Argument Against the Existance of God: Timeless/Omnipotent/Omniscient Paradox

[zenwolf1]

Man created cyber space and all things in it. From the perspective of things in cyber space, man always was, man is omnipotent, omnicient, omnipresent, perfect for lack of a more perfect term. Wake up, your trying to break the world! dont you want to repair the world? It takes a moron to think this problem is small enough for them to solve alone, oh wait, you dont beleive in GOD, so you ultimately are alone. sorry buddy.

[pitythesheep]

@zenwolf1 I don't think he's trying to break the world, more like wake it up! I can simplify this for you. If God has the power to do anything (omnipotent), can he create a stone large enough that even s/he cannot lift? If s/he can, then we can come to the conclusion that s/he is not "All powerful" since s/he can't lift the stone. If s/he can't create a stone large enough to him/her to lift, then we also come to the same conclusion.

[zenwolf1]

@pitythesheep Your question has no bearing on the way god really interacts with the universe, or stones. Can man create a chess program that man cant beat? Yes. Does it make man any less omnipotent in or to cyberspace? No. Trying to prove limitations of something, doesnt disprove anything. It actually reaffirms it. The glass is empty, with such fullness.

[pitythesheep]

@zenwolf1 So what way does God REALLY interact with us? Are you claiming that God is in fact omnipotent? Your chess reference doesn't make sense because you can't be be "more or less" omnipotent. All Powerful does not equal Sometimes Powerful. Unlimited power does not equal Limited powerful. I posed a logic paradox on the basis that God is all powerful and has unlimited power.

[zenwolf1]

@pitythesheep God really interacts with us the way your conciousness, really interacts with the cells of your body. Its not as straaightforward as, Thy will be done. Omnipotent means that no matter where you go in the universe, or being of god, power over you can not be diminished. You cant hide under a stone lets say and escape it. Not the same as all powerful, but Powerful everywhere. And be careful when saying what man says about him, if he didnt say it Godself.

[pitythesheep]

@zenwolf1 be careful when saying what man says about him? Man has been the only one to speak of him. Everything we know of God we get from scripture which was written by....drum roll please..... man. You yourself are telling me how God interacts with man. God did not write the bible. Men wrote it and claimed it to be the word of God, which we can only rely on honesty there after. As for Omnipotence, I just simply don't agree with your definition.

[MarcinP2]

Sequences are usually timeless. They are timeless in mathematics and computer programs.

These can for example be sequences of numbers or sequences in logic, sequences of numbers are timeless.

Sequence by definition is a collection of things with assigned order and the order is not chronological unless you want it to be.

[TheNeonSkylight]

That's fine, but God is neither a mathematical concept nor is he a computer program. When I used the word sequence, I was using it to describe the progression of events and thoughts.

Indeed, that is what sequence is by definition, but I am not arguing whether sequence is timeless or not.

[MarcinP2]

You want to make it your position that causation requires flow of time? That would bring into mind a couple of problems.

Red some of your other comments BTW:

in view of most (at least non-reformed) god is changeless.

Nobody is arguing God has a stream of thoughts like we do. He's not an entity troubled with doubts and engaging in investigations.

That would mean god is changing, which is not the traditional view.

[JohnQPublic11]

It does not matter if you disagree; God created our universe, God does not live in our universe, God lives outside our universe. What you know as time only exists in our universe, our time does not exist where God lives, therefore God is timeless to our universe. Your video is a FAIL.

[TheNeonSkylight]

You're treating time as if it's something that actually exists in reality. Time doesn't "exist," it is merely a description of moments and change, it's not a quality one can choose to possess or not. There is no, "our time," time isn't a place.

If God was truly timeless, he would be completely unchanging. He would not be able to have thoughts since the process of thinking involves a beginning, middle, and an ending. If God was without time, everything would be the same moment for God.

[TheNeonSkylight]

This idea of being timeless in itself is contradictory to the idea that God is a conscious being.

And if God doesn't exist in time or space as we know it, God just doesn't exist, at least in a way that's not relevant or to have any meaning to us whatsoever. Furthermore, if you are arguing that God does exist, but outside of time and space, then you're changing the definition of "existence" into something meaningless.

[TheNeonSkylight]

You can still make the claim that God does exist out of both time and space, that's fine, but then you can't then say that God created the universe, or did this, or is doing that. Concepts like creating, doing, thinking, are all concepts that take time in order to exist or to be performed. There in no "create" without a sequence of creation, and sequence necessitates time.

[coquiborikua]

You say in the video that the paradox can be easily refuted by saying he is timeless. Do you know how? Because the more I think about what timelessness entails, the less relevance it has IMO to the problem presented.

[TheNeonSkylight]

You're right, if one has an understanding of what timelessness entails, then it becomes irrelevant to the paradox presented.

[TheNeonSkylight]

I added the timlessness part of the argument later on when I noticed that some of the individuals I presented the argument to predicated their objections on that God is also a timeless being. In the objection, it was stated that because God is not bound by time, he was not subject to a timeline where he could only make certain decisions at certain moments. This is why I demonstrated that timelessness is not relevant to the problem to avoid getting more of the same objections.

[noelplum99]

Your webcam was angled up a little too much imo

[TheNeonSkylight]

It was intentional. I like to keep an air of mystery. :)

[kainniak1]

could not god have had all of his thought b4 "time" like he sat around in nothing and thought about everything .if god is real there is no beginning think of as like one of the cartoons where at the end it was all a dream

P.S i am atheist and i just thought of this off the top my head wile i am baked so it might just sound good to me

[noelplum99]

@kainniak1

The problem is that you are attributing temporal concepts to processes occuring outside of our temporaility. Now you can do what you HAVE done and posit an external temporality but then you have also opened the door for lots of other things that theists don't want to open the door on (for a start, God could not have created time if he requires time in which to operate) including pre-existant universes.

[TheNeonSkylight]

To add on to noelplum99's response, I stated in the video that time isn't something that exists in real life and something that God can just step out of. To have thoughts in the first place, requires time as thinking had a process; a beginning and end.

God apparently never came into creation, he was the uncaused cause, yet there was a moment where he went, "I'm going to create the earth." That sequence of moments is time.