Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Well first you said 1)always existed or 2)was created. Now you have modified #2 to include something from nothing. I can still think of things that don't fit either, since there seems to be a limitless number of things that can be conjectured. But why don't you just start with 1)always existed or 2)didn't always exist? A lot simpler and won't require this constant goal post moving.
"Well first you said 1)always existed or 2)was created. Now you have modified #2 to include something from nothing."
They are saying the same thing Again this proves your critical thinking skills need improvement because if something came from nothing doesn't that imply it was created?wouldent that be a starting point? but i am explaining 2 different concepts your way is only explaining one of the 2 i would say that would make it easier to understand but not the full story if you only said always existed or not you leave out the whole explanation of the concept of something coming from nothing.
You are playing with word salad. For some people, created would not be something coming from nothing. For other, it might be. Others will tell you something can't come from nothing, and others still will tell you that it happens every day. If you start with word salad the best you can hope for is word salad in the end.
And I can do without the innuendo that I don't have critical thinking skills or that I'm dishonest. Please stop that non-sense.
You was giving a poor example of me modifying my stance and i explained that i have not but worded differently the meaning are still the same that is a tactic to rephrase sometimes people get a better understanding.
Andrewcgs:
Scientists like to think that the moon was once a piece of the earth that was sheared off in a dramatic collision. If this is the case then the moon was created, but not from nothing. Everything was already there for the moon to be created, it just needed the cataclysmic collision that sparked it into being. This is very different to "something from nothing" and neither does it fit the "always there" conclusion because although the particles that make up the moon were always there, the moon itself was earth.
A very simple example but you must first define "created" before you can say something either was or wasn't and saying that "created" = "something from nothing" is an obvious fallacy. Adam himself was created from dust, not nothing, didn't you read Genesis? But, of course, then we have a fundamental problem because what did He create the dust from, or why did He need the dust that He already created from nothing in order to create a man? What's so special about dust anyway? Was it beach dust or desert dust?
I think I'll leave it there and go have a whiskey .... bottle.
My definition of created is something that has a starting point.
That definition doesn't suit. A race or journey has a starting point. If the moon was made from earth was its starting point when the earth came together or when it was split apart? Now you have to define your definition so start again. Define created.
That was my original point that everything that exist has to fit in the category of one of those two ways you can use this philosophy with EVERTHING, try it everything physical and non physical can be judge by this system. Either it has a starting point,it always existed, or nothing exist you guys have not said another way every attempt has fit in the category of the ways i have explained already i simply ask for another way which has yet to be done!
I have difficulty making sense of your run-on sentences but you seem to intentionally miss what I am saying. You say that things which exist must either be created or always exist. I say that is wrong. I have never seen anything created. I have seen buildings built, I have seen pools dug and river-bottoms dredged. I have seen many types of construction and destruction but I have yet to see anything "created" and since you have yet to put a reasonable definition to that word I would say that you have not seen such things either.
So I propose that anything which exists either always existed or was constructed from raw materials that already existed. Nothing is ever "created" unless you have a definition of that word that makes sense, which up to now you seem to intentionally avoid expressing. Just as The Pragmatic says, it is a loaded word, and until you define it, it means nothing to us.
My definition of created is something that has a starting point.
Nyarlathotep-" i can still think of things that don't fit either, since there seems to be a limitless number of things that can be conjectured."
You have failed to name a single 1 that didn't fit in the 2 ways that i have claimed to be the only ways for existance. You have tried though but they fit in the category of one of those 2 ways so you have yet to give me another way(just one i have little faith you can do so) that dont fit in the category or 1 of those 2 ways.
Mitzelplix the magic elf is born in a universe that has a finite beginning, he travels back in time and alters history so it has an infinite history. But then changes his mind and reverses this, then reverses the reverse, etc.
The universe appears to have a starting point, but instead the starting point is part of an infinite cycle, but the infinite cycle was born from a starting point, which was created from an infinite cycle. So we have an infinite recursion of starting points. Does not seem to fit either category since you can always go back to a finite start, or an infinite cycle, depending on what you want.
The universe created itself from nothing then created an infinite past before this point. So it has a finite starting point and an infinite past. Does not seem to fit either category.
I can make these up all day. How many do you want?
Are you joking?do you realize that in you example you only use the 2 ways that i stated something can exist, from nothing , or something that infinite! I dont think you realize that but you have done that every time you give and example of another way its actually not other ways but one of the two ways i have stated. Now this is were honesty kicks in if you dont agree with with that fact your not being honest here and this conversation is pointless.but the fact is you did not give another example of existence but in some wierd said the 2 ways that i said are the only ways. I hope the game your plays is fun!
I noticed you didn't sort those ideas I posted into either of your two categories.
I DEFINITELY HAVE! Either you haven't seen what i have replied which i think is very unlikely or your HONESTY is up for judgement you might be incapable of being truthful because you want the credit of being knowledgeable which is just not wise and proving that you need some growth in your critical thinking skills as i have said its sad to say but you cant evaluate information honestly and the conversation is useless. THIS IS WERE I DESTROY YOU A CHAIR,PLANET,TV,CAR,ME,GOD,YOU ,UNIVERSE,SUN,MOON,MULTIVERSE, EVERYTHING for example has only 2 possibilities of existence ethier they have starting points or they always existed. The 3rd possibility which is NOT a possibility of existence but a possibility is NOTHING would exist if neither one of those 2 ways to exist are accurate. there would be no way for something to exist, you have gave examples of existence that is not different than the two ways THAT IM AM CLAIMING not even realizing that which implies that you can't do it. but still try to stand tall in quick sand, if you was a lwayer you defendant would be fried! this philosophy is universal and applies to everything you can imagine which i have proven above and you have said yourself dont make me get the quote, i have a feeling you might not be honest about that.
