Outside of Space and Time
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-03-2015, 08:30 PM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
(23-03-2015 05:27 PM)Russ Wrote:  You say this, but can you produce a post that shows an example of a 'K.O.'? It would be nice to see a link to something that you wrote that you think was your best and/or most effective rebuttal.

(23-03-2015 08:09 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  So will you be looking for/providing a link to what you think was a good post from you or will you not?

Much cheers to all.

So what do you guys want me to do, comb through every single post or something??
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 12:24 AM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
(23-03-2015 08:30 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  So what do you guys want me to do, comb through every single post or something??

Consider

You can't remember.. or perhaps paraphrase... one of your posts/comments that you think is the 'Humdinger' of your answers/responces?

A post some where in your memory that you remember fondly as being "Yeah, that's the ticket."?

Consider


Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Peebothuhul's post
24-03-2015, 05:07 AM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
(23-03-2015 04:03 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  If there is no time (and is nothing preceding his sitting), how can there be a time when he stands up?

It is called simulatenous causation...when he begins to stand, that first instant of motion is simulatenous with the very first instant of time. One did not precede the other..it happened at the same time. So he did stand in time, it was just the very first instant of time, and there was no temporal "before" he began to stand.

No. You don't even understand cause and effect. You should learn more about that before trying to expound on some theoretical outside-of-time causality.

Standing doesn't cause motion and motion doesn't cause standing; they're the same thing. The standing is the motion from going from a sitting state to a standing one. The cause would be the decision to stand. And according to you, he decides to stand at the same instant that he stands. Which is stupid.


(23-03-2015 04:03 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-03-2015 01:57 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  The whole problem with "eternal being" and infinite regress is that you're looking for a way to answer questions about "the first cause". Now, that's cute and all, but you start with things that make sense (cause and effect) and then just start making things up until you feel you've "answered" the question. The problem is, it's purely speculative, and it raises more questions than it answers.

Makes no sense.

I'd ask you to elaborate because I took the time to elaborate, but you're just going to respond either with more double-speak or you're going to mix and match your terms like you did above with "stand" and "motion".


(23-03-2015 04:03 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-03-2015 01:57 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  You should probably leave these types of discussion to the grown ups.

Then perhaps I need to leave the forum? Laugh out load

HAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAAHA!


(23-03-2015 04:03 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-03-2015 01:57 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  You made a bunch of stuff up that contradicted the other stuff you said. You gave yourself a beat down. You're like some type of unaware self-parody.

Hey, what I am giving you is knowledge, my friend.

You're peddling bullshit, motherfucker.

As Chas said, if you can't provide a meaningful definition for what it is to be "outside of space and time" (without contradicting yourself), this whole notion is meaningless.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RobbyPants's post
24-03-2015, 11:21 AM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
(24-03-2015 12:24 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Consider

You can't remember.. or perhaps paraphrase... one of your posts/comments that you think is the 'Humdinger' of your answers/responces?

A post some where in your memory that you remember fondly as being "Yeah, that's the ticket."?

Consider

Even if I did, I wouldn't know the exact post # to refer you to. However, if someone had a gun to my head saying "Pick one, and it better be good", I would refer the gun slinger to my "debate" with GWOG regarding the Resurrection. I thought my responses to his objections were great, and I was really getting into a spirtual zone, just warming up, until he screwed it up.

And that "spirtual zone" I am talking about is a mental HIGH...that only an apologist can relate too Yes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 11:42 AM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
Dude, what part of Michigan are you from?

(24-03-2015 05:07 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  No. You don't even understand cause and effect. You should learn more about that before trying to expound on some theoretical outside-of-time causality.

Laugh out load Should I?

(24-03-2015 05:07 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Standing doesn't cause motion and motion doesn't cause standing; they're the same thing. The standing is the motion from going from a sitting state to a standing one. The cause would be the decision to stand. And according to you, he decides to stand at the same instant that he stands. Which is stupid.

The act of BEGINNING to stand, whatever you want to call it, represents a CHANGE, and change requires time. When the first change was made, that is when the first moment in time occurred. It was at the same moment...it was a first time for both.

