Why must there be one God?

[coolduude]

Hi there,

I apologize if I’m coming off as a blasphemer or just plain dumb But I’m honestly curious.

We can logically deduce that

1. The universe is finite in time
2. Therefore, it was created
3. Something created it

After that, it’s up for debate in many different circles. Obviously, the religious will say God created the universe. Scientists will say there could have been another force (such as gravity).

So here’s my question(s):

1. Could there have been a different force that created the universe? A force like gravity.
2. If God does exists (which I tend to believe), why must there be one? Can’t there be many beings, entities, that are existence itself? Can there be many uncreated beings? Why must there only be one God and not a pantheon of them?

Thank you,
coolduude

 

[RB2]

Gods revelation to us about him and his relation to us is in the Bible.
Science teaches us about the physical world.
Seems you want to chuck the Bible.
If so, good luck.

If not many of your questions can be answered by the study of theology,philosophy and logic.
Priest and deacons need a university degree in philosophy and theology.
Answering your questions requires the rigorous approach of philosophy or theology. These things are best read through an internet search rather than having someone who knows the material, hack out a less than adequate typed response to you.
Although on these forums, invariably someone will attempt.

A big difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is that the Protestants have the Bible and they discern all their knowledge about God through it. Catholicism combines the Faith with Reason. Combining Faith with logic and philosophy helps us find logical consistent truths about God that are not quite clearly evident through a simple reading of the bible alone. God gave us our reason, our philosophy, our Plato and our logic as well as our science. Our intellect and ability to reason is one of the ways we are created in His image. Catholicism deducea things through Natural Law, Divine Law which are all manifestation of philosophy which much of Protestantism rejects. Read St Thomas Aquinas.

 

[phoenixrrt62]

Hum.
I can take it in the other direction. Why must there be a god at all?
But…wrong place to do it.
However, I couldn’t resist.

 

[Apollos]

You always have such good posts, coolduude.

Distinguish among the Four Causes and the first question will answer itself. For example, when my boss asks me why I am late I can always say gravity caused it. See where I am going with this?

Ask yourself how these Gods would differ from one another, and you will have the answer to your second question.

 

[Damase]

So here’s my question(s):

1. Could there have been a different force that created the universe? A force like gravity.
2. If God does exists (which I tend to believe), why must there be one? Can’t there be many beings, entities, that are existence itself? Can there be many uncreated beings? Why must there only be one God and not a pantheon of them?

Gravity, as we understand it, couldn’t have created the universe—gravity doesn’t create something out of nothing. It itself is created.

What would the creator of the universe be like? The creator has to be able to set all things in motion, without ever having been put into motion itself; the un-caused causer of all causes; completely necessary (as opposed to contingent on other things for its existence); the cause of all perfection (the greatest, noblest, truest thing); and the natural “end” of all created things. This thing we call God. For proofs on these statements, see Thomas’s Five Ways.

Now, why must there be one God? Even the ancient Platonic philosophers knew that there must be one God—it is demonstrable using logic. And here are two proofs, one from a Muslim philosopher, and one from a Christian.

Al-Ghazali’s argument from omnipotence
First, we will accept, as most theists do, that God must be omnipotent. So, let us examine the assertion that there could be two distinct, essentially omnipotent, persons (in other words, more than one God). But for these Gods to be distinct in any way, they would have to have differing wills; and if these wills would differ, then they may conflict. But this is necessarily false: if the will of an omnipotent person conflicts with another person’s will, the latter’s will is thwarted by the former’s, and if a person’s will is thwarted by another’s will, then that person is not omnipotent. Thus it is impossible for there to be two distinct, essentially omnipotent, persons.

William of Ockham’s argument from the demand for total devotion
We might understand God as “something more noble and more perfect than anything else besides him”. So if any being is God, then it must be more perfect than anything else besides him; but if there were two distinct beings and each were God, the first would be more perfect than the second and the second would be more perfect than the first. And it is impossible for there to be two beings each of which is more perfect than the other.

Moreover, God must be completely unique. The fact that he demands total devotion from us proves this. If there were two gods, there would be two beings each of which was worthy of worship. But we could not be totally devoted and unconditionally committed to each of two distinct beings.

