thehomer:

No. In this case, the references are to the Gods as described in the Bible.

What other entities or objects do you actually come to know by being defined in the negative?

You are the one who has suddenly introduced the Bible and 'other entities'. I have been focusing on the issue of God/no-God.

thehomer:

Maybe they comment because of the things that they see religious people doing and have decided to speak out.

IF THEY ARE SO [b]CONVINCED [/b]THAT THERE IS NO GOD, WHY DO THEY [b]BOTHER [/b]ABOUT WHAT RELIGIOUS PEOPLE ARE DOING?

imhotep:

You are the one who has suddenly introduced the Bible and 'other entities'. I have been focusing on the issue of God/no-God.

Again, which God? When speaking with certain theists, I try to address the God of their choosing so when I'm saying some God does not exist, I'm speaking about the particular God that they believe. So which God do you claim exists? Are there other Gods? These are crucial questions in this sort of discussion.

imhotep:

IF THEY ARE SO [b]CONVINCED [/b]THAT THERE IS NO GOD, WHY DO THEY [b]BOTHER [/b]ABOUT WHAT RELIGIOUS PEOPLE ARE DOING?

So, are you going to define God and give us other entities that are solely defined in the negative?
They bother because the actions of some of these religious people defraud, harm, maim and kill people sometimes their own children.

thehomer:

Again, which God? When speaking with certain theists, I try to address the God of their choosing so when I'm saying some God does not exist, I'm speaking about the particular God that they believe. So which God do you claim exists? Are there other Gods? These are crucial questions in this sort of discussion.
So, are you going to define God and give us other entities that are solely defined in the negative?

THE FORMULA
---------------------------
1.    The mystic was back from the desert.

2.    “Tell us,” they said, “what God is like.”

3.    But how could he ever tell them what he had experienced in his heart?

4.    Can God be put into words?

5.    He finally gave them a formula — inaccurate, inadequate—in the hope that some might be tempted to experience it for themselves.

6.    They seized [/b]upon the formula. They made it a sacred text. They imposed it on others as a holy belief.

7.    They went to great pains to spread it in foreign lands. They wrote many scholarly thesis on the formula.

8.    Some even gave their lives for it.

9.    The mystic was [b]sad. It might have been better if he had said nothing.

imhotep:

THE FORMULA
---------------------------
1.    The mystic was back from the desert.

2.    “Tell us,” they said, “what God is like.”

3.    But how could he ever tell them what he had experienced in his heart?

4.    Can God be put into words?

5.    He finally gave them a formula — inaccurate, inadequate—in the hope that some might be tempted to experience it for themselves.

6.    They seized [/b]upon the formula. They made it a sacred text. They imposed it on others as a holy belief.

7.    They went to great pains to spread it in foreign lands. They wrote many scholarly thesis on the formula.

8.    Some even gave their lives for it.

9.    The mystic was [b]sad. It might have been better if he had said nothing.

In other words, you really have nothing to say.

thehomer:

In other words, you really have nothing to say.

Every 'definition' of God is like a [b]signpost [/b]pointing to the Truth.

When you [b]cling [/b]to the signpost you are [b]prevented [/b]from seeing/experiencing the Truth.

Because you think you [b]have [/b]it already . . .

imhotep:

Every 'definition' of God is like a [b]signpost [/b]pointing to the Truth.

When you [b]cling [/b]to the signpost you are [b]prevented [/b]from seeing/experiencing the Truth.

Because you think you [b]have [/b]it already . . .

You really don't have a working definition do you? Yet you wish to object when I point out that I'm referring to God as described in the Bible. Since you don't know your God so well, how do you know he's there?

To those who are denying the existence of God,use this opportunity to change your ways,for this whole world was created by God and not by evolution,
for we believe that the cars we drive was created by man and the house we live in was
built by man,which is automatically known as a ''creator'' of cars and  of ''house''
how much more should we doubt that,the stars,sky,sun,rain,and the human structure was not created,
but emerged from no where.''evolution''?

