Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:29 pm**

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:18 pm The question is not ill-formed. If God as it is described in the Bible created the universe then there was a point that the creation did not exist. At that point you only have God.

The problem is in the word "point." Creation is a "point." But eternity is timeless, and has no "points."

Think about it this way. You and I are on the Earth. That's a "point" in the universe, right? But where is the centre of the universe? Are we at it? Are we not? How would we know?

We would only know, if the universe were bounded and finite. If it's infinite, then there is no sensible way to even talk about "the centre of the universe." The universe, if infinite, can have no "centre." Then, the "centre of the universe" would not be a point at all. It would be an attempt to impose the language of the finite on an infinite system.

That's what you're struggling with. You think that eternity-past can be regarded as a "point," and creation as another, with "time" as an overarching, transcendent reality above them. But that's not the right way to think about eternity, because time itself is created within the act of the creation of substance, is not eternal -- and eternity isn't a "point."

Posted: **Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:46 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:29 pm
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:18 pm The question is not ill-formed. If God as it is described in the Bible created the universe then there was a point that the creation did not exist. At that point you only have God.
The problem is in the word "point." Creation is a "point." But eternity is timeless, and has no "points."

Timeless or temporal. You cannot create time since the creation of time requires time.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:29 pm Think about it this way. You and I are on the Earth. That's a "point" in the universe, right? But where is the centre of the universe? Are we at it? Are we not? How would we know?

We would only know, if the universe were bounded and finite. If it's infinite, then there is no sensible way to even talk about "the centre of the universe." The universe, if infinite, can have no "centre." Then, the "centre of the universe" would not be a point at all. It would be an attempt to impose the language of the finite on an infinite system.

That's what you're struggling with. You think that eternity-past can be regarded as a "point," and creation as another, with "time" as an overarching, transcendent reality above them. But that's not the right way to think about eternity, because time itself is created within the act of the creation of substance, is not eternal -- and eternity isn't a "point."

I am not talking about eternity since to me it is a misconception. Again, if God created the universe then there is a point that the universe didn't exist. At that point you only have God. What is wrong with this argument.

Posted: **Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:53 pm**

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:46 pm You cannot create time since the creation of time requires time.

No, actually, it doesn't. It can "require" no time, if time itself does not yet exist! That's the point.

I am not talking about eternity since to me it is a misconception.

That's the problem. You can't conceive of eternity, so you're trying to make it a kind of "time" in your thinking. But it isn't.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:02 am**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:53 pm
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:46 pm You cannot create time since the creation of time requires time.
No, actually, it doesn't. It can "require" no time, if time itself does not yet exist! That's the point.

I am not talking about eternity since to me it is a misconception.
That's the problem. You can't conceive of eternity, so you're trying to make it a kind of "time" in your thinking. But it isn't.

You are evading my argument. Was there a point that universe didn't exist? If yes then God was alone at that point. Otherwise, there is no need for God.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:08 am**

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:02 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:53 pm
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:46 pm You cannot create time since the creation of time requires time.
No, actually, it doesn't. It can "require" no time, if time itself does not yet exist! That's the point.

I am not talking about eternity since to me it is a misconception.
That's the problem. You can't conceive of eternity, so you're trying to make it a kind of "time" in your thinking. But it isn't.
You are evading my argument.

No, I'm just trying to correct the error in thinking that keeps you imagining it IS an argument. It's actually not even coherent, I'm sorry to have to say. I mean that kindly, but you'll find it's just not coherent, once you understand that time is a creation and eternity is not a point. In fact, the whole thing depends on you treating eternity as a "point."

It's not.

So you're left with only one "point," that of creation, at which time comes into being, along with space and matter. And since there is no "distance between one point," there is no interval between eternity and creation.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:12 am**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:08 am
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:02 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:53 pm
No, actually, it doesn't. It can "require" no time, if time itself does not yet exist! That's the point.

