Infinite past... with a beginning?

[kx000]

You can make up a religion with any sort of nonsense in it.

It's my right. The fallen angel has always been associated with light.

 

[sideshowbob]

It's my right.

And it's my right to point out he nonsense.

 

[kx000]

And it's my right to point out he nonsense.

But, all truth comes through faith.

 

[sideshowbob]

But, all truth comes through faith.

There's some nonsense right there. faith is one of the biggest obstacles to truth.

 

[kx000]

There's some nonsense right there. faith is one of the biggest obstacles to truth.

Belief is synomical to trust, and both result in truth.

 

[sideshowbob]

Belief is synomical to trust, and both result in truth.

Nope. Trust is easily misplaced.

 

[kx000]

Nope. Trust is easily misplaced.

When you can know when you trust someone.

 

[sideshowbob]

When you can know when you trust someone.

As I said, trust is separate from truth.

 

[kx000]

As I said, trust is separate from truth.

Not separate. Truth is the means and trust the ends.

 

[Cris]

Some people seem to view the notion of an infinite past with a beginning as impossible. Anyone can argue this impossibility properly?
EB

The argument concerning infinity appears irrelevant. The essence is that a beginning is impossible.

1. Everything has a cause.
2. Time is required for anything to occur.
3. A beginning implies there is no time beforehand.
4. If there was a point where time did not exist (3) then there could not be an event to cause (2) a beginning.
5. Since there was no beginning (4) then time has always existed.

 

[sideshowbob]

Truth is the means and trust the ends.

That's just gibberish.

 

[Speakpigeon]

The argument concerning infinity appears irrelevant. The essence is that a beginning is impossible.

1. Everything has a cause.
2. Time is required for anything to occur.
3. A beginning implies there is no time beforehand.
4. If there was a point where time did not exist (3) then there could not be an event to cause (2) a beginning.
5. Since there was no beginning (4) then time has always existed.

Sorry, I don't accept premise 1, premise 2, premise 3.
I take 4 and 5 to be what you infer from your premises, so, obviously, I don't see your conclusions as necessary.
EB

 

[Write4U]

Time (chronology) is only required after the beginning of change.

 

[kx000]

That's just gibberish.

"In the beginning God was"

 

[sideshowbob]

"In the beginning God was"

Citation please.

 

[kx000]

Citation please.

John 1:1 In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[sideshowbob]

John 1:1 In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.

That doesn't back up your claim that "Truth is the means and trust the ends." Try to post something sensible.

 

[just me]

If an instant can exist before forever in the past, infinite time could have begun in that instant.

And infinity minus infinity can be a figure other than 0, because infinity plus any figure other than 0 is equal to infinity.
so such an instant could have existed.

 

[river]

If an instant can exist before forever in the past, infinite time could have begun in that instant.

.

Think about this a little more , to your first statement . We all should .

Figure out the reasoning . To me it is flawed .

Repeat it to yourself , just me until you understand truly what you stated .

 

[just me]

.

Think about this a little more , to your first statement . We all should .

Figure out the reasoning . To me it is flawed .

Ok. How so?