It is high time  people stop living in denial and embrace the creator of heaven and earth,
whose name is Jehovah God. He is ready to forgive you your sins.go to him and pray for
forgiveness of sins,so that when you die,your soul will not burn in hell,but you will inherit God's kingdom
which is the only hope of mankind. God is good.


take a look at this beautiful and fearful revelation of ''Heaven and ''Hell'' and the 'Return of Christ'
God Bless you all.


http://www.testimoniesofheavenandhell.com/2011/03/angelica-zambrano-was-shown-the-kingdoms-of-heaven-and-hell-and-the-return-of-christ/

thehomer:

You really don't have a working definition do you?

Quite the contrary. I have many many many 'working definitions'.

thehomer:

Yet you wish to object when I point out that I'm referring to God as described in the Bible. Since you don't know your God so well, how do you know he's there?

It is said that Buddha obdurately refused [/b]to be drawn into talking of God.

He was obviously familiar with the [b]dangers of drawing maps for armchair explorers.

imhotep:

Quite the contrary. I have many many many 'working definitions'.

It seems you merely wish to play word games.

imhotep:

It is said that Buddha obdurately refused [/b]to be drawn into talking of God.

He was obviously familiar with the [b]dangers of drawing maps for armchair explorers.

So are you now Buddha?
Well good luck to you.

thehomer:

It seems you merely wish to play word games.

Ah. . .words

DISCIPLE: “When will I be enlightened?

MASTER: “When you see.”

DISCIPLE:  “See what?”

MASTER: “Trees and flowers and moon and stars.”

DISCIPLE: “But I see these everyday.”

MASTER: “No. What you see is paper [/b]trees, paper flowers, [b]paper [/b]moons and [b]paper [/b]stars. [b]For you live, not in reality, but in your words and thoughts.”

@imhotep

imhotep:

Quite the contrary. I have many many many 'working definitions'.


It is said that Buddha obdurately refused [/b]to be drawn into talking of God.

He was obviously familiar with the [b]dangers of drawing maps for armchair explorers.

If you cannot define what God is then even you have no idea what you even mean when telling atheist they disbelieve in God. Either provide a definition of what God IS, or stop talking about the concept like know it. Coming up with all these clever ways of saying you have no idea what you are talking about, is not going to further this debate. A definition of religion would also be very much appreciated. It is a simpler request. Tell us what it "IS" you say atheist disbelieve. An infinite list of what God is not is not any more informative than no definition at all.

@thehomer

thehomer:

You really don't have a working definition do you? Yet you wish to object when I point out that I'm referring to God as described in the Bible. Since you don't know your God so well, how do you know he's there?

This is exactly the question, you should ask in any debate you have about God from the start. When you ask them for a coherent definition of what God IS, an answer will rarely ever be forthcoming. If someone cannot even bring oneself to provide one, then clearly even they do not know what they are saying.

Idehn:

@imhotep
If you cannot define what God is then even you have no idea what you even mean when telling atheist they disbelieve in God. Either provide a definition of what God IS, or stop talking about the concept like know it. Coming up with all these clever ways of saying you have no idea what you are talking about, is not going to further this debate. A definition of religion would also be very much appreciated. It is a simpler request. Tell us what it "IS" you say atheist disbelieve. An infinite list of what God is not is not any more informative than no definition at all.

@thehomer
This is exactly the question, you should ask in any debate you have about God from the start. When you ask them for a coherent definition of what God IS, an answer will rarely ever be forthcoming. If someone cannot even bring oneself to provide one, then clearly even they do not know what they are saying.

800 years ago, one of the world’s ablest theologians, (who spent a lifetime studying the definitions of God, among other things). Thomas Aquinas suddenly stopped writing.
When his secretary complained about his unfinished works, Thomas replied: "Brother Reginald, some months ago I experienced something of the Absolute, so all I have ever written of God seems to me now to be like straw."

How could it be otherwise when the scholar [/b]becomes a [b]seer?

=========================================
The Zen Masters put it succinctly: “The one who knows, does not say. The one who says, does not know.”

=========================================
Take it or leave it: God IS.


=========================================
If you are interested, you can google the works of Thomas Aquinas. There, you will read to your hearts content all about the definitions of God, from the Christian viewpoint though.

imhotep:

800 years ago, one of the world’s ablest theologians, (who spent a lifetime studying the definitions of God, among other things). Thomas Aquinas suddenly stopped writing.
When his secretary complained about his unfinished works, Thomas replied: "Brother Reginald, some months ago I experienced something of the Absolute, so all I have ever written of God seems to me now to be like straw."

