.

[gracedwithlife]

You cannot use the mere fact that it is eternity to come to the conclusion that I would have happened sooner.

You would, indeed, have happened already if you had an infinite regress of cause and effects to come into being before now.

The current instance of me obviously is, but it does not preclude the possibility that I have happened before and don't remember it.

You that you are now could not have happened before because now is now not before.

The only time that is proven to exist is the time of the universe, which does not apply to the theoretical exo-verse that the universe supposedly exists within.

They are all subject to the law of cause and effect so that you would have happened already having had an eternity to do so in your alleged past eternity.

[Hakurei Reimu]

You cannot use the mere fact that it is eternity to come to the conclusion that I would have happened sooner.

You would, indeed, have happened already if you had an infinite regress of cause and effects to come into being before now.

Prove it. You take this as a shared assumption. It is not. Prove it.

And an infinite past ? infinite regress.

The current instance of me obviously is, but it does not preclude the possibility that I have happened before and don't remember it.

You that you are now could not have happened before because now is now not before.

Let's see your maths. Prove that there have not been previous instances of me.

The only time that is proven to exist is the time of the universe, which does not apply to the theoretical exo-verse that the universe supposedly exists within.

They are all subject to the law of cause and effect so that you would have happened already having had an eternity to do so in your alleged past eternity.

Prove that the universe would be subject to the law of cause and effect. Keep in mind that the law of cause and effect is an induction on observations taking place within the universe.

Do you know the difference between an induction and a deduction?

[Sal1981]

You cannot use the mere fact that it is eternity to come to the conclusion that I would have happened sooner.

You would, indeed, have happened already if you had an infinite regress of cause and effects to come into being before now.

And happened again, an infinite amount of times. Now, the present moment, is just between infinities from before the present moment and what will become, if you believe your own argument.

Just because you believe in infinite regress, doesn't exclude the possibility for the same event to happen twice or more, the current universe's configuration notwithstanding.

[gracedwithlife]

Prove it.

The proof was already given....

If you want to suggest an infinite regress of cause and effects to reject God, then you would have had an eternity to come into being before now, so you should already have happened. Therefore, nature needs a cause outside itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated Whom we call God.

[Hakurei Reimu]

Prove it.

The proof was already given....

And I have already dismantled it.

Look, I know you think that your proof is perfect, but it isn't. I have already outlined what is wrong with it, and there is so much wrong with it. You have done nothing to address those flaws, instead you have simply swept my criticism under the rug and pretended that they are not a problem, instead of addressing them. That annoys me.

[gracedwithlife]

I have already dismantled it.

Not at all. Everyone knows that if you want to introduce an infinite regress of cause and effects you are introducing a past eternity, therefore, by definition you had an eternity to come into being before now, so you should have already happened. Since that contradicts your existence now, nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated Whom we call God.

[aitm]

Is this the same creator god that made a woman so filthy that he demanded they be set outside society when they have their period?
Is this the same creator god that can't beat another army because they had iron wheels on their chariots?
Is this the same creator god that says the sky is water and the moon is a light and the sun was created after the plants on earth?
Is this the same creator god that claims there is a dragon inside the earth capable of gathering a third of the stars in his tail and flinging them to earth?
Is this the same creator god who proclaims there shall be no other god but me and then creates another one?


meh, me thinks you give too much credit to your god, if there is a god that created the universe it sure as hell wasn't your piece of shit one.

[gracedwithlife]

Is this the same creator god that made a woman so filthy that he demanded they be set outside society when they have their period?
Is this the same creator god that can't beat another army because they had iron wheels on their chariots?
Is this the same creator god that says the sky is water and the moon is a light and the sun was created after the plants on earth?
Is this the same creator god that claims there is a dragon inside the earth capable of gathering a third of the stars in his tail and flinging them to earth?
Is this the same creator god who proclaims there shall be no other god but me and then creates another one?


meh, me thinks you give too much credit to your god, if there is a god that created the universe it sure as hell wasn't your piece of shit one.

God of the Bible is the one you can't find a naturalistic explanation to account for the eyewitness testimony of the Apostles.

[Hakurei Reimu]

I have already dismantled it.

Not at all. Everyone knows that if you want to introduce an infinite regress of cause and effects you are introducing a past eternity,

An infinite change of cause and effect is not an infinite regress.

therefore, by definition you had an eternity to come into being before now,

Again, simply asserted, but never proven. I know it seems like common sense to you, and it is, but common sense has historically been very bad dealing with infinity. Mathematical rigor is your only way to deal with it.

Rest dismissed.

[gracedwithlife]

An infinite change of cause and effect is not an infinite regress.

By infinite regress I mean an infinite cause and effects into the past.

[Hakurei Reimu]

An infinite change of cause and effect is not an infinite regress.

By infinite regress I mean an infinite cause and effects into the past.

Well, that's not what infinite regress means. You insist on using it because of the perceived prejudice that it invokes.

[gracedwithlife]

An infinite change of cause and effect is not an infinite regress.

By infinite regress I mean an infinite cause and effects into the past.

Well, that's not what infinite regress means. You insist on using it because of the perceived prejudice that it invokes.

That is what infinite regress means: an eternity of the past of cause and effects what atheists try to introduce to replace God which fails of course since you would have already happened having had an eternity to do so.

[Hakurei Reimu]

That is what infinite regress means: an eternity of the past of cause and effects what atheists try to introduce to replace God which fails of course since you would have already happened having had an eternity to do so.

Infinite regress means that there is an infinite chain of propositions. Events are not propositions.