Existence Is Infinite if you try using the definition of existence given from the seeming dictionary definition OP gave, these assertions are rendered as "That which is observed is observed because that which is not observed is not observed". What this is supposed to communicate about the meaning and implications of existence, I do not know. — MindForged
Actually the implication is closer to "that which exists can be observed because it exists, and that which does not exist cannot be observed because it does not exist".
That which does not exist cannot be observed (or interacted with). That which does exist can be.
It's not giving me a real understanfing of what you think existence is. It's like using the word "true" in your definition of truth. — MindForged
As stated above, my points are fairly straightforward. I am asserting that existence is infinite in extent, and eternal in duration. I am also asserting that we are parts of existence.
Furthermore existence is being. It's difficult to get much simpler than that while remaining coherent. You must keep in mind that human language has its limits. Many things are difficult, some things nearly impossible, to describe with words. This could be viewed as a demonstration of the human brain's limited abilities and the limitations of its concepts.
Further, existence having a beginning does not imply there was a state of so called non-existence beforehand. That's a logical doozy because it contradicts itself, but not in the way OP intended. It can easily mean there was a first moment of time. There's no "before" a first moment because "before" is a temporal concept, and clearly someone positing a first moment of existence is not positing a time before time. That's just dumb. — MindForged
The idea of a "beginning of existence", or a "first moment of time" suggests that existence just began. How would you explain that? It is essentially a something-from-nothing premise. ("No before" essentially implies nothing.)
How does something, how does time, just come about? This must be explained.
How does existence "just begin"?
Eternal existence requires no such explanation. If existence always existed there would be no event, there would be no occurrence requiring explanation.
Eternal existence is the simpler explanation. Eternal existence always exists, it does not just pop into being. Eternal existence passes Occam's Razor as it is the simpler explanation of the two. Existence "just coming about" requires further explanation, it concerns a more complicated premise and by extension a more complicated explanation to support it.