Impossibility of God?

[AgnosTheist]

Through Scripture, God discloses his character and will in language and images that make sense to the average human. The language used in the Bible to describe God and his “actions” is referred to by biblical scholars as “anthropomorphism,” which is to describe God by reference to the attributes of his creatures. Therefore, Scripture speaks of God “seeing,” “hearing,” “speaking,” reaching out his “hand,” “coming down to see,” “smelling,” etc. These are simply anthropomorphisms designed to communicate truths about God to his finite creatures. How else, after all, may the finite begin to comprehend the infinite?

if only those explanations are in the bible itself. but its not, so those are but nothing but post bible innovations. the fact still remains that in the bible God spends time.

It’s hardly “recent,” given the fact that St. Augustine wrote about it copiously in the 300s A.D. Even before Augustine, however, it was discussed by other early Church Fathers.

prove it. quote them saying that god is ‘outside of time’.

No doubt it seems “illogical and absurd” to you because you insist on trying to apply a wholly finite and creaturely reality (time) to an absolutely infinite and self-existent Being. This, I would agree, is indeed entirely illogical and absurd. My advice is to stop doing it immediately.

my friend, infinity involves time.

 

[ncgolf]

my friend, infinity involves time.

Now this is something new … how did you come up with something like this? One of the defintions of infinite is “1. immeasurably great”. You said in an earlier post that time is “measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues” … purely a measure but infinite is immeasurable so how can infinity involve time … it could only be endless time which is not really a measure but an abstract, it is not really a number at all.

The Christian God is defined as infinite … no beginning an no end … you see time doesnt enter it because time is useless as a measurement.

Now if you are talking about another God other than the Christian God then you can do whatever you want but then it would only be in your mind.

 

[AgnosTheist]

Now this is something new … how did you come up with something like this? One of the defintions of infinite is “1. immeasurably great”. You said in an earlier post that time is “measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues” … purely a measure but infinite is immeasurable so how can infinity involve time … it could only be endless time which is not really a measure but an abstract, it is not really a number at all.

Think a little bit harder, my friend.

Infinity is immeasureable as a whole, and yet you can measure segments of it. Like between the period that Lucifer was created and the moment he rebelled. Thats a time period within God’s infinite lifespan.

 

[Donald45]

…the fact still remains that in the bible God spends time.

In the Bible, God is portrayed as spending time in order to communicate truth about the infinite to his finite creatures.

prove it. quote them saying that god is ‘outside of time’.

"Eternity, for instance, presents in an instant the future, the present, and also the past of time" (Clement of Alexandria, 195 A.D.).

"Eternity has no time. It is itself all time" (Tertullian, 207 A.D.).

"This is spoken to him by God, with whom all time is today. For there is no evening with God, and there is no morning" (Origen, 228 A.D.).

"For in that age [eternity], there is neither past nor future, but only the present" (Methodius, 290 A.D.).

I can go on if you like. I haven’t even begun to cite St. Augustine yet.

my friend, infinity involves time.

Theologically, “infinity” refers to “the characteristic of having no bounds or limits.” This is a basic attribute of God’s nature, and not an aspect of time. (You seem to be using the term in a mathematical sense, while I’m using it theologically.)

Blessings,

Don
+T+

 

[Donald45]

…Thats a time period within God’s infinite lifespan.

Of course, God has no “lifespan.” A “span” of time suggests a beginning and an ending, which does not apply to an infinite, self-existing and eternal Being. Again, you’re having a hard time thinking outside of finite human experience.

Pax,

Don
+T+

 

[AgnosTheist]

Of course, God has no “lifespan.” A “span” of time suggests a beginning and an ending, which does not apply to an infinite, self-existing and eternal Being. Again, you’re having a hard time thinking outside of finite human experience.

stop playing semantics. i said “infinite lifespan”. deal with the points I raised.

 

[ncgolf]

Think a little bit harder, my friend.

Infinity is immeasureable as a whole, and yet you can measure segments of it. Like between the period that Lucifer was created and the moment he rebelled. Thats a time period within God’s infinite lifespan.

No … those are moments for the created creatures, not God. Why do you always compare God to one of His creations be it angel or man. Any example you give always measures God through one of his creations. Try to measure God on his own, against His own essence.