How could it be otherwise when the scholar [/b]becomes a [b]seer?

=========================================
The Zen Masters put it succinctly: “The one who knows, does not say. The one who says, does not know.”

=========================================
Take it or leave it: God IS.


=========================================
If you are interested, you can google the works of Thomas Aquinas. There, you will read to your hearts content all about the definitions of God, from the Christian viewpoint though.

Again, if Thomas Aquinas cannot define what God is, then nothing he said about God could possibly make any sense. Asking you to define God is simply asking you if you know what it IS you are talking about. If you are unable to define God, then you have nothing meaningful to say about the subject. All these appeals to mysticism are just an attempt to cover up the fact that, you have no idea what you say you believe. That should at least give you a moment of pause.

imhotep:


=========================================
The Zen Masters put it succinctly: “The one who knows, does not say. The one who says, does not know.”

=========================================
Take it or leave it: God IS.


=========================================
If you are interested, you can google the works of Thomas Aquinas. There, you will read to your hearts content all about the definitions of God, from the Christian viewpoint though.

You cannot even tell me what is. You might as well have made up a word "blahblah" and declared in big bold letters Blahblah IS. That is no more informative than no definition at all. If you cannot even tell atheist what it  IS they disbelieve than it is meaningless to talk the subject any further much less call them religious. You clearly do not know what it is you believe either.

Idehn:

If you cannot even tell atheist what it  IS they disbelieve than it is meaningless to talk the subject any further much less call them religious. You clearly do not know what it is you believe either.

If the  atheist goes on disbelieving what he  cannot define, then I worry for him . . .

imhotep:

If the  atheist goes on disbelieving what he  cannot define, then I worry for him . . .

What about yourself? You continue to say you believe what you cannot define.

Idehn:

What about yourself? You continue to say you believe what you cannot define.

Read my earlier posts ==>

imhotep:
There are many viewpoints (and definitions) on God, from the apophatic [/b]to the [b]cataphatic . . .

Idehn:

. . . .
@thehomer
This is exactly the question, you should ask in any debate you have about God from the start. When you ask them for a coherent definition of what God IS, an answer will rarely ever be forthcoming. If someone cannot even bring oneself to provide one, then clearly even they do not know what they are saying.

I've asked the questions but the fellow shows that he simply does not know what he is saying even after I've pointed out to him that my responses refer to the God of the Bible.
This fellow it seems wishes to believe in his unknown God so I'll just leave him to it. When he finally knows his God, he can then let others know.

thehomer:

I've asked the questions but the fellow shows that he simply does not know what he is saying even after I've pointed out to him that my responses refer to the God of the Bible.
This fellow it seems wishes to believe in his unknown God so I'll just leave him to it. When he finally knows his God, he can then let others know.

Well said.

Read the Spanish Mystics. From their experience [/b]of God, they tell us that sometimes God is [b]best known by Not-Knowing.

God is__________________________

Theists always leave the definition of god as open as possible because they know it cannot be defined because it doesn't exist.

I like Spinoza's definition though. He said, "God is an asylum of ignorance".  He's very right, classic case of god of the gaps. Whenever there is a gap in knowledge, theists fit their gods in and shut down their thinking faculties.

A couple of months ago, Neil Degrasse Tyson gave another nice definition. "God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time goes on"

God is the result of man's fear of the unknown, fear of his own mortality and an illusory insurance policy for his ignorance and fear.

One of the main reasons for christianity/islam's popularity among the downtrodden and ignorant is their promise of life after death. The promise that happens to be the biggest scam in human history. That's one of the main reasons theists are unwilling to examine their beliefs; they need the illusion to help make sense out of life.
Evolution's curse is that it gave man the ability to understand how hostile,ruthless and unfeeling the universe can be. I guess god lets them come to terms with it. They attribute the good things they see to their god and the bad things to their god's adversary. Simplistic,effective and even acceptable but it gets offensive when it ceases to be a private delusion and they try to impose it on the rest of society a la creationists, fundamentalists, politicians that won't keep the separation between church and state, religious convictions threatening national security and well being ( repubs attack on Planned parenthood), fleecing of gullible and helpless masses (every doggone church in Nigeria) and psychos who can't think for themselves even if their lives depended on it (olaadegbu, joagbaje, mabell,sweetnecta and cretins like them).

