How does immortality of God follow?

  • Thread starter Thread starter STT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess I just wanted confirmation that I am on the right track!!!🐲
 
STT said:
Can you stop reading my post whenever you want?
Click to expand...
Yes, but that’s not interrupting a chain of causality or uncaused. You’re suggesting I do things for no reason instead of having reasons for doing things.
 
STT said:
40.png
Wesrock:
Yes, but that’s not interrupting a chain of causality or uncaused.
Click to expand...
It is interrupting the chain of causality and it is uncaused.
Click to expand...
Would I take action to “interrupt” said chain if said chain didn’t exist and wasn’t in my purview? The fact that my action is dependent upon this causal chain existing and being before me makes it a cause of my subsequent decisions in how to respond to it.
Wesrock said:
You’re suggesting I do things for no reason instead of having reasons for doing things.
Click to expand...
Of course we are able to do things based on no reason.
Click to expand...
You might argue without any reasons to back you up or inform your decision making… That’s not how I work.
 
Last edited:
I think he believes in a “caused uncaused cause”

(1) Caused in terms of our decision making ability since he conceded we are caused to have ability to change our mind:
STT:
This means that you were caused to change your mind
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
(2) Uncaused in how we decide, i.e. we decide freely
STT:
uncaused cause since we can interrupt a chain of causality and decide.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
(3) Cause since we affect the chain of causation by our decision in (2)
 
Wesrock said:
Would I take action to “interrupt” said chain if said chain didn’t exist and wasn’t in my purview? The fact that my action is dependent upon this causal chain existing and being before me makes it a cause of my subsequent decisions in how to respond to it.
Click to expand...
You accepted that you can stop reading my post whenever you want. You of course need to put yourself in a mental mode to observe the chain and stop whenever you wish.
Wesrock said:
You might argue without any reasons to back you up or inform your decision making… That’s not how I work.
Click to expand...
Aren’t you able to practice your free will?
 
STT said:
40.png
Wesrock:
Would I take action to “interrupt” said chain if said chain didn’t exist and wasn’t in my purview? The fact that my action is dependent upon this causal chain existing and being before me makes it a cause of my subsequent decisions in how to respond to it.
Click to expand...
You accepted that you can stop reading my post whenever you want. You of course need to put yourself in a mental mode to observe the chain and stop whenever you wish.
Click to expand...
Yes… and that’s not uncaused or independent.
Wesrock said:
You might argue without any reasons to back you up or inform your decision making… That’s not how I work.
Click to expand...
Aren’t you able to practice your free will?
Click to expand...
Yes. That doesn’t mean my being or will are uncaused and exist or act absolutely independently.
 
Last edited:
STT said:
How does immortality of God follow from the fact that He is uncaused cause?
Click to expand...
The others have given you good answers, but lets try this another way.

Do agree that there are truths that cannot fail to be true?
 
God is not physical cause, but ontological cause. He is the creator of categories and therefore transcends every category. God is not a supreme being amongst other beings. He is the author of the category “being” and therefore transcends it. And transcending it, he is not subject to effects that occur to beings. Therefore, speaking analogically, God is immortal. Literally “Athanatos.” Undying.
 
STT said:
Sure. What is your argument?
Click to expand...
Well if there are truths that cannot fail to be true, then…
  1. They cannot be a product of nothing
  2. They cannot begin to be true.
Such truths cannot come out of nothing because there is absolutely nothing in nothing. So truth must be grounded in existence. Also they cannot be grounded in any being, state, or property, that was at some point only potentially real, because the kind of truth we are talking about cannot begin to be true. In other-words such truths are eternally or timelessly true. Therefore the being that such truths are grounded in must also eternally or timelessly exist without cause.

Thus these eternal truths that we discover reflects the nature of an eternal being.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
Well if there are truths that cannot fail to be true, then…

1.They cannot be a product of nothing
Click to expand...
True.
IWantGod said:
  1. They cannot begin to be true.
Click to expand...
True.
IWantGod said:
Such truths cannot come out of nothing because there is absolutely nothing in nothing. So truth must be grounded in existence.
Click to expand...
True. No existence, no truth.
IWantGod said:
Also they cannot be grounded in any being, state, or property, that was at some point only potentially real, because the kind of truth we are talking about cannot begin to be true.
Click to expand...
True.
IWantGod said:
In other-words such truths are eternally or timelessly true. Therefore the being that such truths are grounded in must also eternally or timelessly exist without cause.
Click to expand...
I have problems in here: (1) How if the truth is about beings rather than a being? (2) The fact that there is a eternal truth does not indicate that there is a eternal being.
IWantGod said:
Thus these eternal truths that we discover reflects the nature of an eternal being.
Click to expand...
This doesn’t follow.
 
Last edited:
STT said:
I have problems in here: (1) How if the truth is about beings rather than a being? (2) The fact that there is a eternal truth does not indicate that there is a eternal being.
Click to expand...
STT said:
Such truths cannot come out of nothing because there is absolutely nothing in nothing. So truth must be grounded in existence.
Click to expand...
You admit here that it is incorrect to think an eternal truth without the existence of an eternal being.
STT said:
This doesn’t follow.
Click to expand...
You wish to think of an eternal truth as a being in and and of itself which in an ontological sense is true. That which is eternally true, eternally has and act of reality since in that case truth is what is, and that which is in this context cannot fail to be.

But you are incorrect in a different sense. For example, for the sake of argument, lets say that it is eternally true that 2 + 2 = 4. What you have to understand is that this is an abstraction from reality. It begins with the principle of non-contradiction; for example a thing cannot be and not be at the same time. And the reason this is true is because of the nature of existence. The truth that 2 + 2 = 4 is not a being floating around in the ether. It does not have a nature by itself. And since you agree that eternal truth cannot come from nothing and cannot come from a being that begins to exist, you have to agree under pain of contradiction that 2 + 2 = 4 is true because of a nature that eternally exists. It is because of the nature of ultimate reality that 2 + 2 = 4.

If it is impossible for an eternal truth not to be true, you cannot say that there is not an eternal reality, because if there were no reality at all then eternal truths would no-longer be eternally true, which is a contradiction.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
STT said:
That is because human has ability to freely decide. We sometimes follow a chain of causality (like now that you are reading my post). We however have ability to break the chain of causality whenever we want. This act, breaking a chain of causality, requires a decision. The decision however cannot be related to the chain of causality since it is free. Therefor free decision is uncaused.
Click to expand...
Agreed. However, that doesn’t mean that the human making the decision is himself in his person uncaused.
 
IWantGod said:
You admit here that it is incorrect to think an eternal truth without the existence of an eternal being.
Click to expand...
I accepted that existence implements an eternal truth but that doesn’t mean that the existence itself is eternal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top