In the beginning God or nothing?

Originally posted by black beetle
Since you appear to think that a singularity is "something that comes from somewhere" it is obvious to me that either intentionally or unintentionally you 're unable to offer a solid argument.
Therefore I have to ask you: how do you define "singularity"?
😵

I define it as something made up by people who do not have a clue
how everything came into being.
Kelly

Originally posted by black beetle
Nope;

I said we do not know where the singularity came from, the farest we can trace is the existence of the singularity. We have already traced it based on elements of reality, but you appear to ignore it😵

Again, you followed something through time billions of years and it
ended up in a singularity, OR you look at the universe as it is now
and you see what is here and say if it did this for X amount of time
it would lead to this?
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I define it as something made up by people who do not have a clue
how everything came into being.
Kelly

Then our fruitful converstion is clearly over!

Have a good time KellyJay😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Then our fruitful converstion is clearly over!

Have a good time KellyJay😵

You too.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
You seem to limit everything as being in the singularity for some
odd reason as if you know that were true, why is that?
Kelly

What was outside of God before God created anything? How long did God exist before God created time?

I limit everything to being everything, in whatever condition, including that of a singularity as described by blackbeetle. Even if science is wrong about the nature of the singularity, I would still not think that that warrants a leap into the kind of dualism that drives—yes, drives—your questions.

The universe is not like a jar containing bugs. Once one has described all the things, forces and relationships that comprise the universe, there is nothing left to explain—such as “Yes, I know how stars and elephants and all that got here, but what about the universe itself?” Now, science may not be able to describe and explain all that, but it is not logically impossible. So, if the singularity is the condition of the universe prior to which we cannot understand, that still does not require (or even warrant) the question of where did the singularity come from—or however you want to word such questions.

You are not satisfied with the everything just being the everything—because that does not fit your understanding of God. That’s why you said that God, for you, is not the “all-in-all”. You have to have a God that is separate from everything else, a God that is necessary while all else is contingent. That’s what theistic dualism is; and it is what you have insisted upon since I’ve known you. That view of God and the universe cannot even speak of a “totality”.

Now, since that view leads people to talk about such things as a God that is a being that “exists eternally outside of time and space”—and other such nonsense—I conclude that it is nonsense. That does not mean that I think every possible view of a God is nonsense, but strict dualism is. None of you dualist theists are able to talk about God without talking nonsense—but you won’t give up trying to talk about God, even if it means talking nonsense!

You have been repeating yourself over and over for years now. I’ve been here. And it isn’t that nobody’s answered you. It’s that nobody has given you an answer that makes sense in terms of your particular religious beliefs—whether or not you mention them every time you post, or just act as if they aren’t there in the background. And that’s it, Kelly. After all these years, if you claim that anything else drives your stubborn refusal to reject everything that everyone else says—by just repeating over and over the same questions that have been answered—then I call you a liar (and when is the last time you remember me calling anyone a liar!). The answers that you’re given just don’t allow you to think that your nonsense version of God isn’t nonsense.

I used to have a great deal of respect for you, even when we disagreed (and enjoyed the times when we were on the same side of an argument). But I have watched you play this game for too many years now, on too many threads. And I have watched you, over and again, deny that it was driven by defense of your religious beliefs. (How much time do you want me to spend poring over 5 years of threads to back that up? You know damn well that I can. You tried to do it in this thread, in response to twhitehead, forgetting what you wrote in your opening post.)

You’re dishonest, Kelly—and I don’t like you. Blackbeetle can be gracious; he hasn’t known you on here as long as I have. I don’t wish you ill health or anything like that. I just don’t intend to waste any time discussing anything with you again.

Let me repeat: you are dishonest, and I no longer have any respect for you at all. You can say whatever you want.

Originally posted by vistesd
What was outside of God before God created anything? How long did God exist before God created time?

I limit everything to being everything, in whatever condition, including that of a singularity as described by blackbeetle. Even if science is wrong about the nature of the singularity, I would still not think that that warrants a leap into the ki ...[text shortened]... are dishonest, and I no longer have any respect for you at all. You can say whatever you want.

It is simple most seem to think everything's roots seem to be in the
singularity, why that is I don't know. Even if I accepted it as a reality
which I don't, saying all things were at one point found in it would still
be an unknown as far as I'm concern just as what it was sitting in
and other questions would haunt me.

If you are asking me those two questions, I'm not sure anything is
outside of God ever, and I believe time is just a product of God so it
was always there either as a part of God or a witness to Him. Both
are just quick thoughts off the top of my head, and subject to change
if someone can give reason to think otherwise.
Kelly

Originally posted by vistesd
What was outside of God before God created anything? How long did God exist before God created time?