I could make more arguments if you want them.

 

[coolduude]

Gods revelation to us about him and his relation to us is in the Bible.
Science teaches us about the physical world.
Seems you want to chuck the Bible.
If so, good luck.

If not many of your questions can be answered by the study of theology,philosophy and logic.
Priest and deacons need a university degree in philosophy and theology.
Answering your questions requires the rigorous approach of philosophy or theology. These things are best read through an internet search rather than having someone who knows the material, hack out a less than adequate typed response to you.
Although on these forums, invariably someone will attempt.

A big difference between Catholicism and Protestantism is that the Protestants have the Bible and they discern all their knowledge about God through it. Catholicism combines the Faith with Reason. Combining Faith with logic and philosophy helps us find logical consistent truths about God that are not quite clearly evident through a simple reading of the bible alone. God gave us our reason, our philosophy, our Plato and our logic as well as our science. Our intellect and ability to reason is one of the ways we are created in His image. Catholicism deducea things through Natural Law, Divine Law which are all manifestation of philosophy which much of Protestantism rejects. Read St Thomas Aquinas.

I have read a little of Aquinas. Essence and Existence is about as far as I’ve read though

 

[coolduude]

You always have such good posts, coolduude.

Is that sarcasm?

Apollos:

Distinguish among the Four Causes and the first question will answer itself. For example, when my boss asks me why I am late I can always say gravity caused it. See where I am going with this?

Ask yourself how these Gods would differ from one another, and you will have the answer to your second question.

Unfortunately, no, I don’t see it.

 

[coolduude]

Gravity, as we understand it, couldn’t have created the universe—gravity doesn’t create something out of nothing. It itself is created.

What would the creator of the universe be like? The creator has to be able to set all things in motion, without ever having been put into motion itself; the un-caused causer of all causes; completely necessary (as opposed to contingent on other things for its existence); the cause of all perfection (the greatest, noblest, truest thing); and the natural “end” of all created things. This thing we call God. For proofs on these statements, see Thomas’s Five Ways.

Now, why must there be one God? Even the ancient Platonic philosophers knew that there must be one God—it is demonstrable using logic. And here are two proofs, one from a Muslim philosopher, and one from a Christian.

Al-Ghazali’s argument from omnipotence
First, we will accept, as most theists do, that God must be omnipotent. So, let us examine the assertion that there could be two distinct, essentially omnipotent, persons (in other words, more than one God). But for these Gods to be distinct in any way, they would have to have differing wills; and if these wills would differ, then they may conflict. But this is necessarily false: if the will of an omnipotent person conflicts with another person’s will, the latter’s will is thwarted by the former’s, and if a person’s will is thwarted by another’s will, then that person is not omnipotent. Thus it is impossible for there to be two distinct, essentially omnipotent, persons.

William of Ockham’s argument from the demand for total devotion
We might understand God as “something more noble and more perfect than anything else besides him”. So if any being is God, then it must be more perfect than anything else besides him; but if there were two distinct beings and each were God, the first would be more perfect than the second and the second would be more perfect than the first. And it is impossible for there to be two beings each of which is more perfect than the other.

Moreover, God must be completely unique. The fact that he demands total devotion from us proves this. If there were two gods, there would be two beings each of which was worthy of worship. But we could not be totally devoted and unconditionally committed to each of two distinct beings.

I could make more arguments if you want them.

Nice post.

I think I get all that. Just have to digest it.

 

[Damase]

I think I get all that. Just have to digest it.

Indeed. Contemplate these things, asking the Holy Spirit to guide you and preserve you from error.

 

[Apollos]

Me? Sarcastic? Never.

Ok, gravity is an efficient cause; it answers the question “Why does the universe exist?” with “The fact that there is a law of gravity is sufficient reason to think the universe came into existence spontaneously without a distinct external cause such as God”, as Hawking apparently thinks. (I’m speaking to those who have heard the newsmedia’s version.)

But there can be no law of gravity until and unless there is a universe. Hence the law of gravity cannot be prior to, and therefore cannot be a cause of, it. So it must be an effect of something else.

But for the sake of argument, let’s say that gravity is the one cause to which all effects reduce. Therefore it is the *second *cause.

