If you'd like to do your side of the argument a favor, you could try making a post addressed to me without bringing in an ad hominem argument. That would be a verifiable miracle.

Quote Originally Posted by Parture View Post
You're a babbletalker. You babble. A false dichotomy is when someone says there is option 1 and option 2, but since option 1 is false, therefore option 2 has to be true, all the while overlooking option 3 that is clearly available to consider. Anyway, there is no dichotomous position. Since nature always needs a cause, infinite regress would be false because you would have happened already having had an eternity to do so. And that's final. Since nature can't always have existed it must be true that which is outside of nature is the cause. Case closed.
This is not what a false dichotomy is. You're close, but not quite.

The false dichotomy fallacy is a fallacy in which an option is unfairly excluded. It is not a formal fallacy, so your formal analysis is superfluous.

I don't really see why you're trying to argue with me on this one. You're trying to make an argument known as the disjunctive syllogism, which is a valid one. So here's your argument:

1. Either the universe is eternally existent, or the universe had a beginning.
2. The universe is not eternally existent.
C. Therefore, the universe had a beginning.

The form of your argument is fine, and I accept premise 1 as true. But you're not giving me any reason to accept premise 2. Why should I?

God is Spirit. We don't know the elements of Spirit, only that Spirit has the functions of communion, conscience and intuition, so when God creates He does so by these functions, these very functions we have also in our spirit. However much you like or dislike the uncreated Creator's decision, process or work of creation, you can't challenge it because He is the greatest of all. God's prerogative is His alone. Since all He does is perfect you can trust in it. You certainly can ask some questions but when some answers aren't forthcoming that doesn't infringe upon the fact of His Almighty nature. So while the universe can come from God it can't come from nothing, because that which doesn't exist can't cause anything. It doesn't exist.
The only part of this section that was anything resembling an argument was the part where you said "that which doesn't exist can't cause anything." I agree with this point, and I should have made it more clear in the past that this is not a position that I am advocating.

This is the beginning of humility to accept the uncreated Creator outside time and space. Outside time and space defined: not in space and not in time.
That's not a definition. Time is not a room. You can't step out of it.

You might be arguing that time is not a thing which applies to god, but this would be disproved by the bible itself, so I don't think you're going that route.