God Couldn't Have Caused The First Moment Of Time

Contention 1: Con starts off the round by listing things that God cannot do (be evil, unjust, and a liar), thus showing the coherency of God not being able to do something humans can. The problem is that none of those are considered great making properties. Note that in my first round I stated: "God must be a being with an intellect far more advanced than humans because he is also described as a maximally great being, who would certainly have intelligence as this is a great making property." Having intelligence is certainly greater than not having intelligence. Thus, any great making property that humans posses; God would have to a further extent. This doesn't mean that God is expected to do everything a human can do. He then mentions the fact that God cannot make square circle to show that there are things God cannot do. However, I know this, as this whole debate is about me proving that God cannot do something; create the first moment of time. My opponent then claims that a Maximally Great Being cannot think, but that is like saying that a Maximally Great Mathematician cannot do algebra; It is complete nonsense. Intelligence allows us love, if we couldn't process thoughts about emotion then love would have no meaning. God is conceived of as a omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent being: "a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions."[1] Omniscient means all knowing, but knowing presupposes a mind and thus intelligence. There is simply no reasonable conception of God which does not entail he is intelligent. My opponent then asks the question of what an all knowing being needs to think about. Well, an all knowing being would have to think about whether or not he wants to create a universe. Without this ability, he wouldn't have free-will and couldn't be a Maximally Great Being. Even though he would have knowledge of all things, it is what he does with that knowledge that matter. What Con is describing is like static information stored; like a frozen bookshelf stuck in timelessness. However, this shares no relation to anything that can be called a "being". Con then appeals to a definition of intelligence that is as follows: "The basic eternal quality of divine Mind" The problem is that the term "mind" necessitates intelligence, so the implications of thoughts from a mind cannot be avoided: "The principle of intelligence; the spirit of consciousness regarded as an aspect of reality."[2] A functioning intellectual mind without a mental process is like flame that doesn't burn. They are logically incoherent situations as the very essence of that that thing is denied and assumed at the same time. Additionally, I did not just source an author from a popular Christian website, I quoted one of the most popular Christian philosophers as well. To deny God the ability to think, is similar to denying him the ability to have consciousness, or the ability to be a being! One cannot just stray from the very essence of what is implied by a term, that is the height of irrationality. Any reasonable definition of God will infer intelligence. Contention 1 still does not harm my argument. Contention 2: This argument from Con was dropped. Contention 3: Con argues: "It is not incoherent to argue that God could exist outside of the dimension that we call time while still having inherent to himself the quality of being capable of change or of having an inherent sequence of experience that all events he performs (the creation of the universe, the incarnatio of his son, etc.) follow." However, it is incoherent. Change presupposes time, as any change can be timed which actually entails the existence of time. If something begins to move or change, then as it moves, everything that traces back beginning in the earlier than direction is "past", when that "past" moment was "present", everything in the later than direction is the "future". This means time is necessary for change. Saying a process or change can occur with 0 time is like saying you can fit a basketball in 0 space; it is clearly impossible. If God was the cause of the first moment of time, then he would have to be timeless and thus changeless. Your argument would only work if my argument was that God couldn't have caused the first moment of physical time. If that was the case, then God could exist in metaphysical time. However, my argument states that God cannot cause of the first moment of time (which means time itself in any context), necessitating that any cause of it being timeless. Additionally, my opponent states: "Moreover, if God did have such an inherent quality, there would still be only one first moment of time, because God, being eternal, would not have a first moment but the space-time continuum, being temporary, would have a first moment." God cannot have the inherent quality of changing while being the cause of the first moment of time. The reason, as stated before, is because change presupposes time. If God exists in some type of time already (even if it is not physical time), he cannot cause the first moment of time (because some time already exists). My argument has nothing to do with specifically the time within the universe but time itself. Conclusion All of Con's objections fall flat on their face (Con even conceded contention 2). Any reasonable conception of God requires him to at the very least be intelligent, and be able to process a thought in order to make choices (this is how God is usually conceived, and Maximal Greatness entails it). If we deny that God is intelligent, we might as well deny that water is wet. As far as choices are concerned, If God doesn't think about a choice, then we have a mechanism that violates free-will (another great making property). Contention 3 entails an incoherency. If God caused the first moment of time, then he would have to be timeless and thus changeless. If he existed in some prior time, then he really didn't cause the first moment of time. My argument doesn't say that God couldn't have caused the first moment of the time we experience, but time. Any type of time self-evidently falls under the "time" category. Since none of my opponent's objections go through; my argument still remains unscathed... The resolution has been affirmed. Vote Pro. Sources [1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com... [2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...