555

Is there arguement against his eternity ? I think it's impossible to deny his eternal because god as no beginning and no end.

Citrusponge

Non-existent things have neither a beginning nor an end

JAK1

An assertion is not evidence. You make assertions. Absent evidence which can be tested, evaluated and dissected, your assertion is meaningless. Just as there was/is no evidence for the notion of gods, the invention of God has no more credibility.

Hence, one can make up any dogma one wishes, play with it, revise it, or change it. "I think" is hardly relevant to establishing your claim. Actually, you aren’t really thinking here. You’re stating doctrine previously invented by others.

JAK

FFT

There'd have to be an argument for his eternity first, wouldn't there?

JAK1

Keep in mind that truth by assertion presents no argument and no evidence.

It does not tolerate well skeptical review.

JAK

DBT

Eternity.
Eternity is either a finite causal chain of events within infinite, absolute time, or eternity is a timeless state of affairs that denotes the absence of existence since there are no bodies in motion. Let us consider the possibility that eternity is an infinity of time first. If eternity is infinite duration or "infinite time" per a realist view of time, then we are faced with the difficulty of explaining what events, if any, occurred during the quantity of time preceding the existence of the universe.

RexT

Time and space are related in that each deals with a different dimension of distance. Distance can be considered as duration, (time) or it can be seen as static, (space) never changing in overall length. Really, space is the unchanging duration and time is space in motion. Thus, time can have beginnings and endings locally, which is finite locations in space whose duration is altered in some fashion, but infinite unbounded space is eternal, as a whole unchanging, with no beginning or end. This is not god, but it is eternity.

Rex

UncleJim

But to do that you must first accept the god of theism. All you have done is to deny a claim, you have not offered one to replace it.

UncleJim

This requires that your underlying premise of a previously nonexistence universe is valid. There is no evidence to support such a claim.

DBT

I don't see that at all - the point of the quote is the reference to two possible states of eternity, the "timeless state" - and eternity as infinite duration or "infinite time"...