By what standard have you arrived at this knowledge of two metaphysical logics? God clearly has a more clearer understanding of whats possible but he operates by the same standard that we do. There are not two logics metaphysically speaking and there is no basis to think that there is. In a sense his nature is metaphysical logic insofar as he is the antithesis of nothing. God is truth. Gods nature is the objective ontological standard of rational truth and the reason why 2+2 = 4
Negative, Ghostrider, God does not operate by the same standards as we do… In fact that’s explicitly stated. Furthermore God is incomprehensible, also explicitly stated. We cannot understand something that is outside of causality with an examination of causes (or logic), that’s not possible, understanding God is outside of the scope of our logic.
God created the physical universe, he did not create metaphysical logic.
All logic results from observation of the physical. Metaphysical logic results from assuming that the physical applies to the not physical, as such we can only make rulings about the metaphysical nature INSIDE OUR OWN UNIVERSE.
God did not create good an evil, God is goodness itself insofar as God is the antithesis of evil.
A square and a triangle is not the same thing. They cannot be the same thing because they are distinct in nature and cannot remain triangles or squares if they become identical precisely because they would no-longer be distinct. They would lose that which defines them as a square or a triangle in the first place. So it is metaphysically impossible to create a square-triangle.
In our universe, under out understanding, but if you had read more Plato, you would know that metaphysics results from comparing physical and assuming that those hold true otherwise, so in a universe with different observational physical logics, metaphysics will not hold true.
The laws of physical behavior and the laws of metaphysical logic are not the same thing. You are confusing the two, probably because you have no understanding of latter.
Again, metaphysics comes from applying the laws of rational observation to the unobserved, the rational observation results from our universe and therefore can only apply to things inside our universe. It’s pretty simple stuff.
This is not true. My argument demonstrates the fallacy in your thinking.
No you really haven’t, you’ve just shown that you haven’t read a lot of Plato or any Aquinas, who have both answered your arguments far better than I ever did.
Thats one way of putting it. But essentially it is about turning away from the nature we call “good”; this nature is God. Its not simply a turning away from some arbitrary rules imposed by a more powerful being.
It is absolutely a turning away from God. You should read Aquinas, he’s written more eloquently on the problem of Evil than I ever could.
So its impossible for God to turn-away from himself because it is a **metaphysical contradiction. So we can know if its metaphysically impossible for God to do something.
**
Case closed.
No really can’t know that, I assume that is true, because God has stated that he is without sin, and therefore it follows that is true, but God is not comprehensible, we can neither comprehend perfection nor infinity, and as such we are not qualified to answer that question. Again our metaphysics results from applying observational law to things that are not observed, which does NOT work on things that exist outside of causality.
