God Is Self-contradictory. Hence, God Doesn’t Exist.

Hehe - I was expecting as much. Typical religious nutter.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

'Eternal' is not difficult to understand, it's difficult to understand the theists own definition of eternal and how they continually invoke it into their descriptions of their gods.

Look at Archies statement:

"God is eternal - deal with it."

If we substitute the slightly varying definitions of 'eternal,' we get:

God is continuing forever or indefinitely - deal with it.
God is lasting for an indefinitely long period of time - deal with it.
God is tiresomely long; seemingly without end - deal with it.

I like the last one, as it fits theists unending rhetoric in regards to the descriptions of their gods.

But I wonder which definition, exactly, does Archie refer? Or you refer?

And I'm sure you theists will begin fighting amongst yourselves with wooden swords, as you always end up doing when attempting to reconcile your own versions of god with each other.

Now, THAT'S entertainment!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't know where you got those definitions, but I don't think they are very accurate Q. These are from the Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

1 a : having infinite duration : EVERLASTING b : of or relating to eternity c : characterized by abiding fellowship with God <good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life? -- Mark 10:17 (Revised Standard Version)>
2 a : continued without intermission : PERPETUAL b : seemingly endless
3 archaic : INFERNAL <some eternal villain ... devised this slander -- Shakespeare>
4 : valid or existing at all times : TIMELESS <eternal verities>

You could use 1,2 or 4, but to me "Timeless" is the description which seems most appropriate to me. As we keep repeating ETERNALLY (your 3rd definition), God is greater than time - how could it be otherwise?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oh, I see, you consider one online dictionary to be more accurate than another?

Excellent! We finally have a working definition for eternal; timeless. Thanks.

Now, can you make sure the other theists here agree with you? And could we also agree on the definition of 'timeless.' I would submit that definition as, "unaffected by time." Agreed?

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Don't quit now!
You never know when you will hit the jackpot, as ads say.
Stay!
See where the Galaxy is going:
http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/060419_attractorfrm.htm

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Sorry, Archie!
That was the wrong article.
Your argument is not dead yet.
Check this out:
http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/060330_multiversefrm.htm

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Archie appears to be little more than a pompous ass with Christian ideals of superiority over the non-believers.

Too bad, he seemed liked a guy who could parry and thrust. I suppose his rapier has gone limp over the years.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I think we have to sympathize with Archie.
He is in a BIG DILEMMA:

[1]If the Universe is eternal,
he must land himself on the RAZOR. And
therefore, his 'Eternal God' is redundant and un-necessay.

[2]And if the Universe has a beginning,
Archie is beaten to the ground (a knockout)
by the INFINITE-PAST PARADOX.

Poor Archie!
There is no way out for him!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

If eternal means timeless, as Q has said is the acceptable definition, the infinite past paradox cannot apply, nor can any other ideas about time apply.
Also the defintion that was given - valid or existing at all times: timeless - is a bit confusing. Does an eternal object exist at 2:30 or does the term "at 2:30" not apply at all?

Please explain.


P.S. How can your reference to boredom apply, Q, if you think twenty years, or a thousand years is a long time? Or if you think time passes one moment after the next? Your anthropomorphications of God are funny.

 

I think it was DDog who considered that definition acceptable, you'll have to agree or disagree with him, I'm simply giving him the benefit of the doubt.

If the concept of time cannot be applied to gods, what can we make of Genesis?

"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day"

... the third day... the fourth day... and so on until we see...

"And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made."

It appears time was applied to creation, and from the timeless dimension from whenst he did his work, timelessly. Curious.

Well, if your god appears to be able to work over a period of time, pat himself on the back for doing a good job and then take a rest when finished, the anthropomorphication of boredom should be easy to apply.

"And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made."

It's almost as if one were to expect that passage to end off with:

"And then God decided it was Miller time!"

How's that for attribution?

 

It is difficult talking about infinities such as eternity CG. As I said Augustus wrestled with this in the 5thC (they had no television then, so they had to do something). His conclusion was that God is present fully in each moment of time (e.g. at 2:30), but also exists outside time - is not confined by time. I suppose a modern image would be a higher dimension whereby all of our space/time exists as a finite object in that dimension. In theory God must exist in all physical dimensions and also be beyond even them. :bugeye:

I quite like the image of God picking his nose and gazing vacantly into unspace for 10000000 years waiting for his cue.

 

Looks good AAF. Brane cosmology (derived from M theory) is very elegant and is also a sign of science becoming "ironic" i.e. unvalidatable by experiment. A bit like God really!

