ETERNITY BEFORE CREATION.....THE NON-EXISTENCE.....of GOD!

by Terry 92 Replies latest watchtower bible

Pubsinger

Are there no opinions here on the possibility of the existence of an Eternal Being?
RAF

before anything to everything there must have been something (and that's the thing weither you believe in evolution or creation) = THE POTENTIAL (ESSENCE)
I'm going to put it AGAIN shorter :
So From one point (resumed at it maximum) to talk about a begining :
Bible statement (to take a religious example)
God the essence of everything with a spirit began to create at its maturity (by its Christ = maturity).
Forget about the Genesis account it's a story to make it short and understandable for people back then.
it's like everything had the potential to exist but just wasn't ready when not ready ... (like anything not ready yet)
Science statement
A cell (I call it like that its simple) began to evolve since it had a chance to means somehow at its maturity (ready to).
But here we have a probleme with missing material (as potentiallyfrom one cell and from what this cells comes if not the potential to be that) to build everything and moreover when you have to take this in consideration about human being with missing links (means no proof) to lead from a point to another in beetween species.
What's in RED here means the same actually …
Now you have to realise that everything (even things that we don't know about yet certainly) do existe - so all from a cell or essence (it have to be essence anyway = the potential)
Also we have a spirit (able to love and hate which have something to do with love) is it so hard to link it to the fact that the essence of everything do have a spirit?
It's not a conclusion it's an opinion ...

So the title and all the questions raised in the first post are just well ... PFFFFFFFFFF
Title : ETERNITY BEFORE CREATION.....THE NON-EXISTENCE.....of GOD!
(it's not about eternity) you juste have to take into consideration a potential anyway at some point to lead to an other point (weither you believe in evolution or creation). for instance potential of not being limited and developpe whatever can be (so evolution or creation really looks the same to me - I just put hasard out of it - and just think that everything = God - knows better with it's own maturity = Christ about everything at any point) - so you can take it conceptually or religiously it stays a matter different ways to see things and get to the point.
Cindi_67

Hey Cindi
How's it going? Been awhile, hope all is well.
I read "A Brief History of Time" a long time ago. Good book, wouldn't mind rereading it actually.
Take care.
Hi Twitch:
Everything going very well. How are you? Interesting subject this one isn't it? Love to talk about these things. I do believe that there is a God. It's just that to me he is still very far away, and I wonder what really is going through his mind about us humans. The Society makes him very loving and very demanding at the same time. When analizing all these, I think that there is a lot us humans do not understand about God, and therefore anything we think he is, he might not be. All these pagan religions, with all their gods, some of them very loving and some of them very violent and demanding are just a reflect of what religions have portrait God to be, and I think JW's are a little bit influenced by this beliefs as well, they just would not admit it. The Bible does give two faces of God. Why do we feel that the pagan religions have it all wrong about God, when even the Bible gives some disturbing accounts of God's rage from time to time? They might have gone too far, but their beliefs are based on tradition and word of mouth. They just over extended their imagination and split God into many gods, each one based on his personality and traits. I do not go as far as to believing he does not exist, but I do question they way we have been taught he is.
Pubsinger

Terry
You have gone very quiet on this thread.
Are you conceding that, regardless of other lines of arguement you may have for the non-existence of God, this one is actually very weak if not fatally flawed?
Eternity before creation does not mean that an Eternal Being could not exist.
It means that an Eternal Being possibly hasn't created eternally.
However there is a further possibility.
An action performed in eternity or an "eternally performed" action.
For example if you asked an Eternal Being what it's first thought was, could it reply "I have always thought"
And if you asked an Eternal Being what it's first action was, could it reply "I have always been active"
If that is possible then you're initial post doesn't hold any water.
donkey

BEFORE God began creating.......he wasn't a CREATOR.
He was but he CHOSE not to be. Get it?
BEFORE God began creating.....there was nothing......and therefore nothing TO KNOW.
He knew but he CHOSE not to know. Get it?
BEFORE God began creating...there was nothing and nothing to know....and therefore nothing to LOVE.
He chose not to love that which didnt exist because he chose for it not to exist. Get it?
BEFORE God began creating...He was alone with nothing to distinguish him from nothingness except--what? His mind? Filled with what, actually?
He CHOSE not to be filled. Although he wasn't empty either because he chose not to be empty. Get it?
So if Gold is almighty can he create a rock that is so heavy that he could not lift it?
Of course he could he would just choose not to lift it.
Terry