I limit everything to being everything, in whatever condition, including that of a singularity as described by blackbeetle. Even if science is wrong about the nature of the singularity, I would still not think that that warrants a leap into the ki ...[text shortened]... are dishonest, and I no longer have any respect for you at all. You can say whatever you want.

I don't think God is everything and everything is God,
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Since the universe and all it in is supposed to be in the
singularity, it than is the universe, the only thing you have addressed
is that universe once looked like this, without addressing how it came
into being.

But we have addressed how it came into being. It didn't. You may ask me over and over again why I haven't address the reason why I am wearing a pink shirt, but if I am not wearing a pink shirt and I say so, then the point is addressed (or undressed 🙂 )

You argue as follows:
1. Everything has a cause (assumption).
2. The singularity is something. (claim)
3. Therefore the singularity must have a cause.
4. Therefore the cause of the singularity must be explained.
However we dispute assumption 1. claim 2. and therefore conclusion 3. so you need to support assumption 1. and claim 2. before you get to 4.

We have claimed that 1. is not only not proven but is likely false - as well argued by knightmeister in one of his threads on brute facts.
We also argue that the totality of everything does not constitute a 'something' or at least is not necessarily bound by rules that apply to its members. (hence 2. is suspect).

Originally posted by KellyJay
I don't think God is everything and everything is God,
Kelly

I did not expect this comment in this discussion.
What is 'not God'? in your opinion?

Originally posted by twhitehead
But we [b]have addressed how it came into being. It didn't. You may ask me over and over again why I haven't address the reason why I am wearing a pink shirt, but if I am not wearing a pink shirt and I say so, then the point is addressed (or undressed 🙂 )

You argue as follows:
1. Everything has a cause (assumption).
2. The singularity is somethi at least is not necessarily bound by rules that apply to its members. (hence 2. is suspect).[/b]

No you did not address it, you simply stated it was there, which is not a
reason for it being there, it is simply a statement saying it is there.

I don't believe in the singularity as something that ever was, so my
proving it was something isn't something I feel bound to do. I do
believe everything has a reason or cause, and our not knowing what it
is does not mean it isn't there, only we lack understanding.
Kelly

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I did not expect this comment in this discussion.
What is 'not God'? in your opinion?

You and me for two examples, you need more?
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
No you did not address it, you simply stated it was there, which is not a
reason for it being there, it is simply a statement saying it is there.

Are you satisfied that I have addressed the reason for my wearing a pink shirt?

I may have 'simply stated it was there' but not in response to your request for an explanation on 'how it came into being'. My response to that request is that it did not come into being. Can you at least admit that I have given such a response? You may not agree that it is a satisfactory response but at least lets talk about my response rather than simply pretending that I did not say it.

I don't believe in the singularity as something that ever was, so my
proving it was something isn't something I feel bound to do.
Nobody asked you to prove it was something, nor is belief in existence required. However if you want to make the claim that if it existed then it must have a cause then you must support the claim that if it existed then it was something.

I do believe everything has a reason or cause, and our not knowing what it
is does not mean it isn't there, only we lack understanding.
Kelly
And you are welcome to that belief. However you have not proved that belief nor given any argument to support that belief, so it remains just that - a belief.

Originally posted by KellyJay
LOL, you are telling me what you believe by saying that singularity was
real, as well as "t=0" you think that isn't a matter of belief?
Kelly

It is a matter of the current evidence and where it points.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You and me for two examples, you need more?
Kelly

'You and I ' are not part of God. How so? Is this just a matter of semantics?
If ,again, we are 'outside God' then what is on the inside?
I mean what do you MEAN?

Yeah I need more. Please help me work through this issue. It seems you have held off a couple of nice wolves in this thread and I would be indebted to any furthur insights that you (or anyone ) could offer.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
'You and I ' are not part of God. How so? Is this just a matter of semantics?
If ,again, we are 'outside God' then what is on the inside?
I mean what do you MEAN?

Yeah I need more. Please help me work through this issue. It seems you have held off a couple of nice wolves in this thread and I would be indebted to any furthur insights that you (or anyone ) could offer.

You and I are not God that was what I said.
Do we make up parts of God as in I am the toe nail and you are..., no.
We are part of God creation, yes.
We are invited to be part of God's family, yes.
I mean God is His own person, He has His own personality and so forth.
Not sure what you want here.
Kelly