As for your razor argument - the multiverse may indeed be infinite, as universes spawn more universes. However, Archie might say - but where did the first one come from? Where did branes or "the bulk" originate?

(Me, I prefer God as an inner experience, so I won't speculate about a divine "first cause".)

 

cole grey: "If eternal means timeless, as Q has said is the acceptable definition, the infinite past paradox cannot apply, nor can any other ideas about time apply".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It's really very simple, c.g.

Here is the complete definition of ETERNITY:
http://www.answers.com/topic/eternity

The paradox of infinite past is applicable to all of the definitions of eternity.

And in the case under discussion, the paradox takes the following form:
{Why did God take an infinite time to create the Universe}?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Augustine of Hippo wrote that "time exists only within the created universe, so that God exists outside of time; for God there is no past or future, but only an eternal present. That position is accepted by many believers. And one need not believe in God in order to hold this concept of eternity: an atheist mathematician can maintain the philosophical tenet that numbers and the relationships among them exist outside of time, and so are in that sense eternal". http://www.answers.com/topic/eternity

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The last refuge for the folks of faith to save their 'Eternal God' from the ravages of logic and reason is to suppose that either He is timeless or He is living outside time all by Himself!

Nice try, but it doesn't make any sense at all. To say that God is outside of time is logically equivalent to and the same as saying that He does not exist.

moreover, getting rid of time is absolutely impossible. And even when you deny time in words, you affirm it logically in a big way. The reason for this is that the flow of time forms a homogeneous continuum of all rates from the infinitely small to the infinitely large all at once. And each rate of time flow implies the rest as a necessary consequence.

Take as an example the ordinary pendulum clock!
It has three hands that run at different rates.
These three hands of the clock are only a partial snapshot of the actual flow of time.

The second hand implies on its side an infinite series of hands that run at faster and faster rates until end up with the moment hand where the rate of time flow is infinite.

The hour hand of the clock, also, implies, on its side, an infinite series of hands which run at slower and slower rates and have as their limit the eternity hand which does not move at all.

Thus there is no escape from time. And life of God outside time is meaningless.

In fact, time is an essential attribute of God.
No time; no God, but the reverse is not true.
That is to say that there is always time whether there is God or not.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Up! Up! Up, ahead of 'witnessjudgejury's amusement!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Archie: "What's that? It doesn't impress you? Oh... pardon me while I get the smelling salts.Tell me... did God consult you? Or is that the problem you have with the universe?... that's a really stupid question. You don't understand the question, have no clue to the answer, and then you want to denigrate God..."!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Oh yeah?
You think pointing out the contadictions of the infinite past in the myth of creation is stupid?
Not a chance!
The only dumb thing here is to turn a blind eye to them.
Don't you agree now?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Well done AAF, I knew you'd get there in the end!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

...and then you go and have to spoil it! Listen AAF, God is fully present at every instant of time, AND is also outside time. That is being omnipresent!

...unless time is quantised (e.g. like energy). I'm not sure what the latest thinking on quantised time is, but it was a popular idea at one time.

According to Einstein (Special Relativity), if you were a photon of light, the time between the start and end of the universe to you would be instantaneous. An almost infinite time (for us) is "compressed" into an instant. Time does not pass for that photon. Does that help?

The Gnostics refer to God as "The All". God is the origin of time and space and all else. Time is not an attribute of God. Everything in existence, including time is like a thought in the mind of God.

 

These are your words, Q,

Which sun does God use to mark sunset and sunrise? Do you know what a day is to God? No. The term is obviously metaphorical.
Also, just because God is timeless, that doesn't mean God's creations are timeless - they function according to physical laws, and God doesn't have to wait to pass the time while the stars are accumulating from hot gases and exploding to make planets and all that, yawning all the way.

 

That's not a bad thought, Mr. Grey. The concept of 'eternity' from a theological standpoint involves 'timelessness' rather than 'long time'. I don't think 'science' has a definition of 'eternity'. Eternity doesn't seem to be something useful in either cosmology or calculus… or chemistry, for that matter.

That sounds more like a secular attempt at a definition. "… valid or existing at all times …" could apply to 'the universe' or 'laws of gravity' – if we presume 'time' to be limited to the duration of our universe. So, once we get all the qualifications out of the way, we're saying the universe has been here as long as there has been a universe. (Argue with that!)