Terry
You have gone very quiet on this thread.
Are you conceding that, regardless of other lines of arguement you may have for the non-existence of God, this one is actually very weak if not fatally flawed?
Eternity before creation does not mean that an Eternal Being could not exist.
It means that an Eternal Being possibly hasn't created eternally.
However there is a further possibility.
An action performed in eternity or an "eternally performed" action.
For example if you asked an Eternal Being what it's first thought was, could it reply "I have always thought"
And if you asked an Eternal Being what it's first action was, could it reply "I have always been active"
If that is possible then you're initial post doesn't hold any water.
I feel like a dance instructor with a quadraplegic class.
Eternity before creation does not mean that an Eternal Being could not exist.
You don't even understand the argument, do you? If you did, you couldn't ask this question.
An action performed in eternity or an "eternally performed" action.
For example if you asked an Eternal Being what it's first thought was, could it reply "I have always thought"
You see, words have to have definitions and context to have any meaning whatsoever. You don't get it.
Dare I try to explain again?
1.For the word "God" to have meaning it must have not only a definition, but, an ostensible referent. Otherwise, it is just a made up concept WITHOUT instantiation. Like Wookie or Peter Pan.
2.The religious definitions of God are quite specific. (Eternal, All-Powerful, Omniscient, Creator, etc.)
3.The only thing ostensible about God is the source material which describes His activities.
4.The Christian God is described in the bible. (Peter Pan is described in the Play by Barrie. The Wookie is described in Star Wars by Lucas, etc.)
5.In my opening post I referenced the usual descriptions of who/what God is.
6.I took the definitions about God and placed them in a very specific context: pre-creation and asked how God could match those definitions JUST BEFORE He began creating.
That is an extraordinarily lucid and specific set of circumstances. My conclusion was that God ceases to be describable as God if He has not yet created anything. Then, I offered for consideration the idea that a pre-creation God wasn't God at all. Consequently, the God we all (think we) know could not exist pre-creation.
It then follows that man must be the author of the defined God we all know from the Bible.
That is my argument.
Now you come along and offer an "Eternal Being" who says "I have always thought". And I'm sure you think that makes sense.
Well, not only does it not make any sense whatsoever; it fails to be even a comprehensible thought!
To think requires what? It requires an OBJECT of thought. One must place before the mind something.
Where does that leave you PRE-creation?
To posit an Eternal Being you have to demonstrate that this Being exists as something (as opposed to nothing but a figment like Peter Pan or the Wookie.) Then, there must be events going on for Time to have any context.
Further, this Being must possess identity. In what way can a Being exist without a consciousness of self that has no objects of thought? God's identity is a comparative without anything to compare God topre-creation.
It gets worse!
To be "God" requires an observer who is NOT God. Otherwise, God is just merely an "only" and not comparatively greater than someone/something else.
This "God" is without description, definition, consciousness of self as an object of thought and not greater than anything at all (since nothing exists yet!)
You see, the concept keeps disintegrating right before our eyes.
Words have to have ostensible definitions in order to communicate meaningfully. A word like "God" to mean anything must be very specifically realized.
You can posit anything you like; a giant tortoise swimming in eternity and be just as intelligible as you've already been.
It is mind fluff and not honest discussion.
Here is a cold and brutal fact.
IF YOU CANNOT DEMONSTRATE what you insist exists actually exists then you are just jaw-jacking.
God talk is just jaw-jacking.
God could not BE without identity and a comparative being to be better than, smarter than, wiser than, older than, etc.
Without any EVENTS to trigger a measurement between there is no Time in which God can be ETERNAL.
And so forth...
Really, I know I'm wasting my time here explaining this.
You think you can legitimately offer arguments without instantiation and they are every bit as good as arguments which have logic and instantiation. And, you are wrong my friend. Wrong wrong wrong.
"Roundness" is an actually demonstrable phenomenon which can be instantiated. The sides of a round figure must all be the same distance from center. There you have it: Roundness becomes instantiated by demonstration, defintion which gives identity and instantiation by measurement.
"God" is NOT an actually demonstrable phenomenon which can be instantiated. Why?
Can you supply the reasons?
Terry