These pseudo-intellectuals must be suffering from a case of inferiority complex .  "Since you think my belief in unproven entities and my religion is illogical and irrational, I'll say your lack of belief in this hogwash is also a religion. See you are just like me, you have faith too!"

Atheism is the rejection of all gods and so called decrees and commandments attributed to them.
There are no tenets, dogmas or doctrines in atheism. There's no belief in the supernatural. There are no rites, ceremonies or rituals. There's no holy infallible book that was revealed to some illiterate in a cave or written on slabs of stone.
Atheism is the rejection of gods and that's all.  It's an acceptance of nature as is, without supernatural embellishments. It's a personal relationship with jesus reality.

And finally, god is nothing, god is a cat, god is a god, god is the air, god is spaghetti etc. because>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gods aint sh_t!

And to those who keep rejecting evolution and who somehow think evolution is about the origin of the universe, you need to put your religious propaganda down for a minute and expose yourself to some information outside of your religious box.
Humans are apes, whether you like it or not. Look at any type of  primate's hands, see the fingers and opposable thumbs? Now look at your hands.
Cats, Lions,tigers, cheetahs, pumas, etc are related. They all look alike in some kind of way. Same things with apes, we just happen to  hit the evolution lottery a few hundred thousand years ago, give or take. Years before yahweh was "born" 6000 years ago.
Evolution's is the proverbial nail in the  coffin, if you people admit that darwin and all evoultionary biologist that have come after him in the last 150 years are right, then even the gullible ones among you will have no choice to reject stories about talking snakes, dumb unclothed humans and the voyeuristic god who liked to take walks in the garden and play with his unclothed humans or whatever variation of the madness you subscribe too.

Ancient man had a lot of ignorant practices we don't do anymore, but some of us just can let go of the weirdness. That's why some accept the ancient fairy tales but reject scientific knowledge. The same knowledge that they rely on while thinking sky daddy is the one responsible.

Martian:

God is

Yes, my brother. God IS.

Martian:

Theists always leave the definition of god as open as possible because they know it cannot be defined because it doesn't exist.

There is no [b]open [/b]definition of God. Search well.

Martian:

I like Spinoza's definition though. He said, "God is an asylum of ignorance".  He's very right, classic case of god of the gaps. Whenever there is a gap in knowledge, theists fit their gods in and shut down their thinking faculties.

And where is Spinoza today? God has positively influenced many more lives than Spinoza.

Martian:

A couple of months ago, Neil Degrasse Tyson gave another nice definition. "God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time goes on"

The guy sounds frustrated. Probably got frustrated when he noticed that God will not fit into his 'scientific' mind. LOL

Martian:

God is the result of man's fear of the unknown, fear of his own mortality and an illusory insurance policy for his ignorance and fear.

One of the main reasons for christianity/islam's popularity among the downtrodden and ignorant is their promise of life after death. The promise that happens to be the biggest scam in human history. That's one of the main reasons theists are unwilling to examine their beliefs; they need the illusion to help make sense out of life.
Evolution's curse is that it gave man the ability to understand how hostile,ruthless and unfeeling the universe can be. I guess god lets them come to terms with it. They attribute the good things they see to their god and the bad things to their god's adversary. Simplistic,effective and even acceptable but it gets offensive when it ceases to be a private delusion and they try to impose it on the rest of society a la creationists, fundamentalists, politicians that won't keep the separation between church and state, religious convictions threatening national security and well being ( repubs attack on Planned parenthood), fleecing of gullible and helpless masses (every doggone church in Nigeria) and psychos who can't think for themselves even if their lives depended on it (olaadegbu, joagbaje, mabell,sweetnecta and cretins like them).

These pseudo-intellectuals must be suffering from a case of inferiority complex .  "Since you think my belief in unproven entities and my religion is illogical and irrational, I'll say your lack of belief in this hogwash is also a religion. See you are just like me, you have faith too!"

God created a Universe that can evolve/adapt. You will do well to learn from this, rather than try to attack God. You will only end up getting frustrated and bitter for nothing.

