Philosophy Now Forum

Same problem. You are kidding. Don't you? The term "alone" implies the pre-existence of a kind of place . "Alone" means, "being in a place where there is nobody." By alone I mean that there was only God and nothing else. When you say, "There was..." which &qu...

Bahman: Immanuel Can: . Bahman's question is like questioning "How do you prove that 2=2=4? " You don't set out to prove a tautology. God is tautologous with good. God =good. Evil is absence of good. God can't be neutral, neither good or bad, because God is absolute good. Or you might say...

Was God alone before the act of creation? Same problem. You are kidding. Don't you? The term "alone" implies the pre-existence of a kind of place . "Alone" means, "being in a place where there is nobody." By alone I mean that there was only God and nothing else. But if...

Bahman: You are not answering my question: How could you prove that God is not Neutral or Evil? Immanuel Can: It's a flawed question. You can't presume a "neutral" or "evil" conception without already referring to an objective standard you don't have . Bahman's question is like ...

There’s the first error. “Creation out of nothing” means there was no “point,” because a “point” marks the existence of substance. You can’t use the concept “point” when there is no “thing” for the “point” to be in or to refer to. And you certainly can’t use it of time, since time actually is not c...

Sorry...yes. Apparently not. You're using a framework that assumes the existence of an essential feature of the universe ("time") to account for the origin of the universe (and thus, of time). The explanation fails, because it's simply circular. Time cannot be a feature of the creation of...

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 21, 2022 11:29 pm Watch out bahman IC is trying some shit Craig tried on Harris one time. He's tryna convince you that all talk of morals, relative or not, would be meaningless is 'god' didn't exist.

Ok, dude.

Then your third point falls apart. No. Sorry...yes. ...we have to accept that any act requires time Apparently not. You're using a framework that assumes the existence of an essential feature of the universe ("time") to account for the origin of the universe (and thus, of time). The expla...

Before there was a universe, there was no such thing as time or space. They are part of what had to be created. Yes, I agree. Then your third point falls apart. No. You can't indict something for "taking time" when there was no "time." That is the problem. That is the regress in...

Point 3 is your problem: "act" and "time" are assumed to be within a universe . But the universe has not yet been created, in that case, since you're trying to explain the origin of the universe. You can't use the terms of a physical universe to explain how the universe has thos...

No, nothing can be "causeless" that is not eternal. Did you read my argument against the act of creation of everything? Point 3 is your problem: "act" and "time" are assumed to be within a universe . But the universe has not yet been created, in that case, since you're...

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Jul 21, 2022 1:36 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 20, 2022 11:36 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Wed Jul 20, 2022 10:33 pm

That's a shame.

Yes. Anyway, I am not sure that one can take a photo of such an experience.

You may be sure that photos, works of art and great literature, and some stumbled-upon experiences include epiphanies . JC is not the only epiphany.

True.

Nothing to something is possible. No, nothing can be "causeless" that is not eternal. Did you read my argument against the act of creation of everything? So they're not the Supreme Being; they, themselves are contingent. There is a Supreme Being among them. No, I don't mean there's just a...

First of all, yes. Give me an example. Secondly, statements use words but not all uses of words form a statement. That I am aware of. Try any mathematical proof for an example without words. Yes, but one uses symbols in a mathematical proof. A symbol is not a word but it has a meaning.

Harbal wrote: ↑Wed Jul 20, 2022 10:33 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 20, 2022 10:29 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Wed Jul 20, 2022 10:19 pm I don't suppose you managed to get a photo, did you?

No.

That's a shame.

Yes. Anyway, I am not sure that one can take a photo of such an experience.