I still will wait for an explanation of God and time that does not compare God to something else. You must explain how an infinite being without beginning or end experiences time, since this is the Christian view of God. God does not need creation so imagine God without any creation be it angel or man, universe, nothing, zilch. How does God experience this? How could it work? This is what you must answer to refute the Christian view of God … try.

 

[mahoneyt]

With Omnipotance and Omniscience, the whole God makeing a rock he can’t lift, he knows all, knows what he will do in the future, cannot do anything different, therefore is not omnipotant

Any help is appreciated

Who says God is omnipotant and Omniscience? Be careful in using Philisophical terms from the enlightenment and reading them back into the Bible.

 

[AgnosTheist]

No … those are moments for the created creatures, not God. Why do you always compare God to one of His creations be it angel or man. Any example you give always measures God through one of his creations. Try to measure God on his own, against His own essence.

I still will wait for an explanation of God and time that does not compare God to something else. You must explain how an infinite being without beginning or end experiences time, since this is the Christian view of God. God does not need creation so imagine God without any creation be it angel or man, universe, nothing, zilch. How does God experience this? How could it work? This is what you must answer to refute the Christian view of God … try.

You are reinventing God beyond the biblical perspectives. The bible freely compares God to physical objects. The bible specifically compared god’s time to human time. And yet you desire a more magical god. So I would leave you at that. Its time to agree to disagree. It was a pleasure exchanging ideas with you.

 

[Donald45]

stop playing semantics.

Stop insisting on the proper use of words and their meanings? How will this further our discussion?

i said “infinite lifespan”. deal with the points I raised.

Let’s deal with this point, upon which your other points depend. The phrase “infinite lifespan” is simply an oxymoron. What exactly is it that God’s life “spans,” if he is indeed “infinite”? From which point to which point does this “span” extend? From beginning to end? No, that doesn’t apply to an “infinite” Being. I’m afraid your phrase is internally flawed and ultimately self-refuting.

You might find these articles on the classic Christian view of God interesting, if not helpful:

newadvent.org/cathen/05551b.htm
newadvent.org/cathen/06612a.htm#IIA

Blessings,

Don
+T+

 

[Donald45]

You are reinventing God beyond the biblical perspectives.

Not at all. In any case, the Catholic Church is not limited to “the Bible alone” in its formulation of doctrine. This idea, historically referred to as sola scriptura, is a relatively recent Protestant teaching that was utterly unknown prior to the 16th century. Catholicism also has recourse to Sacred Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium (teaching office) in its understanding of theological issues.

The bible freely compares God to physical objects.

Yes, in an anthropomorphic and analogous manner. This is a crucial fact that you seem determined to ignore.

The bible specifically compared god’s time to human time.

Again, analogously and anthropomorphically.

Blessings,

Don
+T+

 

[AgnosTheist]

Let’s deal with this point, upon which your other points depend. The phrase “infinite lifespan” is simply an oxymoron. What exactly is it that God’s life “spans,” if he is indeed “infinite”? From which point to which point does this “span” extend? From beginning to end? No, that doesn’t apply to an “infinite” Being. I’m afraid your phrase is internally flawed and ultimately self-refuting.

how about ‘infinite life’? i dont limit myself to plain terms. the idea is much more valuable than the word being used to identify the idea. And the irrefutable idea is the fact that there are periods of time within infinity.

Not at all. In any case, the Catholic Church is not limited to “the Bible alone” in its formulation of doctrine. This idea, historically referred to as sola scriptura, is a relatively recent Protestant teaching that was utterly unknown prior to the 16th century. Catholicism also has recourse to Sacred Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium (teaching office) in its understanding of theological issues.

Yes, in an anthropomorphic and analogous manner. This is a crucial fact that you seem determined to ignore.

thats not a fact but an opinion. i will view it as a fact if someone can quote god saying ‘these comparisons are only to be viewed in an anthropomorphic and analogous manner’.

anyway, i can argue my case logically. while you guys must run under the cover of religious opinion. lets leave it at that. we are done here. everything was said and done. its time to agree to disagree.

 

[ncgolf]

anyway, i can argue my case logically.

I am sorry to disappont you but your arguments are not logical but argumentative. I doubt anyone would say they are logically consistent. I must admit that what I have written is not really mine, but what I understand from Scripture, the Church and the writings of the Saints. When you use all 3 sources it is amazing just how consistent they all are.