Martian:

Atheism is the rejection of all gods and so called decrees and commandments attributed to them.
There are no tenets, dogmas or doctrines in atheism. There's no belief in the supernatural. There are no rites, ceremonies or rituals. There's no holy infallible book that was revealed to some illiterate in a cave or written on slabs of stone.
Atheism is the rejection of gods and that's all.  It's an acceptance of nature as is, without supernatural embellishments. It's a personal relationship with jesus reality.

Curious. Why atheism subsists by bashing theism.
Atheism has no life of its own.
What exactly is the substance [/b]of atheism?

Martian:

And finally, god is nothing, god is a cat, god is a god, god is the air, god is spaghetti etc. because>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>[b]gods aint sh_t!

One Mystic said: God is No Thing.

Martian:

And to those who keep rejecting evolution and who somehow think evolution is about the origin of the universe, you need to put your religious propaganda down for a minute and expose yourself to some information outside of your religious box.
Humans are apes, whether you like it or not. Look at any type of  primate's hands, see the fingers and opposable thumbs? Now look at your hands.
Cats, Lions,tigers, cheetahs, pumas, etc are related. They all look alike in some kind of way. Same things with apes, we just happen to  hit the evolution lottery a few hundred thousand years ago, give or take. Years before yahweh was "born" 6000 years ago.
Evolution's is the proverbial nail in the  coffin, if you people admit that darwin and all evoultionary biologist that have come after him in the last 150 years are right, then even the gullible ones among you will have no choice to reject stories about talking snakes, dumb unclothed humans and the voyeuristic god who liked to take walks in the garden and play with his unclothed humans or whatever variation of the madness you subscribe too.

The big question being: Where did apes every other thing come from?
And whatever it was that evolved into apes, where did it come from?

^^ Yes.

Why something instead of nothing?

@ thehomer: if you could not see the meaning in the story given by imhotep of "the formular". . . I am really and truly gobsmacked.

imhotep:

Yes, my brother. God IS.
There is no open [/b]definition of God. Search well.
And where is Spinoza today? God has positively influenced many more lives than Spinoza.

The guy sounds frustrated. Probably got frustrated when he noticed that God will not fit into his 'scientific' mind. LOL

God created a Universe that can evolve/adapt. You will do well to learn from this, rather than try to attack God. You will only end up getting frustrated and bitter for nothing.

Curious. Why atheism [b]subsists by bashing theism.
Atheism has no life of its own.
What exactly is the substance [/b]of atheism?


One Mystic said: [b]God is No Thing.

The big question being: Where did apes every other thing come from?
And whatever it was that evolved into apes, where did it come from?

God is, God is,god is ,god is>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>god is what for goodness sake?
Spinoza is dead. What does that have to do with anything? We all die!
lol, frustrated! The guy's quote is about your god of the gaps. Thats what both quotes were about. The god you people fit in every unknown.
I'm not attacking god, how does one go about attacking non existent entities? Hell, I don't even know what you mean when you say "god". All you do is cite some spanish mystics who said "god is"
Atheism doesn't subsist by bashing theism. Atheism is a rejection of claims made by theists who insist that their various gods are responsible for everything and yet can't even provide a coherent explanantion of what they are talking about. After all god is_____.

You need to stop appealing to this unknown mystics!

Mysticism:1)obscure thought or speculation.
2)a doctrine of an immediate spiritual intuition of truths believed to transcend ordinary understanding, or of a direct, intimate union of the soul with god through contemplation or ecstasy.
Since it's all speculation, maybe you need to check with the Ibo mystics or italian mystics. They probably filled in the blank in the sentence "god is_________"

Where did the first organism to evolve come from. Right here on earth? Somewhere from the cosmos? Remnants of the sun's accretion disk?
I don't know. Just like I don't know the reason universe exists in the first place. But I do know it exists, scientific observations and calculations also say it has existed for a few billion years. But for the reason it exists, I have no idea.
I'm not going to fill this gap with a god though because sooner or later human knowledge and ingenuity will fill in the blanks with rational explanations.
If your "god is" is responsible, then you have to come up with rational and conclusive evidence.

Deep Sight:

^^ Yes.

Why something instead of nothing?

Maybe it's because of the onesness of infinity.

Martian:

God is, God is,god is ,god is>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>god is what for goodness sake?
Spinoza is dead. What does that have to do with anything? We all die!

And God is not dead. . .