It depends on how one looks at the question. What is an 'eternal object'? I can't think of many. I can think of the laws of the universe being 'eternal' as above… as long as the universe lasts, they will function. However, most 'things' are not eternal; not planets, stars, galaxies or clusters. Does God or Heaven exist at 2:30? I don’t think there's a meaningful answer to the question. We can't 'look' into Heaven at 2:30 to check, can we? I can pray and talk with God at 2:30, but if God is in Eternity, 'when' does He hear me? The Bible speaks of God knowing us before the foundation of the Earth. "Eternity" is somewhat out of the passage of time.

 

God has no beginning and no end because God is unimaginable. The beginning and the end must be also unimaginable for an unimaginable item. The beginning and the end of the cosmic energy or space or the creation are also unimaginable. Therefore, the beginning and the end are unimaginable for the unimaginable item like God and also for the imaginable item like space. Therefore, the two points, which are the beginning-less and end-less characteristics cannot help you in understanding the real nature of God. If you start recognizing the God by simply these two points (beginning-less and end-less), you may think that God is an imaginable item like the space or energy or the creation. In fact based on these two characteristics people have imagined God as an imaginable item like space or energy or creation. This concept has misled people to such a low level that people think that God is the very infinite space or infinite energy or infinite creation. Therefore, one should filter the concept of God at this juncture itself. One should think that God has no beginning and no end because the beginning and the end of an unimaginable item are also unimaginable.

Such God desired to create this Universe for entertainment. The very desire itself is the Creation. In view of God this present materialized universe in only an idea or imagination or the very desire itself. Therefore, the desire to create the world is itself the desire and also the created world itself is a desire. Thus the creation, maintenance and dissolution of the imaginary world are also imaginations or desires. A part of this infinite creation is the individual soul. The soul is like a drop of the infinite ocean of imagination or desire of God. Thus, quantitatively the entire ocean of imagination of God is very huge compared to the tiny soul. Remember that both the Universe and the tiny soul are made of the same substance called as imagination or desire. Thus the force of the Universe is far greater than the force of the soul. Due to such huge quantitative difference of the same phase, the Universe, which is far stronger than the soul appears as a materialized entity for the soul. But this infinite ocean of desire, which is the infinite Universe is a tiny drop compared to the infinite force of God. Therefore, again due to the same quantitative difference of force the entire universe is just the very weak imagination from the view of God. Thus imagination and materialization exist simultaneously true from the point of God and soul.

For the sake of entertainment, God desired to create the Universe. This statement is in Veda (Sa dviteeya Maicchat). In this statement there is a very subtle intermediate stage, which is the essence of the desire to create the Universe. The desire to create the world is like the golden ornament but the essence of such desire is like the raw gold in which the ornament is not yet expressed. Such raw essence of the desire is pure awareness. The pure awareness is a special subtle form of energy, which is not qualified by any form. Such pure awareness is called as the spirit, which is not qualified and does not have any attribute. This is called as “Nirguna Brahman”, which means the pure awareness, which has no reference to the creation of the universe. It is a very critical and subtle point to recognize the pure awareness. Veda says that only very very sharp intelligence can grasp that critical state (Drushyate Tvagraya bhuddhya). Sankara, the topmost genius among the spiritual preachers could grasp that state and proposed the concept of Nirguna Brahman or non-qualified pure awareness. Such pure awareness is the first creation of God (Parabrahman). This first creation is almost as critical and unimaginable as the very Parabrahman itself. The only difference is that Parabrahman is absolutely unimaginable for any sharp intelligence, but this pure awareness is imaginable only for a very sharp intelligence. This pure awareness is called as Mula Prakriti or Suddha Sattvam or Mula Avidya or Mula Maya or the Spirit in general. The Parabrahman maintains such spirit and it is only an associated item and is the first created item. The word Mula means the first. This spirit is in the form of knowledge. It is aware of itself, which means that it is knowledge. Knowledge requires both subjective and objective characteristics. It is subject as well as the object. Therefore, it is called as knowledge or Sattvam. This knowledge is the first form of energy. Energy is always active. Action is the characteristic of Rajas. Such Spirit is unaware of its own creator who is the God. Therefore, it is having ignorance or Tamas. Thus, the Knowledge itself is action and ignorance. According to Gita Knowledge is Sattvam (Sattvaat Sanjayate Jnanam), action is Rajas (Rajah Karmani) and Ignorance is Tamas (Tamastva Jnanajam). Thus these three qualities are always inseparable. The pure knowledge (Suddha Sattvam) itself is pure action (Suddha Rajas), which is the pure ignorance (Suddha Tamas). Thus in the very first instant itself the three qualities are created simultaneously in the purest state. Since all these three co-exist, it is called as equilibrium of the three qualities. When the equilibrium is disturbed various items of awareness result in which the three qualities exist in various proportions. Such disturbance of the equilibrium resulting in various distorted items of the three qualities is the very creation. The various mixtures of these three qualities constitute this diversified universe, which is meant for the play of the God and for His entertainment. When the entertainment is over all the three qualities go into the equilibrium state. Thus the Universe is converted into Mula Prakruti.

