0

# paradox of the eternallity of god

Mon 21 Jul, 2008 07:30 pm
considering that god has no beginning or end, its eternal, infinite, limitless.
supposing that god ceases (end) to exist now then hes mortal or finite?

the answer is no because if we start from the point that god ended and look
backwards we would see no end. therefore god has existed an infinite amount of time before his end and then god is still and be ever eternal, limitless, infinite even if god ceases to exist now.
• Topic Stats
• Top Replies
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 984 • Replies: 9
No top replies

Holiday20310401

1
Mon 21 Jul, 2008 07:50 pm
@mashiaj,
Then infinite must mean that a future and a past must both exist in infinite proportion.

If something were to cease to exist after having an infinite time before it ceased to exist then it could not cease to exist.

Because if something were to cease to exist then there could be no relative point (being the cease of existence) to the time before that occurrence. Otherwise the time before that would be finite. There are no distinguishings between relative points in an infinite, being that of a loop. Either all true or all false, therefore implying symmetry. Any piece of information that is relative, must come from a source and be taken to a source (in respect to time), there must be a beginning and an end.

If only one of the two were to exist, like in this paradox being that of only the end, then the existence would be undefined because information would not have a cause but the effect is linear. If only the beginning existed and there was no end then is would be without cause because it would be defined by the beginning but to no means of its end. It would have to be non relational, because relation provides reason, and potential to another relative point.

So I would think of this paradox as being irrational, impossible.

An infinite will always form a loop otherwise it can't be infinite.

If one thinks otherwise then tel me, lol.

1
Mon 21 Jul, 2008 11:04 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Its a trick statement, because now is always now, never in the past or the future. Or one can argue that there is no past and there is no future, so given the existence of God s/he has always existed and always will.
0 Replies

mashiaj

1
Tue 22 Jul, 2008 01:24 am
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401 wrote:
Then infinite must mean that a future and a past must both exist in infinite proportion.

why proportion? are u thinking that the infinite is dividable?

ok lets assumpt that backwards its an eternallity of time and tomorrow time(whatever) ceases eternallity+1=eternallity, eternallity+6=eternallity,
eternallity+10000=eternallity, eternallity+1000000000000000=eternallity.
no matter how much time you add to eternallity it is still the same.

infinite is not dividable it is irrational, all rations are finite therefore all infinite is irrational.
Holiday20310401

1
Tue 22 Jul, 2008 11:40 pm
@mashiaj,
sorry, proportion was a bad word, ofcourse it can't be divided.

1
Wed 23 Jul, 2008 11:47 am
@Holiday20310401,
Past and future are really meaningless terms in the realm of eternity. It seems there there is a past because we have memory of the duration of our existence. It seems that there is a future based on a consitently confirmed inference of memory of past duration transitioning into the now. In the argument that God has existed and always will exist is really just saying God exists now. It is possible that a God would be outside the realm of past present future duration and experience.
mashiaj

1
Fri 25 Jul, 2008 12:49 am
Past and future are really meaningless terms in the realm of eternity. It seems there there is a past because we have memory of the duration of our existence. It seems that there is a future based on a consitently confirmed inference of memory of past duration transitioning into the now. In the argument that God has existed and always will exist is really just saying God exists now. It is possible that a God would be outside the realm of past present future duration and experience.

they don't exist in that realm.
Doobah47

1
Sat 26 Jul, 2008 03:24 am
@mashiaj,
There's no paradox if we consider that this ideology of an infinite existence places dimensions as individual facets of an infinite environment; the dimensions could reach a state of stagnation (ceasing to project further into infinity, but not having reached any end). The notion of infinity tends to demand that a dimension continues consistently (like time or depth), yet it is surely possible that a somewhat telescopic reach by the dimension could result in the dimension beginning an alternative mode of projection, continuing to reach out but forming a pattern similar to a sound wave, thus eventually oscillating so much so that it ceases to move forward... If light is formed by waves then a dimension such as depth, although metaphysical not should surely follow suit - considering that depth might require sight, the tip of the telescopic dimension seeing a potential for continued projection.

Time is more interesting because it is a dimension without foundation in reality, so perhaps prescribing a waveform of time is completely useless, for it does not adhere to any sense of rhythm - humans have simply assigned symbolic gestures of seconds etc.
mashiaj

1
Sat 26 Jul, 2008 03:42 am
@Doobah47,
Doobah47 wrote:
There's no paradox if we consider that this ideology of an infinite existence places dimensions as individual facets of an infinite environment; the dimensions could reach a state of stagnation (ceasing to project further into infinity, but not having reached any end). The notion of infinity tends to demand that a dimension continues consistently (like time or depth), yet it is surely possible that a somewhat telescopic reach by the dimension could result in the dimension beginning an alternative mode of projection, continuing to reach out but forming a pattern similar to a sound wave, thus eventually oscillating so much so that it ceases to move forward... If light is formed by waves then a dimension such as depth, although metaphysical not should surely follow suit - considering that depth might require sight, the tip of the telescopic dimension seeing a potential for continued projection.

Time is more interesting because it is a dimension without foundation in reality, so perhaps prescribing a waveform of time is completely useless, for it does not adhere to any sense of rhythm - humans have simply assigned symbolic gestures of seconds etc.

nonsense.... :listening:
0 Replies

AugustineBrother

1
Tue 9 Aug, 2016 12:26 pm
@mashiaj,
Those three words are the none of them positive statements. They are simply privative statements. Without what is limited and time-bound and finite it would mean nothing at all
0 Replies

### Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
DOES NOTHING EXIST??? - Question by mark noble
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King

1. Forums
2. » paradox of the eternallity of god