I also find it interesting to try to understand God a little more through what ifs but in the end it is really not that important of a question.

What I do find much more mysterious is that God … creator of all … actually took the form of a human being. The author inserted Himself into His creation … that people got to sit, laugh, talk with God himself. The mystery of the Incarnation is a much more fascinating and important piece of history than speculating “infinite life” or “infinite lifespan”.

Peace be with you AgnosT.

 

[Donald45]

…And the irrefutable idea is the fact that there are periods of time within infinity.

The concept you’re proposing is known to philosophers as an actual infinite, and it is indeed entirely “refutable.” In fact, it’s a philosophical impossibility, a rational absurdity.

thats not a fact but an opinion.

It is a teaching of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, and not an opinion of mine.

i will view it as a fact if someone can quote god saying ‘these comparisons are only to be viewed in an anthropomorphic and analogous manner’.

Of course, this merely assumes the validity of the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura, which is nothing more than an opinion on your part, and is a plainly self-refuting concept.

anyway, i can argue my case logically. while you guys must run under the cover of religious opinion.

Here you’re just begging the question in favor of your own position. I’ve already demostrated in numerous ways how your view is simply irrational at several points.

lets leave it at that. we are done here. everything was said and done. its time to agree to disagree.

As you like. May God bless you and yours, and Merry Christmas.

Don
+T+

 

[tomarin]

Of course, this merely assumes the validity of the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura, which is nothing more than an opinion on your part, and is a plainly self-refuting concept.

Don,

can you spell out for me how sola scriptura is “plainly self-refuting”? i’d like to know partly out of curiosity and partly in case i’m ever in a position to make an argument refuting it.

 

[AgnosTheist]

The concept you’re proposing is known to philosophers as an actual infinite, and it is indeed entirely “refutable.” In fact, it’s a philosophical impossibility, a rational absurdity.

show me.

It is a teaching of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church, and not an opinion of mine.

i did not say it was yours.

Of course, this merely assumes the validity of the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura, which is nothing more than an opinion on your part, and is a plainly self-refuting concept.

IMO, the entire bible is nothing but a product of pure human imagination & opinion. But theologically speaking, what was originally written holds a lot more weight than recent innovations (magisterial opinions).

Here you’re just begging the question in favor of your own position. I’ve already demostrated in numerous ways how your view is simply irrational at several points.

your ‘numerous ways’ are merely various reworded denials of using universal qualities to the idea of god. christians use universal qualities to describe god, but then when universal qualities were used to show the limitations of god christians think its foul. funny. anthropomorphism can work both ways.

 

[Donald45]

Don, can you spell out for me how sola scriptura is “plainly self-refuting”?

Briefly:

~ sola scriptura puts forth the claim that “everything necessary to Christian faith and practice is presented in the Bible alone.”

~ yet, the proposition that “everything necessary to Christian faith and practice is presented in the Bible alone” is itself not presented in the Bible alone.

~ from this it follows that sola scriptura itself must not be a proposition necessary to Christian faith and practice.

=> therefore, sola scriptura contradicts its own central claim, thus refuting itself.

God bless,

Don
+T+

 

[Donald45]

show me.

It only takes a moment’s reflection. A completed series of temporal events must, by definition, have a beginning and an ending point. Such a temporal series, therefore, cannot be “infinite” in the sense of being limitless, given that it bears the limitations of a beginning and an ending. Clearly, an “infinite” series of temporal events is an absurdity.

IMO, the entire bible is nothing but a product of pure human imagination & opinion.

This is itself “nothing but a (highly debatable) product of pure human imagination and opinion.”

But theologically speaking, what was originally written holds a lot more weight than recent innovations (magisterial opinions).

Why should this be the case? You’re assuming a lot here.

(Hey, I thought we were “agreeing to disagree”! )

Pax,

Don
+T+

 

[tomarin]

Briefly:

~ sola scriptura puts forth the claim that “everything necessary to Christian faith and practice is presented in the Bible alone.”

~ yet, the proposition that “everything necessary to Christian faith and practice is presented in the Bible alone” is itself not presented in the Bible alone.

~ from this it follows that sola scriptura itself must not be a proposition necessary to Christian faith and practice.

=> therefore, sola scriptura contradicts its own central claim, thus refuting itself.

God bless,

Don
+T+

ah, i see. thanks.