To infinity and beyond.

[Nearly Sane]

Actually, it all follows from being that which exists independent of anything else.

That's a further assertion

[jeremyp]

It sounds as if you have nothing Against a necessary entity per se and that IMV is why. Some atheists imo think the necessary entity has the smell of God about it and they would be right...

I'm not ruling out the possibility of a necessary entity. I'm just saying that you haven't shown that there must be a necessary entity or that this necessary entity must be a god under the normal definition of a personal god.

But let us look at what our necessary entity entails...

It has always existed

That does not follow.

It exists rather than nothing existing

This is a tautology. If something exists then something exists. Well done. How profound.

There is nothing that can make it do anything...otherwise that would be the necessary entity.

Well that rules out your god as a necessary entity: humans forced your god to incarnate as a human.

Subsequently, it obeys no greater law, has no context in which to make an accidental or chance action.

Again, if true, your god cannot be a necessary entity, otherwise it would just have forgiven humans instead of going through all that death and resurrection nonsense.

Given that then it is not like a natural, unconscious thing.

Huh? That's a leap.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That does not follow. This is a tautology. If something exists then something exists.

It does follow that the necessary entity has always existed since had it not it would have come from nothing and nothing does not exist.

[jeremyp]

It does follow that the necessary entity has always existed since had it not it would have come from nothing and nothing does not exist.

How do you know there was never a time when nothing existed?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

How do you know there was never a time when nothing existed?

Nothing, by definition doesn’t exist. You seem to be advocating something coming from nothing or something creating itself...an absurdity .

More over the existence of nothing you are suggesting seems to depend on a something... time.

[jeremyp]

Nothing, by definition doesn’t exist.

This is just word games.

How do you know there was never a time when nothing existed?

You seem to be advocating something coming from nothing or something creating itself

You mean like your god?

I'm not advocating anything. I'm asking you to justify the things you advocate.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

This is just word games.

How do you know there was never a time when nothing existed?
You mean like your god?

I'm not advocating anything. I'm asking you to justify the things you advocate.

I’m not advocating anything creating itself just something always existing. When we observe entities which is it that has always existed and always will?

[jeremyp]

I’m not advocating anything creating itself just something always existing.

Yes and I'm asking you to justify that and also your insistence that the something that has always existed is your (or anybody's) god.

When we observe entities which is it that has always existed and always will?

I don't know. You tell e.

[SteveH]

Nothing, by definition doesn’t exist. You seem to be advocating something coming from nothing or something creating itself...an absurdity .

More over the existence of nothing you are suggesting seems to depend on a something... time.

As I've pointed out previously on this thread, modern quantum physics, as I understand it (and it is quite likely that I've misunderstood it, but if you think so, references please) says that universes can indeed pop into existence without a pre-existent cause.

[Outrider]

I’m not advocating anything creating itself just something always existing.

I’m not sure you have properly acknowledged the difficulties with infinities

Which is it, just so we're clear?

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Which is it, just so we're clear?

O.

Can a single entity be the same as an infinite regress of entities? I think not.
So both.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As I've pointed out previously on this thread, modern quantum physics, as I understand it (and it is quite likely that I've misunderstood it, but if you think so, references please) says that universes can indeed pop into existence without a pre-existent cause.

Reference please? Where are yours?
Trouble here is the ubiquity of energy. Since it is literally anywhere nothing now can be popping out of nowhere.
Moreover I’ve heard the effect of popping into existence is due to quantum fluctuations so presumably something has to fluctuate.

[SteveH]

Reference please?

https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/what-caused-the-big-bang

[Outrider]

Can a single entity be the same as an infinite regress of entities?

Your problem, you said, was with infinities.

I think not.

I get that distinct impression myself.

So both.

A, special pleading lives on. So good to see a classic.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/what-caused-the-big-bang

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=4

[SteveH]

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html?_r=4

Given that a universe exists, it has to have some set of quantum laws, so why not the set we actually have?