I get your question and I answer it. You are looking for criteria which I have given you, feelings. Now it is your turn: Does God know His nature?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:01 pmI can see you don't. But I guess that, if you want to, you can go back over my messages and read them carefully. Eventually, maybe you'll get it.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:51 pmI understand yours if you let me know.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 8:42 pm
Because you can't even understand mine, apparently; so I think I've gone to "a well that's dry," so to speak, and there's evidently no point in trying any further. I'm not trying to frustrate you. But neither can I get something from you, if you can't understand the question.
Hope springs eternal.
A reason for existence of God
Re: A reason for existence of God
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 22528
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: A reason for existence of God
"Feelings"? The way you know what evil is, is by reference to your own "feelings"? And that's supposed to convince everybody else that you're right?bahman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:05 pmI get your question and I answer it. You are looking for criteria which I have given you, feelings.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:01 pmI can see you don't. But I guess that, if you want to, you can go back over my messages and read them carefully. Eventually, maybe you'll get it.
Hope springs eternal.
C'mon, B.; you can't possibly believe that. And if you can, nobody else can.
Re: A reason for existence of God
I think what I said to you is correct. Believe it or not. Now it is your turn: Does God know His nature?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:21 pm"Feelings"? The way you know what evil is, is by reference to your own "feelings"? And that's supposed to convince everybody else that you're right?bahman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:05 pmI get your question and I answer it. You are looking for criteria which I have given you, feelings.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:01 pm
I can see you don't. But I guess that, if you want to, you can go back over my messages and read them carefully. Eventually, maybe you'll get it.
Hope springs eternal.
C'mon, B.; you can't possibly believe that. And if you can, nobody else can.
Re: A reason for existence of God
I have tried a lot of times too. I took my pick before, It did not exist and then existed. But before the time actually did become existant, we can not say anything about it. See, whatever "was before", when God wanted time to exist, God almighty said be it and it became at once. Time started and creation started. And now God is Loving us through orderly and Logical universe with positively weighing 1's and 0's. God almighty and the most Loving is all I need.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:03 pmThis is the last time I try: Either time existed and non-existed at the point of creation or it didn't exist and then existed. Take your pick. Which one?
I tried to pour all my ideas so not to be questioned one by one.
Re: A reason for existence of God
But when you use "then" it means that the act of creation requires time!K1Barin wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:29 pmI have tried a lot of times too. I took my pick before, It did not exist and then existed. But before the time actually did become existant, we can not say anything about it. See, whatever "was before", when God wanted time to exist, God almighty said be it and it became at once. Time started and creation started. And now God is Loving us through orderly and Logical universe with positively weighing 1's and 0's. God almighty and the most Loving is all I need.
I tried to pour all my ideas so not to be questioned one by one.
Re: A reason for existence of God
Let me correct my English. Second line, But what was before the time that time actually did become existant, ...K1Barin wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:29 pmI have tried a lot of times too. I took my pick before, It did not exist and then existed. But before the time actually did become existant, we can not say anything about it. See, whatever "was before", when God wanted time to exist, God almighty said be it and it became at once. Time started and creation started. And now God is Loving us through orderly and Logical universe with positively weighing 1's and 0's. God almighty and the most Loving is all I need.
I tried to pour all my ideas so not to be questioned one by one.
Re: A reason for existence of God
I don't know, do you think so? Can you talk about the state of before time.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:32 pmBut when you use "then" it means that the act of creation requires time!K1Barin wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:29 pmI have tried a lot of times too. I took my pick before, It did not exist and then existed. But before the time actually did become existant, we can not say anything about it. See, whatever "was before", when God wanted time to exist, God almighty said be it and it became at once. Time started and creation started. And now God is Loving us through orderly and Logical universe with positively weighing 1's and 0's. God almighty and the most Loving is all I need.
I tried to pour all my ideas so not to be questioned one by one.
Re: A reason for existence of God
I don't understand what you're saying/asking here. Can you rephrase it?
There are lots of differently imagined unseen gods and always have been. Logically, this points to gods as being products of man. You are saying that logic points to a loving god. There is nothing logical about this. There is not a consistently visable/known god, nor is there a loving entity taking care of all the suffering people in the world. No one is intent on saving us from ourselves or anyone else... and no one is going to condemn us. We may like to think or wish otherwise, but it might be best if we embrace the experience with more awareness and flexibility than pretending there's a god in charge.
As I explained above, the reality that humankind lives in does not match your claim of a loving god. Nor does it match all of the imaginings of other gods over human history. So many imaginings and claims from the minds of men, and none have ever made themselves fully and consistently known. Instead, men continually make up excuses for why that must be so... and then they continue to make ridiculous claims! It's not logical... and it's ridiculous when theists try to claim that their beliefs are based in logic.