(24-03-2015 05:07 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  I'd ask you to elaborate because I took the time to elaborate, but you're just going to respond either with more double-speak or you're going to mix and match your terms like you did above with "stand" and "motion".

To stand is to be in motion, right? If the man was sitting perfectly still for eternity, at which the concept of time has yet to exist...and the man BEGINS to stand, that act/motion/movement occurs..........SIMULTANEOUSLY........with the first moment of time.

So two things are happening at the exact same moment..

1. The man begins to stand
2. Time begins

Those two things occurred at the exact same moment..one did not precede the other...and that represents the beginning of time.

And not only does this make sense, but it is absolutely NECESSARY, because it is easy to go back in time and count the number of years/months/days/hours/seconds it took to arrive at the present day, why? Because you have a beginning point..a reference point.

But, if you don't have a reference point, you will never be able to arrive at the present day, but the fact that we have "reached" the present day...this could only occur if there is a past boundary to time...a starting point.

So it all makes damn good sense if you just open your closed mind, use common sense, and just let God settle in your heart.

(24-03-2015 05:07 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  You're peddling bullshit, motherfucker.

As Chas said, if you can't provide a meaningful definition for what it is to be "outside of space and time" (without contradicting yourself), this whole notion is meaningless.

Well, a spirit is outside of space, obviously...and a spirit that is outside of space, in a timeless state before creation...would be a spirit that is outside of space & time.

That was easy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 11:48 AM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
(24-03-2015 11:42 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  The act of BEGINNING to stand, whatever you want to call it, represents a CHANGE, and change requires time. When the first change was made, that is when the first moment in time occurred. It was at the same moment...it was a first time for both.

What event caused your hypothetical being to stand? There had to be a cause, right?
That cause had to exist prior to the event, so time started then. But where did that cause originate? And so on.

I am still waiting for a cogent definition of 'outside of space and time'.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 12:19 PM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
To me, outside of our reality would mean nothing. You would need to prove that something can exist outside of time and space in order to prove to me that the possibility of such a being happening can be remotely true.

The only thing that can is other universes and those have their own time and space. When something exists outside of time and space, it becomes its own time and space. Therefor, it is impossible to exist outside of it.


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 04:15 PM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
(24-03-2015 11:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  What event caused your hypothetical being to stand? There had to be a cause, right?

There was no temporally prior cause. The man caused himself to stand, just not in a temporal sense.

(24-03-2015 11:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  That cause had to exist prior to the event, so time started then. But where did that cause originate? And so on.

If the man is the only thing in existence, what could be temporally prior it?

(24-03-2015 11:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  I am still waiting for a cogent definition of 'outside of space and time'.

That ship has already sailed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 04:47 PM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
(24-03-2015 04:15 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(24-03-2015 11:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  What event caused your hypothetical being to stand? There had to be a cause, right?

There was no temporally prior cause. The man caused himself to stand, just not in a temporal sense.

What does that even mean? Cause and effect can't function except temporally.

Quote:
(24-03-2015 11:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  That cause had to exist prior to the event, so time started then. But where did that cause originate? And so on.

If the man is the only thing in existence, what could be temporally prior it?

You misunderstand. When did the cause originate?

Quote:
(24-03-2015 11:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  I am still waiting for a cogent definition of 'outside of space and time'.

That ship has already sailed.

It was never built. Lay the keel, pal.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 09:52 PM
RE: Outside of Space and Time
(24-03-2015 11:21 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Even if I did, I wouldn't know the exact post # to refer you to. However, if someone had a gun to my head saying "Pick one, and it better be good", I would refer the gun slinger to my "debate" with GWOG regarding the Resurrection. I thought my responses to his objections were great, and I was really getting into a spirtual zone, just warming up, until he screwed it up.

Yes

Thank you. I shall peruse your back and forth with GwoG and see if anything stands out.

Thumbsup

(24-03-2015 11:21 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  And that "spirtual zone" I am talking about is a mental HIGH...that only an apologist can relate too Yes

Blink


Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: