Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #45 on: December 24, 2011, 12:14:32 pm »
choux wrote: A timeless God cannot move or do anything. A timeless God could not have created the universe.

What do you mean by "move"? God is outside of space. There is no "move", because there is no "here", nor "there".

But at any rate, you've proven the point. The very moment that first action is done, time exists. That because God is a mind that is capable of acting upon will, He can will something into actuality. A mere non-concsious entity could not do that, if it were timeless. They would be "frozen" in non-time.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

1

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #46 on: December 24, 2011, 12:21:06 pm »
Sparkling's first rebuttal is up. I just read through the first paragraph where Sparkling faults Michael for having his rebuttal -- be a rebuttal? Lol. Anyway, I'll get around to reading the rest of it soon.

Sparkling's post was about 4 hours late. But given the season that's acceptable. Nonetheless, Michael's next post (Rebuttal 2) is due within 12 hours of Sparkling's post. That is, by Christmas Day 12:44am (New York), Christmas Day 4:44pm (Sydney), and Christmas Day 5:44am (London).
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

2

sparkling

  • **
  • 145 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #47 on: December 24, 2011, 12:26:20 pm »
Archsage wrote: Sparkling's first rebuttal is up. I just read through the first paragraph where Sparkling faults Michael for having his rebuttal -- be a rebuttal? Lol. Anyway, I'll get around to reading the rest of it soon.

Sparkling's post was about 4 hours late. But given the season that's acceptable. Nonetheless, Michael's next post (Rebuttal 2) is due within 12 hours of Sparkling's post. That is, by Christmas Day 12:44am (New York), Christmas Day 4:44pm (Sydney), and Christmas Day 5:44am (London).

C'mon man, you can't expect him to post on christmas day. Relax dude.

3

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #48 on: December 24, 2011, 12:34:19 pm »
His will becomes frozen and locked down as He cannot interact with His creatures. Causality very well could be temporal.

When we say that God is timeless we mean that Time means literally nothing to Him. That there is no long or short, old or young in regards to God. When acting in a temporal world, God acts in a temporal world, yes. But that isn't to say that God Himself is not Timeless, lol. From our point of view God is temporal, only because we look at the things God has done, and not God Himself.

Just like, God, despite being non-spacial, can do something in a particular space, God, despite being non-temporal, can do something within a particular time. There is no contradiction here.

Now, all of this is off-topic unless the debaters really bring it up.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

4

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #49 on: December 24, 2011, 12:38:57 pm »
sparkling wrote:
Quote from: Archsage
Sparkling's first rebuttal is up. I just read through the first paragraph where Sparkling faults Michael for having his rebuttal -- be a rebuttal? Lol. Anyway, I'll get around to reading the rest of it soon.

Sparkling's post was about 4 hours late. But given the season that's acceptable. Nonetheless, Michael's next post (Rebuttal 2) is due within 12 hours of Sparkling's post. That is, by Christmas Day 12:44am (New York), Christmas Day 4:44pm (Sydney), and Christmas Day 5:44am (London).

C'mon man, you can't expect him to post on christmas day. Relax dude.

Lol you're right!

That's why I'm being very lax with the enforcement of the deadline. I'd still like to have the deadline known, however, mostly for the sake of future debates. But yeah, I'm not going to disqualify him or anything, if he doesn't post on Christmas day. And the same goes for you.

But post if you can. This is the first debate. It paves the way for future ones. Can't have this one "go to the dogs", as some people say.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

5

Jared Baker

  • **
  • 726 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #50 on: December 24, 2011, 12:55:44 pm »
Where did sparkling get the ridiculous notion that Michael is arguing that the existence [of the Christian conception] of God is absolutely certain? I doubt any of the philosophically inclined Christians here would make such a claim.
"I begin with the principle that all men are bores. Surely no one will prove himself so great a bore as to contradict me in this." - Søren Kierkegaard
"As soon as man began considering himself the source of the highest meaning in the world and the measure of everything, the world began to lose its

6

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #51 on: December 24, 2011, 01:01:06 pm »
Choux I don't see what you're seeing, then. In no way does this mean that the TCA fails.

Because the Cause *must* come first before the Effect (else it wouldn't be an effect). And an infinite regression of time is erroneous (as being illogical). Meaning that the first Cause would be where time begins. That is perfectly consistent with the TCA (and if I may go further) Genesis 1:1.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

7

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #52 on: December 24, 2011, 01:39:01 pm »
a) If X creates Y, then X must exist temporally prior to Y

Ok. So if Y is the Universe, it's X would be God's Will for Creation. And if Y was God's Will for Creation then it's X would be God Himself. God Himself has no X. So God Existed before creation of the Universe.

Now, if God did not do Y(will the creation of the Universe), then there would be no cause or effect. We could not say that Time exists. What this means is that Time cannot be said to exist before or even simultaneously with X. In order to know the existence of Time, we need a Y for some X.  