That's the problem. You can't conceive of eternity, so you're trying to make it a kind of "time" in your thinking. But it isn't.
You are evading my argument.
No, I'm just trying to correct the error in thinking that keeps you imagining it IS an argument. It's actually not even coherent, I'm sorry to have to say. I mean that kindly, but you'll find it's just not coherent, once you understand that time is a creation and eternity is not a point. In fact, the whole thing depends on you treating eternity as a "point."

It's not. So you're left with only one "point," that of creation, at which time comes into being, along with space and matter. And since there is no "distance between one point," there is no interval between eternity and creation.

So, the universe existed at the beginning? If that is true then what God did? What is the meaning of creation ex nihilo?

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:16 am**

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:12 am So, the universe existed at the beginning?

No; "creation" refers to all that exists in the material world.

God is spirit, says the Bible. He is not a mere part of the material world. He transcends it. He can act into it, but only because He is greater than it. He is the Creator; it is only the creation.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:21 am**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:16 am
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:12 am So, the universe existed at the beginning?
No; "creation" refers to all that exists in the material world.

If no then there is a point that creation didn't exist. At that point only God exist.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:16 am God is spirit, says the Bible. He is not a mere part of the material world. He transcends it. He can act into it, but only because He is greater than it. He is the Creator; it is only the creation.

None of these claims helps you. You neither accept that the universe existed at the beginning nor otherwise.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:31 am**

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:21 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:16 am
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:12 am So, the universe existed at the beginning?
No; "creation" refers to all that exists in the material world.
If no then there is a point that creation didn't exist.

Of course.

At that point only God exist.

You can't call it a "point." It's eternity. Eternity prior to creation had no materials, so no "points," and no space, so no intervals and no time.

You neither accept that the universe existed at the beginning nor otherwise.

Actually, I think I've been very clear: the universe is not eternal. It has a beginning. Did I not say that?

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 7:43 am**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:16 am
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:12 am So, the universe existed at the beginning?
No; "creation" refers to all that exists in the material world.

God is spirit, says the Bible. He is not a mere part of the material world. He transcends it. He can act into it, but only because He is greater than it. He is the Creator; it is only the creation.

"God is spirit, says the Bible" which is from God?? Circular!

Reality is all-there is, and for theists, includes the supposed-God which logically and rationally has to be part and parcel of all-there-is.
If God is part and parcel of all-there-is [reality] which include the physical and humans, God cannot transcend all-there-is.

Theists cannot explain the exact mechanisms and processes of how God [non-material] will the material into existence.

The problem is theists [ incl. Immanuel Can] simply assumes God exists as real, create the Universe and is separate from the Universe, which is in essence based on faith.

Fact is, the idea of a God is ASSUMED and reified to be real, and that process emerged and is adapted within humans because the idea of God [illusory] is very effective as a consonance in soothing the cognitive dissonance arising from an existential dilemma.

To maintain consonance and avoid the terrible dissonance, theists will find all sort excuses [as in your case above and elsewhere] to justify their belief in that illusory God they have to cling on to.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 3:55 pm**

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 7:43 am Reality is all-there is, and for theists, includes the supposed-God which logically and rationally has to be part and parcel of all-there-is.

Non-sequitur. It does not follow.

"All that there is" may include things that are eternal. Or, as you insist, it might not. But that's the vexed question, and you do not have evidence to show it is your way. I think you make an illegitimate amphiboly between your term "all that there is" and the idea of strict Materialism. That's not a legitimate move, if those terms are not coextensive.

So you would have to prove that they are coextensive. But you cannot. So your argument does not work.

Theists cannot explain the exact mechanisms and processes of how God [non-material] will the material into existence.

This is only to say, "Theists cannot exhaustively explain God." Did you expect that any contingent, limited, mortal creature would be able to do that?

If that objection were reasonable, we could also argue, "Materialists cannot explain things like the size of the universe or the nature of consciousness; therefore, their view cannot be right."

Would you accept logic that weak?

Then don't ask anyone else to.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:07 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:31 am
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:21 am
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 12:16 am
No; "creation" refers to all that exists in the material world.
If no then there is a point that creation didn't exist.
Of course.
At that point only God exist.
You can't call it a "point." It's eternity. Eternity prior to creation had no materials, so no "points," and no space, so no intervals and no time.

