God outside of time and space?

[Aliza]

Religion is not evidence based. It either works for you (makes you feel good, helps you stay sober, or has some other value in your life), or it does not. 

Explaining it is one thing, but proving it shouldn't be necessary.

Proving it should be necessary when you're trying to get others to believe as you do.
The alternative is... well.... what historically was done: the ruling class either forcing people to believe what they "believe" and then, because that only works superficially for the first generation, wait a few generations and voila; or being the example that people want to emulate. I find this second option a bit more difficult to accomplish, so it's no wonder that the first one would have been the prefered one.

Nowadays, I think none of these options would work. Given how human and fallible any religious hierarchy is, I'd expect them to be unable to be the example, also provided the ubiquitous media coverage we have.
Imposing a belief would be work, if access to the broader society was blocked, I suppose.... but would the Western societies peacefully accept having the internet clamped down like they do in Iran and North Korea and a few other places I could name?

Well sure, if you're proselytizer then you must prove to the person you're trying to convince to their satisfaction.

But I don't happen to support proselytizing.

[1Sam15]

Do government officials (US) proselytize?

[Dānu]

I dont think its a new idea, however it would be impossible to prove [at least by todays standards].

But then from there, if you allow the thing that religious people use as "evidence" all the time, their holy book, which has numerous interactions with this outside of space/time god speaking and interacting with people in real time in actual reality. So even IF we personally could never prove it - said god could hypothetically just pop into our reality and say something/prove otherwise.

Religion is not evidence based. It either works for you (makes you feel good, helps you stay sober, or has some other value in your life), or it does not. 

Explaining it is one thing, but proving it shouldn't be necessary.

I'm sure MAGA Republicans believe something similar regarding their theories of election fraud.

[SteveII]

For a variety of theological considerations, I subscribe to the concept of God existed timelessly and changeless causally prior to the universe (atemporal) and in-time (temporal), from the point of creation on. It does not make sense that Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, was not in time, then in time, and is now not in time. Further the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity, is supposed to indwell people as part of a process of Christian growth--so...in time?

[Minimalist]

Thanks for the pointless demonstration of religitard silliness.