Martian:

lol, frustrated! The guy's quote is about your god of the gaps. Thats what both quotes were about. The god you people fit in every unknown.
I'm not attacking god, how does one go about attacking non existent entities? Hell, I don't even know what you mean when you say "god". All you do is cite some spanish mystics who said "god is"
Atheism doesn't subsist by bashing theism. Atheism is a rejection of claims made by theists who insist that their various gods are responsible for everything and yet can't even provide a coherent explanantion of what they are talking about. After all god is_____.

You need to stop appealing to this unknown mystics!

The mystics are not unknown. They have been and continue to be inspirations to billions.

Martian:

Mysticism:1)obscure thought or speculation.
2)a doctrine of an immediate spiritual intuition of truths believed to transcend ordinary understanding, or of a direct, intimate union of the soul with god through contemplation or ecstasy.
Since it's all speculation, maybe you need to check with the Ibo mystics or italian mystics. They probably filled in the blank in the sentence "god is_________"

God IS.
His response to Moses: "I am He who IS."

Martian:

Where did the first organism to evolve come from. Right here on earth? Somewhere from the cosmos? Remnants of the sun's accretion disk?
I don't know.

But you are supposed to know. Be logical, be analytic, you will arrive at the answer . . . just try.

Martian:

Just like I don't know the reason universe exists in the first place. But I do know it exists, scientific observations and calculations also say it has existed for a few billion years. But for the reason it exists, I have no idea.
I'm not going to fill this gap with a god

You can fill it with no-God. That is very apophatic . . .an unknown acknowledgment of God Himself. Thanks a bunch.

Martian:

God is, God is,god is ,god is>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>god is what for goodness sake?

The refrain "God IS" - is a completed statement already. "God IS" refers to a permanent, immutable and self-existent state of being - namely that God simply IS.

You need to study and reflect on the philosophical notions of necessary things and contingent things.

The eternal element that is and remains the source of all existence is referred to as something that IS. That is a philosophical statement of self-existence. A thing whose intrinsic nature renders it existent.

Maybe it's because of the onesness of infinity.

Of course it is.

DISCIPLE: “How does one discover God?”

MASTER: “Through making the heart white with silent meditation. Not making paper black with religious composition.
Or making the air thick with learned conversation.”

imhotep:

And God is not dead. . .
The mystics are not unknown. They have been and continue to be inspirations to billions.
God IS.
His response to Moses: "I am He who IS."
But you are supposed to know. Be logical, be analytic, you will arrive at the answer . . . just try.
You can fill it with no-God. That is very apophatic . . .an unknown acknowledgment of God Himself. Thanks a bunch.

Finally! So you're talking about the judeo Christian god. The patriachal and ethnocentric megalomaniac created by some ancient Jewish "mystics ".
Being logical means admiting what you don't know. You claim to know the nature of this god down to his gender, yet the only place it exists is in the pages of some ancient Jewish stories. And you're telling me to be analytical!

Deep Sight:

The refrain "God IS" - is a completed statement already. "God IS" refers to a permanent, immutable and self-existent state of being - namely that God simply IS.

You need to study and reflect on the philosophical notions of necessary things and contingent things.

The eternal element that is and remains the source of all existence is referred to as something that IS. That is a philosophical statement of self-existence. A thing whose intrinsic nature renders it existent.

Of course it is.

Ok, in that case the omnipotent invincible cosmic eye is god then.
The all seeing eye, the oneness of infinity and the almighty FSM are the eternal elements that are the sources of all existence. Their intrinsic nature renders them existent, I can't prove it though, it's all philosophical.
FSM is.

^^^ Have you done a study of the philosophical notions of necessary things and contingent things?

Some brief words I posted about a year ago on the subject -

Well if i may briefly. To understand this, i think we should return to the philosophical question of necessary things and contingent things. Basically necessary things are things which self-exist - things which could not NOT exist. Contingent things basically are not inherently self existent: or put better - require a cause to exist.

For a simple example, let me cite these: Time is a necessary thing. Time is something that cannot NOT exist. Time is. Now without getting into the dynamics of whether or not space and time were created at the moment of the "big bang" let me just say this - i refer here to infinite time, and not finite time.