This would be one reason why some choose to beleive that the minimum number of persons needed to make a godhead would be three. It would take one to give, one to receive and one to observe and objectify so that the statement could be made "God is love". Again I'm applying the term "God" to refer to the substance rather than the individual person[s].
Little Toe understands perfectly.
Thank you.
Terry

BEFORE God began creating.......he wasn't a CREATOR.
He was but he CHOSE not to be. Get it?
Before I sing I'm the greatest singer in the world. But, I choose NOT to sing. Get it?
BEFORE God began creating.....there was nothing......and therefore nothing TO KNOW.
He knew but he CHOSE not to know. Get it?
Before I begin speaking and writing I am the smartest person on the planet. But, I choose not to. Get it?
BEFORE God began creating...there was nothing and nothing to know....and therefore nothing to LOVE.
He chose not to love that which didnt exist because he chose for it not to exist. Get it?
I choose not to love what doesn't exist: God. Get it?
BEFORE God began creating...He was alone with nothing to distinguish him from nothingness except--what? His mind? Filled with what , actually?
He CHOSE not to be filled. Although he wasn't empty either because he chose not to be empty. Get it?
So if Gold is almighty can he create a rock that is so heavy that he could not lift it?
Of course he could he would just choose not to lift it.
Since you don't understand the Primary thing that must be understood here I'll go ahead and tell you.
There is an actual difference between our imagination and reality. Yes, there really is.
In some instances we can imagine something which can be built or painted or sung or otherwise DEMONSTRATED and, thus, instantiated by an action which translates imagination into a work identifiably REAL.
In other cases, our imagination can never be taken and put into the real world no matter how hard we try, or hope or dream.
If you can't see the difference between POSSIBLE and IMpossible you are in a world of hurt.
Potential vs Actual.
Real vs Imagined.
Identity vs non-entity
You cannot define a GOD into being in terms of what He hasn't done.
Can't you grasp that?
Pubsinger

This would be one reason why some choose to beleive that the minimum number of persons needed to make a godhead would be three. It would take one to give, one to receive and one to observe and objectify so that the statement could be made "God is love". Again I'm applying the term "God" to refer to the substance rather than the individual person[s].
Little Toe understands perfectly.
So do I.
I am making a very clear distinction between "God/Creator" as a desciption of an Eternal Being's title/role/actions and "God" as the nature/substance of the Eternal being.
2.The religious definitions of God are quite specific. (Eternal, All-Powerful, Omniscient, Creator, etc.)
You said you didn't want to have a discussion which was umbilically linked to a book of fairy tales (or words to that effect)
6.I took the definitions about God and placed them in a very specific context: pre-creation and asked how God could match those definitions JUST BEFORE He began creating.
No you didn't. You said that Eternity before creation proves the non-existence of God.
Were you actually saying that eternity before creation proves that God hasn't always been a "Creator"? IF SO I'D AGREE
That is an extraordinarily lucid and specific set of circumstances. My conclusion was that God ceases to be describable as God if He has not yet created anything. Then, I offered for consideration the idea that a pre-creation God wasn't God at all. Consequently, the God we all (think we) know could not exist pre-creation.
So you are saying that he didn't exist as in "void - never there" or didn't exist in the form/role of God/creator but exists as a being?
To be "God" requires an observer who is NOT God. Otherwise, God is just merely an "only" and not comparatively greater than someone/something else.
Wait wait . . . it's becoming clearer . . .
You ARE saying he WOULD exist as an "only"
THAT'S WHAT OTHERS HERE ARE SAYING.
Sorry thought you were saying he COULDN'T (in the realms of possibility) exist as a being.
ONE LAST THING.
In my first post I said that I didn't know you.
I DO NOW. YOU ARE OBNOXIOUS. FOR PROOF SEE THE END OF THIS POST.
STILL IT HAS TRULY BEEN AN ENLIGHTENING EXPERIENCE. I NOW SEE THE LIGHT THROUGH YOUR WORDS OF WISDOM
AND I WILL NOT ENGAGE WITH ANYONE WHO POSTS THE BELOW
I feel like a dance instructor with a quadraplegic class.
Terry

And if you asked an Eternal Being what it's first action was, could it reply "I have always been active"
This "conversation" could only occur during the lifetime of the non-god questioner.
A concept such as "eternal" is pretty meaningless in connection with being.
For something to exist it must be something.
Re-read my first post. God couldn't exist before he created.

ETERNITY BEFORE CREATION.....THE NON-EXISTENCE.....of GOD!

Share this