Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Nobody knows what happened before a certain point. At this point, anything before that point is nothing but creative speculation - creators included.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The First Action, What Did It?
- Thread starter Zhakir
- Start date
Nobody knows what happened before a certain point. At this point, anything before that point is nothing but creative speculation - creators included.
tarasan
Well-Known Member
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I always use the right tool for the job.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
You attribute God as an enabler of causes of which this requires interaction. Yet to say God is uncreated of which is causeless would indicate there can be no such interaction possible by the very nature of being causeless. For cause and effect to manifest in some manner, an interaction is required.
But they're not different in this regard.
Once you establish that an infinite chain of causality is impossible (which you haven't done yet), and then establish that "causality" even has meaning at the beginning of the chain... which it might not if the start of that chain lies outside of time (which you haven't done either), even then, an uncaused gopher works just as well as an uncaused god as the explanation.
Basically, what you're doing is tacking on a bunch of arbitrary characteristics to this "uncaused cause". You've given no good reason why it's more reasonable to assume that the uncaused cause has consciousness and intelligence than it is to assume that it has fur and a tendency to burrow.
CircularLogic
New Member
The answer is simple. There was no first action. There is enough time in the infinite for all outcomes. Infinity divided by Infinity = 1.
There is no point in even asking such a foolish question unless you are justifying your own beliefs one way or another for there are only foolish answers to this question.
Looking at life from the perspective of energy, there is only an imbalance and balance; tension and release. Simply put, there is no god which we can understand, and if there is one we can't understand it is counter productive to guess at something for it will only end up serving ourselves in spiritual hedonism.
There is no point in even asking such a foolish question unless you are justifying your own beliefs one way or another for there are only foolish answers to this question.
Looking at life from the perspective of energy, there is only an imbalance and balance; tension and release. Simply put, there is no god which we can understand, and if there is one we can't understand it is counter productive to guess at something for it will only end up serving ourselves in spiritual hedonism.
PolyHedral
Superabacus Mystic
But there is not infinite time. Not to mention the fact that infinity/infinity can quite easily be 2.
Luminous
non-existential luminary
Though true. In that case the numeral was "growing" (twice as fast plus an arbitrary sum) faster than the denominator. the example was a limit, not a fraction. Though the point can be taken that there is NOT enough time in infinity for all outcomes, since the outcomes grow faster than the time.