Infinite time is basically eternity. Eternity is not something that needs to be created. It quite simply is - a constancy of continuous infinity of time. It is thus a necessary and not contingent thing, and is self-existent, and needn’t be created. It is intangible, and can be referred to as a flat state of reality.

Now let’s look at another example. Let’s look, for instance (just to give a wild-example) at my Sony Bravia Flat Screen Tv. This is by no means a necessary or self-existent thing: It is a contingent thing, and even if you came upon it in the furthest reaches of the universe, you would conclude that it required a cause to exist.

Now although I know there are hairs to be split on this: let me say that the principal thing to note is that necessary things are by nature intangible, whereas contingent things are tangible. Think of every conceivable self-existent thing: eternity is self existent: and per force intangible. Numbers are also self-existent – and per force intangible.

If you think about it, you may see that anything that is self-existent, cannot also be tangible or material. One pointer to this fact is that self-existent things, being necessary and uncreated, are not capable of change. Matter, on the other hand, changes constantly and this betrays the fact that it is not a necessary or self-existent thing and accordingly: required a cause, or causative/ creative agent.

I honestly hope that this has given some perspective as to why I do not, and will never regard material things or matter, as being self-existent.

Deep Sight:

Some brief words I posted about a year ago on the subject -

Well if i may briefly. To understand this, i think we should return to the philosophical question of necessary things and contingent things. Basically necessary things are things which self-exist - things which could not NOT exist. Contingent things basically are not inherently self existent: or put better - require a cause to exist.

For a simple example, let me cite these: Time is a necessary thing. Time is something that cannot NOT exist. Time is. Now without getting into the dynamics of whether or not space and time were created at the moment of the "big bang" let me just say this - i refer here to infinite time, and not finite time.

Infinite time is basically eternity. Eternity is not something that needs to be created. It quite simply is - a constancy of continuous infinity of time. It is thus a necessary and not contingent thing, and is self-existent, and needn’t be created. It is intangible, and can be referred to as a flat state of reality.

Now let’s look at another example. Let’s look, for instance (just to give a wild-example) at my Sony Bravia Flat Screen Tv. This is by no means a necessary or self-existent thing: It is a contingent thing, and even if you came upon it in the furthest reaches of the universe, you would conclude that it required a cause to exist.

Now although I know there are hairs to be split on this: let me say that the principal thing to note is that necessary things are by nature intangible, whereas contingent things are tangible. Think of every conceivable self-existent thing: eternity is self existent: and per force intangible. Numbers are also self-existent – and per force intangible.

If you think about it, you may see that anything that is self-existent, cannot also be tangible or material. One pointer to this fact is that self-existent things, being necessary and uncreated, are not capable of change. Matter, on the other hand, changes constantly and this betrays the fact that it is not a necessary or self-existent thing and accordingly: required a cause, or causative/ creative agent.

I honestly hope that this has given some perspective as to why I do not, and will never regard material things or matter, as being self-existent.

Ok, in that case we all can create concepts of of self existent beings that we can't actually prove because they are immaterial anyway. So like I said before, FSM is. And it doesn't require a causative agent.
Hell, all gods and supernatural entities exist. Including Zeus, ahura Mazda, Yahweh, Oloodumare et al They are all in Valhalla right now, hanging out with Odin,Thor and a gang of voluptuous self existing maidens.
[
You're just using the cosmological argument aka the uncaused first cause. The conclusion of the cosmological argument is "GOD". Well the two guys who first put forth this argument were Aristotle and Plato and they damn sure didn't believe in the "god" apologists try to claim as that first cause. So which god is the answer, the Greek god or whatever modern day god you believe in or made up?
The universe itself might be uncaused,but at least we know it exists even if we don't know all the details yet.

Martian:

The universe itself might be uncaused,but at least we know it exists even if we don't know all the details yet.

God is  the uncaused  Cause, and we know that God exists.

imhotep:

God is  the uncaused  Cause, and we that [b]know [/b]God exists.

I dare say nobody TRULY KNOWS. simply put, nobody can either confirm within reason (given a broad latitude for hypothesizing) or deny without a doubt (having digested largely corroborated evidence that support such hypothesis) that God exist. what we have are collateral pieces of evidence that suggest or form a good portion of our "opinionated" notions of God and the Universe. but hey! who is this mere algae of creation to dare venture into this realm of thought