T
tonyrey
Guest
What evidence is there that the universe** knowingly **creates itself? And if it doesn’t how does knowledge originate?
- Status
B
belorg
Guest
It’s not about evidence, it’s about logical conclusions, Tony.
T
tonyrey
Guest
What are the premises on which your logic is based?
B
belorg
Guest
I have already explained it to you, but here is a rough version of my argument.
1 God’s will is a necessary and sufficient condition for God’s creative act
2 God’s creative act is a necessary and sufficient condition for te universe
3 God’s will is eternal
4 God’s creative act is eternal
5 conclusion: the universe is eternal
I do not see how someone who believes that God is immutable and omnipotent can deny any of those premises.
D
davidv
Guest
5 does not follow from 1-4. Why does God’s eternal attribute have to extend to his creatures?
B
belorg
Guest
If X is a necessary and sufficient condition for Y, then if X exists, Y exists too. That’s the definition of a NSC. So, it does follow from 1-4
D
davidv
Guest
To what do X and Y refer? What is NSC?
B
belorg
Guest
X and Y can refer to anything. NSC = necessary and sufficient condition.
D
davidv
Guest
This is too generic to explain your conclusion.
It also appears that you are arbitrarily declaring that God is made up of parts. He is not. He is ultimately simple, composed of no parts. His attributes are His essence. God’s will and creative acts are not conditions. NSC cannot apply.
B
belorg
Guest
There is nothing “generic” about this, this is just the definition of necessary and sufficent conditions,and I am not declaring anything about God being composed of parts.
T
tonyrey
Guest
A creative act by an eternal, immutable and omnipotent God does not imply that a created object is eternal, immutable or omnipotent! There is no reason to attribute any of the qualities of the Creator to the creature. To do so arbitrarily imposes human limitations on the Supreme Being. A more appropriate description is the “mysterium tremendum et fascinas” used by Rudolf Otto in his famous book The Idea of the Holy:
bytrentsacred.co.uk/index.php/rudolf-otto/the-idea-of-the-holy-1-summary
The attempt to reduce the Deity to human categories is doomed to failure. None of the words we use should be interpreted literally because divine perfection is beyond our comprehension. When all is said and done we are confronted with the *Deus absconditus *to which both Aquinas and Pascal referred:
Isaiah 45:15
B
belorg
Guest
Assertion don’t counter arguments, Tony, so this is completely irrelevant.
D
davidv
Guest
Your statement that God’s creations must being eternal is one such assertion. Is it also irrelevant?
T
tonyrey
Guest
If that is the case we’re all in the same boat - swamped by the waves of irrelevance!
O
oldcelt
Guest
I hate when that happens.If that is the case we’re all in the same boat - swamped by the waves of irrelevance!
B
belorg
Guest
Correction. I argued for why God’s creations must be eternal and the fact that you are unable to respond to my argument doesn’t make it an assertion.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Alas, we all become submerged and disappear in the ocean of eternal absurdity.I hate when that happens.
But that is to expected if the mind is produced by mindless energy…
T
tonyrey
Guest
What are the criteria of a rational argument, belorg, as opposed to a set of assertions? How can they be distinguished?
B
belorg
Guest
A rational argument, Tony, is one that is logically valid (that is: the conclsuion follows from the premises) and sound (that is: the premises are true).
Now, if you want to* argue* against my argument, you are welcome, but so far you haven’t argued against the valididty of my argument nor against the truth of (one of) its premises.
Until you do, all you have is an assertion.
D
davidv
Guest
Your post 244 re-presented your argument. It has been challenged as invalid. The claim of NCS is not sufficient justification. NCS does not explain why an attribute of the creator must exist in the creation.
- Status