God is in association with this Mula Prakruti in the beginning. At this stage the Mula Prakruti is only a creation or created item and cannot do anything further. Its equilibrium continues. In fact the Mula Prakruti is only inert and the continuation of such equilibrium is the inertia. God enters the Mula Prakruti and pervades it. Now this Mula Prakruti is electrified wire. It is the ignited stick and is called as fire. Now this Mula Prakruti becomes divine and is called as Brahman or the Holy Spirit. The Spirit, which is just the inert created item became Holy due to the existence of God in it. Now Brahman multiplies its little part of the Mula Prakruti in which, Parabrahman does not exist. This means that God enters ninety nine percent of Mula Prakruti and not one percent. This little part of un-divine Mula Prakruti is multiplied by the disturbed equilibrium and the Universe appears. Thus, the pure awareness in which God pervaded becomes Brahman. Now Brahman becomes the spectator of the Universe. The little pure awareness into which God did not enter is modified into the Universe in which God does not exist. Here the modification does not mean materialization. The modification means the undisturbed equilibrium being converted into disturbed equilibrium. In both the states the substance is only awareness. You can compare this to a day-dreamer’s mind. The mind of the day-dreamer is Mula Prakruti. A little part of the mind is converted into dream. The mind, which is not converted, is a spectator of the dream. The dreamer is identified with the spectator part of the mind. Thus the dreamer is witnessing the dream through his unmodified mind. The dreamer has not entered the dream and therefore is not multiplied. When the dream city is burning neither the spectator part of the mind is burnt nor the dreamer. The spectator part of the mind itself can be treated as the dreamer because the dreamer entered that spectator part of the mind and exists in it. Thus, Brahman, the spectator of the Universe can be treated as Parabrahman. Such Parabrahman who is the spectator of the Universe is called as Eeshwara. Thus, Parabrahman is the original unimaginable creator. Mula Prakrithi is the first created item, which is the pure awareness. Brahman is the major part of pure awareness in which Parabrahman entered and occupied it. The same Brahman enjoying the Universe by vision is called as Eeshwara. Neither Parabrahman nor Brahman nor the Eeswara has entered the Universe, which is the disturbed equilibrium of the three qualities. Thus, there is no disturbance in either Parabrahman or Brahman or Eeshwara. In Christianity God is Parabrahman. Brahman and Eeshwara are called as the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is the substance with which the Universe is made of. The spirit is not Holy because God did not occupy it. Thus the Universe is not Holy in Toto. It is Holy with reference to the good devotees and the divine incarnations. It is unholy with reference to bad living beings and Saturn. Parabrahman who is a spectator for sometime develops a desire to enter this Universe in the form of a living being especially as a human being because the main aim is to preach the divine knowledge. Veda says the same (Tadevaanu Praavishat). This divine human being in which, Parabrahman or Brahman or Eeshwara exists is called as human incarnation or God in Flesh. The human incarnation consists of four items. The first item is God. The second item is the Mula Prakruti, which is the pure awareness or Brahman or Aatman or Karana Sareeram (Casual Body). The third item is the disturbed equilibrium of the three qualities called as Jeeva or Sukshma Sareera (Subtle Body). The fourth item is the Gross body made of five elements (Sthula Sareera) which is again imaginary only in view of God but a materialized form in view of other human beings. If you analyse any ordinary living being it contains all the three bodies except God. If we analyse any inert item of the world it contains only the Gross Body made of the five elements.

God should be understood as the unimaginable creator. Next God can be understood as the unimaginable spectator of the world. Lastly, God should be understood as the unimaginable actor who has entered the Universal Drama in the form of Human Incarnation.

At Thy Lotus Feet His Holiness Sri Dattaswami

Anil Antony

www.universal-spirituality.org
Universal Spirituality for World Peace
antonyanil@universal-spirituality.org