- Immanuel Can
- Posts: 22528
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm
Re: A reason for existence of God
I know you think that. I believe you do. I also know you're totally wrong, and your answer isn't any good. But I also know I'm not able to convince you of that, because I can see you don't even understand the problem with your view.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:29 pmI think what I said to you is correct. Believe it or not.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:21 pm"Feelings"? The way you know what evil is, is by reference to your own "feelings"? And that's supposed to convince everybody else that you're right?
C'mon, B.; you can't possibly believe that. And if you can, nobody else can.
So we're stuck.
Re: A reason for existence of God
Yes, I think so.K1Barin wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:41 pmI don't know, do you think so?bahman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:32 pmBut when you use "then" it means that the act of creation requires time!K1Barin wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:29 pm
I have tried a lot of times too. I took my pick before, It did not exist and then existed. But before the time actually did become existant, we can not say anything about it. See, whatever "was before", when God wanted time to exist, God almighty said be it and it became at once. Time started and creation started. And now God is Loving us through orderly and Logical universe with positively weighing 1's and 0's. God almighty and the most Loving is all I need.
I tried to pour all my ideas so not to be questioned one by one.
No, but that statement means that you need another time for the creation of time. This as I mentioned in my original argument leads to regress. Regress is impossible. Therefore the act of creation is impossible.
Re: A reason for existence of God
Does God know His nature?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:45 amI know you think that. I believe you do. I also know you're totally wrong, and your answer isn't any good. But I also know I'm not able to convince you of that, because I can see you don't even understand the problem with your view.bahman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:29 pmI think what I said to you is correct. Believe it or not.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 9:21 pm
"Feelings"? The way you know what evil is, is by reference to your own "feelings"? And that's supposed to convince everybody else that you're right?
C'mon, B.; you can't possibly believe that. And if you can, nobody else can.
So we're stuck.
Re: A reason for existence of God
Likewise your claims have no reason to back them up. Just like a fanatic theist and his claims. You are just saying that a Loving God is ridiculous and not Logical. When "some theists try to claim that their beliefs are based in Logic", they bring reasons for it. And some atheists (not all) just call it all ridiculous. Some atheists and true some theists just claim this and that, and call each other illogical and ridiculous, but they don't engage in a reasoning conversation. They basically have the same behavior. It is not all that theists and atheists have their own character and that is just what they are.Lacewing wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 11:31 pmI don't understand what you're saying/asking here. Can you rephrase it?
There are lots of differently imagined unseen gods and always have been. Logically, this points to gods as being products of man. You are saying that logic points to a loving god. There is nothing logical about this. There is not a consistently visable/known god, nor is there a loving entity taking care of all the suffering people in the world. No one is intent on saving us from ourselves or anyone else... and no one is going to condemn us. We may like to think or wish otherwise, but it might be best if we embrace the experience with more awareness and flexibility than pretending there's a god in charge.
As I explained above, the reality that humankind lives in does not match your claim of a loving god. Nor does it match all of the imaginings of other gods over human history. So many imaginings and claims from the minds of men, and none have ever made themselves fully and consistently known. Instead, men continually make up excuses for why that must be so... and then they continue to make ridiculous claims! It's not logical... and it's ridiculous when theists try to claim that their beliefs are based in logic.
Imagination or anything else, I have a good feeling and I think I have a good reason for it, and I want to share. Just that. Now if you can not take it, you may or may not have reasons to bring. About feeling, I am not sure how calm and confident and comfortable and happy that is going to make you.
Re: A reason for existence of God
That's why I am saying you need an almighty God, to create time at once, with no need of time to create time.
By the way Bahman, at least you are pursuing a reason for your disbelief of God.
Re: A reason for existence of God
I want to get to Bahman's reason for disbelief of God more.
Although this topic was supposed to be a discussion of my reason to believe in a Loving God based on positive weight of 1 and 0 of Logic. And it got all cluttered up and Bahman's reason for disbelief of God based on regress in time popped up. But I want to pursue argument about his reason now.
God is creator not producer. When we humans "create" an artwork, we don't create it out of nothing; actually we produce it which ofcourse takes time. Creating things from nothing includes from no time. God has created time from nothing too, which does not need time. So there is no regress.
Although this topic was supposed to be a discussion of my reason to believe in a Loving God based on positive weight of 1 and 0 of Logic. And it got all cluttered up and Bahman's reason for disbelief of God based on regress in time popped up. But I want to pursue argument about his reason now.
God is creator not producer. When we humans "create" an artwork, we don't create it out of nothing; actually we produce it which ofcourse takes time. Creating things from nothing includes from no time. God has created time from nothing too, which does not need time. So there is no regress.
Re: A reason for existence of God
But any act requires time. You aleady agree with this.K1Barin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 2:11 pmThat's why I am saying you need an almighty God, to create time at once, with no need of time to create time.
By the way Bahman, at least you are pursuing a reason for your disbelief of God.