But because of Y, we know that time exists. Until Y begins, there is no Time.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

8

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #53 on: December 24, 2011, 02:06:42 pm »
Choux, let's look at units of time as a sequence of events. Each event (t) has a before and an after (if Time exists). If Time does not exist, then the even does not have a before and after.

So when does time start? Time must start when the terms "before" and "after" have actuality in meaning. If there was just God, there would be no time, as there is no before and after. That, is timelessness. Now, God wills creation. That, that is where time begins. Not in the effect, but in the cause.

You see, you've been saying there is an X that leads to a Y. But I don't believe that is accurate. There is a Source, S, of which a Cause X, leads to an Effect, Y. See, you saw time like this:

 --------                 --------
|           |  ------>  |           |
 --------                 --------
 Cause                    Effect

But I believe this is erroneous. Time is more accurately shown as the following:

 --------                 --------
|           |  ------>  |           |
 --------                 --------
 Source    Cause     Effect

The source alone does not call for Time. It isn't until the Cause that Time can said to begin. In that God would be the Source, and the Cause His Will, and the Effect is the Universe. God isn't a cause for Universes to exist -- it does not follow that God exists, therefore the Universe exists. But He is the source of that cause.

Time, then, starts with the First Cause, but not with the Source of that First Cause.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

9

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #54 on: December 24, 2011, 02:16:24 pm »
So the decision is the Cause, and the creation is the Effect.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

10

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #55 on: December 24, 2011, 02:31:39 pm »
You said "you cause your arm to move". That's nice and all, but is very vague. What is the cause and what is the effect?

Well the effect is your arm moving. The cause is what? You? No, as that would mean that as long as "you" exist, the effect would naturally flow out of it -- your arm would not stop moving. Rather, the cause is your choice to move. You, yourself, is the source of that choice. And nothing but you, yourself, will lead to that happening.

You are the source, the choice is the cause and the movement is the effect. This is true with all volition.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

11

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #56 on: December 24, 2011, 02:47:02 pm »
Choux wrote: Are you saying that God's choice is a seperate thing from Himself?

Yes, God's choice is not God. God's choice comes from God.

If something is like an abstract object it doesn't change or move. It's timeless and frozen. Since this is the case a timeless God cannot be personal.

God is not "like an abstract object". Moreover, God being "timeless" is to say that He is unaffected by Time. That there is no long or short, or before or after in regards to God. To Him there is only the perpetual Now. You are mixing up the concept of God's Timelessness to the issue of First Cause. They are two different things.

For in order to freely choose to create God would have to make a decision. This involves motion.

exactly, and that is where Time begins. For where there is motion and change, there is time. If there is no change or motion, there is no Time. Which means that before the Cause (God's decision) was only the Source, God Himself. The Source alone was not in a temporal state. Only until the cause existed did Time become actual.

“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

12

LNC

  • ***
  • 1216 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #57 on: December 24, 2011, 02:50:47 pm »
I'm really not sure what Sparkling's tactic is in this debate.  If he is about trying to implant doubt in the mind of the reader, which appears to be his only point, then he has still a long way to go.  He provides no real evidence for his case, other than that some scientists hold the view that the universe may not have had a beginning - so, what?  He then attacks Michael's (and other theists') certainty. But, I don't remember Michael or any other theist arguing that we are certain of anything as certainty is merely a psychological state that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with evidence.  I've met some people who are certain about their views, but wrong about them.  This is a bad tactic on Sparkling's part.

He also really didn't reply as to why Sagen's statement regarding extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence is valid.  I don't think it is.  Claims, extraordinary or not, require adequate evidence.  

I really didn't think, after reading Sparkling's first rebuttal, that he spent much time giving more than a cursory read of Micheal's rebuttal.

LNC

13

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #58 on: December 24, 2011, 03:01:51 pm »
Choux wrote: So, God's will is a seperate entity from God. This makes no sense. I thought God was made up of mind, will, and emotions.

What in the... God's not "made up" of anything, bro.

If God is outside time then He is just an abstraction.

I plainly disagree with this.

For without time there is no motion. Therefore God cannot move because He is timeless. If He doesn't move then He doesn't make decisions. If He doesn't make decisions then He's no longer personal.

Forget about Motion. Motion is about spacial entities traversing the spacial dimension. Now, without using that term, what are you trying to say?


“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

14

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Michael vs Sparkling Debate Discussion - "The Christian God Exists"
« Reply #59 on: December 24, 2011, 03:20:33 pm »
So, on your view God doesn't have mind, will, and emotions.

No. On my view, God is not His choice, and God is not His Will.

How can God freely choose to do something when He's not in space and time?

Remember what you said before? That for each Y there is an X, and that X is either simultaneous with Time or else within Time itself? That choice of God is that X. You don't need time to will something. But in order to Start willing something, time must at least begin right at that Start.

A non-personal entity could not do that. But a personal entity can will things.


“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal