How does immortality of God follow?

  • Thread starter Thread starter STT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
STT said:
you need to prove that out of nothing comes nothing.
Click to expand...
So you think it’s a possibility that out of absolutely nothing a thing can begin to exist without a cause, and you think that in absolutely nothing there are possibilities since you assert that possibility is not an expression of existence; and you ask for proof that things cannot come out of nothing by themselves despite the fact that we are talking about absolutely nothing/no-reality.

In fact all your counter claims are assertions and not worth addressing, because if your correct then reality is fundamentally absurd and there is no hope for a reasonable ontology…

I will bowl out now. Thank you STT for the discussion.
 
Last edited:
The uncreated does not exist as a passible being. It cannot be acted upon as it is the source of every act. There Is nothing prior to it, therefore nothing can act upon it. It is not subject to change therefore it cannot change state or be subject to entropy. Entropy is the decline of energy from an initial starting point. But God, the uncreated supersubsistent source of being is prior to all beginnings, therefore nothing can act upon him because he exists as totally apart from creatures and their effects.
 
STT said:
40.png
Vico:
Only what is created can be mortal.
Click to expand...
I have problem with this. You need to prove it or justify it.
Click to expand...
Only God is uncreated and God is eternal.
 
Gorgias said:
2 unicorns + 2 unicorns = 4 unicorns.
Click to expand...
Yes. Unicorns don’t exists. But the fact that 2 + 2 equals 4 is not only true regardless of what you choose to represent it symbolically, but it’s truth is a result of the principle of non-contradiction which is itself intrinsic to the act of reality. For example a thing cannot exist and not exist at the same time, but that can only be true if the ground of all possible and potential things reflects that truth in it’s nature; that is to say it’s nature is the reason why 2 + 2 = 4.

That is why i said eternal truth is an expression of existence, otherwise there would be no such thing as truth since there is no truth in absolutely nothing precisely because it is nothing at all. It’s meaningless to speak of truth accept in reference to reality. For example the truth that unicorns don’t exist is itself a reference to reality, what does not exist in it, otherwise the statement is meaningless.

Since eternal truths cannot cease to be true, and there is no truth in absolutely nothing, it therefore follows that there must be an eternal reality, and it’s nature is the reason why these things are true.

This is what we call God.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but @Vico said “can be mortal”. The spirits (angels, or our souls) are non-destroyable, unceasing – because if God created something, He don’t want it to not-to-exist. In another words, it is not possible for spirit to be mortal.
 
Last edited:
looskanal said:
40.png
Vico:
Only God is uncreated and God is eternal.
Click to expand...
It’s completely possible for something to be both created and eternal. The two aren’t mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...
I mean in the sense of neither beginning nor end. Single ended eternity, continuance without time, applies to some created things.
 
StAugustine said:
The uncreated does not exist as a passible being. It cannot be acted upon as it is the source of every act. There Is nothing prior to it, therefore nothing can act upon it. It is not subject to change therefore it cannot change state or be subject to entropy. Entropy is the decline of energy from an initial starting point. But God, the uncreated supersubsistent source of being is prior to all beginnings, therefore nothing can act upon him because he exists as totally apart from creatures and their effects.
Click to expand...
I understand that God is immortal if He is pure actual since there would be no change in Him. I however want to see whether there is a proof for immortally of God considering that He is uncaused cause.
 
IWantGod said:
So you think it’s a possibility that out of absolutely nothing a thing can begin to exist without a cause, and you think that in absolutely nothing there are possibilities since you assert that possibility is not an expression of existence; and you ask for proof that things cannot come out of nothing by themselves despite the fact that we are talking about absolutely nothing/no-reality .
Click to expand...
It is quite obvious that you can prove the necessity of existence if you can prove the impossibility of nothing. We have no a priori proof for both.
IWantGod said:
In fact all your counter claims are assertions and not worth addressing, because if your correct then reality is fundamentally absurd and there is no hope for a reasonable ontology…
Click to expand...
I think that my points were valid.
IWantGod said:
I will bowl out now. Thank you STT for the discussion.
Click to expand...
Thank you too.
 
looskanal said:
That’s a bit presumptuous don’t you think. Unless you’re saying that you know for a fact that Mr. Schrödinger’s cat can’t be both alive and dead at the same time. The law of non-contradiction may not be as inviolable as you think it is.
Click to expand...
There is nothing presumptuous at all about the principle of non-contradiction so long as it is applied in the right context.

If you throw out the principle of non-contradiction then truth is meaningless and arbitrary.

Having said that, while it is not true that a cat can be alive and dead at the same time (Schrodinger’s cat is just an analogy and is not to be taken literally), i do accept that a nature can have the effect of behaving as both a particle and a wave at the same time, because it’s nature allows that to be possible.

But while it is true that a nature can be a particle and a wave at the same time, it is not also true that it doesn’t exist or that it is only a particle and not a wave at the same time. Thus the principle of contradiction applies regardless. The principle of contradiction especially applies to the act of reality, since if a thing does not exist, then it is nothing at all, thus one cannot say that it exists. Also you cannot say that you don’t exist as that should be self evident to you.

The presumption is that you understand quantum physics and that it has somehow undermined metaphysics.
 
Last edited:
Even if you constrain the set to starting at 0 or 1, though, there are still an infinite number of positive integers. So it’s not the case that infinity has to go in both directions:
 
Uncaused cause can only be subsistent being beyond every creature and therefore beyond change and thus immortal. In the singularity of existence, at the fount of being, what force will you posit to act on the uncaused cause?
 
Not even that, here we are dealing with simply an endless quantity of discrete units. But God is beyond quantity and unity and division. Our notion of infinity fails to capture his immense singularity and paradoxical trinity.
 
Last edited:
STT said:
How being necessary implements that God is immortal? I don’t see how that follow.
Click to expand...
Something that exists necessarily cannot not-exist and thus cannot pass from existence. That one’s easy enough.
STT said:
No one can act on uncaused cause
Click to expand...
If you agree with that, then no force can take an uncaused cause out of existence and thus, if it exists in the first place, it must be immortal.
 
Usagi said:
Something that exists necessarily cannot not-exist and thus cannot pass from existence. That one’s easy enough.
Click to expand...
But uncaused cause is necessary for the first cause/creation. Why it is necessary afterward?
Usagi said:
If you agree with that, then no force can take an uncaused cause out of existence and thus, if it exists in the first place, it must be immortal.
Click to expand...
The immortality doesn’t follow. Uncaused cause can cease to exist on its own.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top