My dear guido, have you ever taken a logic geometry class? more specifically, a logic section witin a geometry class, aka geometric/logic proofs?
It doesn't appear so. Lets jump in.
GIVENs: (I would change around the order for effect)
let a: Time exists
let b: Time is the medium which things occur
let c: Change is an event in time
let d: Anything that does not have time is static and does not change ( i would change this line to "anything that does not change does not have time," as you are defining lack of time using static. )
let e: A life span is the amount of time that something occurs
let f: Time does not exist within a higher time (by which i believe you mean that time began, and there was nothing before that start)
let g: Things that exist within time have time and things that have time exist within time.
Now your proof is lacking and very iffy, but there are extreme sections where you use absolutly NO LOGIC! Want an example? see below.
In your contorted and illogical proof, you say:
(#3)You assume something that you do not list as a premise (illogical) and you dont link it to any other premises. lets see...
Let z: future exists within time
Let Y: Object exists outside of time
if Z then Z is not C (If the future exists, then it does not change. contorted, ik, but i didn't write it originally and i wanted to do it using all the source premises)
if not C then not G (if the future does not change, then it is
static. If it is static, it has no time ( premise C).
If not G then y (if it does NOT have time, then it cannot exist within time.)
Therefore: using the Law of Syllogism, if Z then Y. This contradicts premise F which says time does not exist within a higher time. Therefor the "people" were right when they told you you were illogical and their reasoning is superior to yours. This is the first contradiction of MANY, but the post is long and monotonous already.
A few more non-proof points:
You say that time does not exist within a higher time, so therefor time must have existed forever. If as later you colclude from your contorted logic that things can exist without time, then they must be following their own, external time, which our time MUST BE SUBJECT to only by coexisting with it. Contradiction? yes.
Another one. If you say time exists and is the medium by which things occur, then ALL things are subject to time, because there is no higher time by which they can occur (as you state). Therefor a timeless god CANNOT exist, since nothing can be timeless, as it would operate off the medium which all things occur AND in its own, higher time. Double contradiction.
In setting out to prove you logic, you destroyed any hope of establishing a logical, functioning chain of events. Instead you use ad hoc repeatedly, create points from thin air, and don't support any of your conjectures with either fact or logical proof.
Edited by Damouse, : oops.
I believe in God, I just call it Nature