You neither accept that the universe existed at the beginning nor otherwise.
Actually, I think I've been very clear: the universe is not eternal. It has a beginning. Did I not say that?

I care not for what eternity is and whether it is true. The act of creation obviously has two points, nothing then something. You need time for this to happen. There is no time when there is nothing. Therefore, God has to create time to create time. This is regress. Regress is not acceptable. Therefore, there is no God.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:24 pm**

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:07 pm The act of creation obviously has two points, nothing then something.

Well, aside from the obvious fact that you're position a "nothing" as a "something" there, i.e. as a "point." You've still got this problem...

You need time for this to happen.

In the material world, yes; but the material world does not exist in the "nothing," as you call it, meaning eternity-past, and neither does time, and there are no "points."

I can see that right now you're just having trouble grasping the implications. I don't blame you. Eternity-past is not like the material world...it cannot be, if, as we observe, the material world is a contingent and created one. Time is a feature of this contingent, created, material world. But we humans are accustomed to think of time as transcendent, because we always experience it as "bigger" and more lasting than we are. However, time does not exist where there is no "materiality." (Indeed, we should not even use the word "where," since it illegitimately imports the idea of a space or place, which eternity is not.) And since time is not transcendent but depends on materiality, it is manifestly a feature of the created world, and did not exist prior to the Creation point.

When we say Creation was "ex nihilo," one of the things that that implies is that it took no time at all.

If Creation had been out of a pre-existing material reserve, it would have taken time. That's why the subsequent creation is described as "days," (meaning really "eras" or "phases" rather than calendar days, since no means for the calculation of lunar or solar days existed at first, and because calendar days are a human invention.) The subsequent stages or phases of the Creation came out of the materials created in the first stage, and thus did take time: however, the initial "ex nihilo" event did not take even a millisecond...

Creation from nothing takes no time. There were no milliseconds for it to take.

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 8:17 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:24 pm
bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:07 pm The act of creation obviously has two points, nothing then something.
Well, aside from the obvious fact that you're position a "nothing" as a "something" there, i.e. as a "point." You've still got this problem...

You need time for this to happen.
In the material world, yes; but the material world does not exist in the "nothing," as you call it, meaning eternity-past, and neither does time, and there are no "points."

I can see that right now you're just having trouble grasping the implications. I don't blame you. Eternity-past is not like the material world...it cannot be, if, as we observe, the material world is a contingent and created one. Time is a feature of this contingent, created, material world. But we humans are accustomed to think of time as transcendent, because we always experience it as "bigger" and more lasting than we are. However, time does not exist where there is no "materiality." (Indeed, we should not even use the word "where," since it illegitimately imports the idea of a space or place, which eternity is not.) And since time is not transcendent but depends on materiality, it is manifestly a feature of the created world, and did not exist prior to the Creation point.

When we say Creation was "ex nihilo," one of the things that that implies is that it took no time at all. If Creation had been out of a pre-existing material reserve, it would have taken time. That's why the subsequent creation is described as "days," (meaning really "eras" or "phases" rather than calendar days, since no means for the calculation of lunar or solar days existed at first, and because calendar days are a human invention.) The subsequent stages or phases of the Creation came out of the materials created in the first stage, and thus did take time: however, the initial "ex nihilo" event did not take even a millisecond...

Creation from nothing takes no time. There were no milliseconds for it to take.

Does any act have a before and after? If not what is supposed to happen?

Posted: **Fri Jan 01, 2021 8:30 pm**

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 8:17 pm Does any act have a before and after? If not what is supposed to happen?

"Before" and "after" are terms that refer to either space or to time.

So what do you mean by "any act"? It can only mean, "any action within time and space." But Creation ex nihilo did not come from within time and space; in fact, it created both. In eternity-past, there was neither time nor space to precede the Creating event. So there was no "before" in the sense you understand the word "before" -- meaning in the sequence and interval between two material things or events within fixed space.

Philosophy Now Forum

How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?

Re: How religion does succeed in changing people minds in mass?