"destroyed by logic and honesty!"
I'm still not seeing it.
"Nyarlathotep Andrewcgs - "or nothing exist at all"
make sure you add this one as well"
This proves you aren't thinking logically or honestly because that might be the most insane thing i ever heard and proves that your not looking for substance but looking to point out were im wrong which is funny cuz i knew that 1 was coming. You cant be counted as a way to exist if nothing exist at all which you said i should add that to my 2 ways for something to exist smh hilarious!
Andrewcgs - "your not looking for substance but looking to point out were im wrong"
Actually I agree with that. I am examining your premises. The conclusion of an argument is only as good as its premises. Garbage in, garbage out.
Perhaps our perception of time is too limited. Maybe time moves in more than one direction, and therefore infinity can exist.
Andrew, you seem convinced that if you, personally, are unable to imagine something, it cannot be. There are only two ways something can exist? Hmmm....
You pose your thoughts, ask for folks to poke holes in your postulation, and then greet those responses with derision. That seems to be your m.o. So what are you actually after? I'll admit, you have me down right confused.
You also seem completely fascinated with, and committed to, armchair philosophy. Perhaps you should consider embarking on an education in it and do the work necessary to become a credentialed expert.
CyberLN ok its simple name another way something can exist other the the 2 ways that i have claimed to be the only ways. It real easy to prove me wrong but yet nobody has done so even when i ask family and friends nobody can do it so let hear it!
WOW OMG CRICKETS nobody even attempts to name another way for existance then the 2 ways i claim are the only ways.i challenge anybody to shut me up and nobody response like i said its simple name another way seems that so for no one can do that which is making me feel like i have something close to truth until im proven otherwise smh idk why i bother sharing knowledge sometimes.
Nyar JUST DID!
"Mitzelplix the magic elf is born in a universe that has a finite beginning, he travels back in time and alters history so it has an infinite history. But then changes his mind and reverses this, then reverses the reverse, etc.
The universe appears to have a starting point, but instead the starting point is part of an infinite cycle, but the infinite cycle was born from a starting point, which was created from an infinite cycle. So we have an infinite recursion of starting points. Does not seem to fit either category since you can always go back to a finite start, or an infinite cycle, depending on what you want.
The universe created itself from nothing then created an infinite past before this point. So it has a finite starting point and an infinite past. Does not seem to fit either category."
Do you even read what people write?
Smh he only said 2 way something that is infinite and something that has a starting point which is my 2 ways. I ask for another way something can exist.
Andrewcgs,
Imagine a line that begins with 0 and goes to T (today). Every point on that line represents a moment of existence, with T being now. We could also put in the negative numbers to represent all times before time = 0. So, our line represents eternal time from an infinite past to the present moment.
Now, we apply your two cases as we look at some object. Either it has always existed or else it was created, and we will call time = 0 its creation point in this time line. But there is yet another possibility. Take away the 0 moment of time. (We're not actually destroying that moment of time. We are merely considering a new object that existed at the same times as the previous one (from 0 to T) except that it did not exist at time = 0) So, our object has existed from time = 0 to the present moment time = T, except that it did not actually exist at time = 0.
The interesting thing about the remaining line is that it has no first point! There is no point right next to 0. Therefore, the object has no creation moment in time! Our object does not have infinite existence, but neither does it have a creator since no creation moment exists for it!
Greensnake i confused are you saying 0 existed or not?
0 is just the name of that point of time as depicted on the time line. We could use another name if 0 bothers you in any way. We could make time = 11 the creation moment for the first object. The second object exists at every moment the first object did except at t = 11. At t=11 the first object was created, but the second object was not yet in existence. It came into existence immediately after t=11, but there is no moment of time immediately next to (adjacent to) t=11, so the second object has no creation (starting) date and, therefore, no creator.
Greensnake
I stated multiple times there only 2 ways something can exist but 3 possibilities. The 3rd possibility is that there is nothing but that is not a way for something to exist. is that what you are implying in your example? If there is no moment in time adjacent to t=11 how would object 2 exist? So its 3 possibilities and only 2 are in existence object 2 would have to have a starting point, always exist or it doesn't exist at all. You didn't explain another way something can exist you only stated it has no starting point
so what about the other 2 possibilities?
What I gave you is a 4th possibility, an object that is finite in existence but has no first point of existence! Therefore, it has no creation date. You would need to know a bit about math to make sense of it. Have to run now. Get back to you later.
Greensnake "an object that is finite in existence but has no first point of existence! Therefore, it has no creation date."
Always=infinite right?so something that can always exist aka infinite is 1 of the 2 ways i have claimed and it has no creation date which is the other way i have stated notice you only use the ways i have stated to even judge your example.therefore its not a 4th possibility because something that is infinite is one of my 3 possibilities and your example fits into the category of 3 possibilities i have stated!
Pages