Then let’s say there are two Gods. Both therefore have every perfection in them. If there are two, then one must have something the other lacks; otherwise they would be one and the same. Therefore one of them is in potency with respect to a perfection, and so cannot be God.

Or again, if there are two Gods, the essence of each is therefore Existence Per Se. But if there are two, then one must be Existence Per Se and the other must be otherwise. Therefore the other is essentially finite existence, which disqualifies that one from being God, or nonexistent, which … is my point.

 

[The_Exodus]

1. If God does exists (which I tend to believe), why must there be one? Can’t there be many beings, entities, that are existence itself? Can there be many uncreated beings? Why must there only be one God and not a pantheon of them?

At some point, no matter how many logically prior “beings” we go, we must come to one which is uncaused. Otherwise, there would be no first cause, and all beings would be exist only accidentally or contingently, but not essentially or necessarily.

This isn’t a question of temporally prior beings, by the way, which there is no contradiction in supposing goes back infinitely. It is a case of logically prior beings. Some philosophers call logically prior beings “hierarchical causes.” There can be no regress to infinity in these causes, since the nature or essence of the beings caused, is not necessary existence (since they are caused by other beings - e.g. the tree by the earth.) If there was an infinite chain of accidentally existing beings, there would be no reason for them to exist, since it would be merely an infinite number of beings, all of which need existence to be given to them, in order for the to come to be.

 

[coolduude]

Ok, gravity is an efficient cause; it answers the question “Why does the universe exist?” with “The fact that there is a law of gravity is sufficient reason to think the universe came into existence spontaneously without a distinct external cause such as God”, as Hawking apparently thinks. (I’m speaking to those who have heard the newsmedia’s version.)

Okay

Apollos:

But there can be no law of gravity until and unless there is a universe. Hence the law of gravity cannot be prior to, and therefore cannot be a cause of, it. So it must be an effect of something else.

Why? Why must it be that way?

Apollos:

But for the sake of argument, let’s say that gravity is the one cause to which all effects reduce. Therefore it is the *second *cause.

Then let’s say there are two Gods. Both therefore have every perfection in them. If there are two, then one must have something the other lacks; otherwise they would be one and the same. Therefore one of them is in potency with respect to a perfection, and so cannot be God.

Or again, if there are two Gods, the essence of each is therefore Existence Per Se. But if there are two, then one must be Existence Per Se and the other must be otherwise. Therefore the other is essentially finite existence, which disqualifies that one from being God, or nonexistent, which … is my point.

Makes sense, except for you third paragraph. Sorta lost me on that one.

 

[tonyrey]

The principle of economy, otherwise known as Occam’s Razor. Why postulate more than One unless you can show that more than One is necessary?

 

[AntiTheist]

Hi there,

I apologize if I’m coming off as a blasphemer or just plain dumb But I’m honestly curious.

We can logically deduce that

1. The universe is finite in time
2. Therefore, it was created

No. Therefore, it came into being at some time. When you say it was “created,” you are assuming that it had an intelligent creator.

Could there have been a different force that created the universe? A force like gravity.

Sure, or some cosmic law that we haven’t discovered yet. We don’t know.

 

[Apollos]

Why? Why must it be that way?

Umm … because there needs to be a universe before there can be laws of that universe. A law of gravity is meaningless if there is no universe that it is a law for. I feel like I’m not understanding what it is that you’re not understanding

Makes sense, except for you third paragraph. Sorta lost me on that one.

If something is God, then its essence and its existence are the same (newadvent.org/summa/1003.htm#article4). If there are two Gods, then they must differ. The only way they can differ is in their essence. The only way something can differ in essence is by being something else. If something’s essence and existence are the same, then to differ in essence is to differ in existence. To differ in existence is either to be something else, or to not exist at all. Hence if there are two Gods, then one of them must be something other than God, or must not exist at all.

 

[_Locke]

The principle of economy, otherwise known as Occam’s Razor. Why postulate more than One unless you can show that more than One is necessary?

Why postulate one unless you can show one is necessary?

But seriously coolduude, that’s a very good question.

The step from deism to theism is a very hard one to make; there is a huge gap between God as a prime mover and impersonal first cause (for which a decently reasonable argument can be made) and a personal God who cares what you eat, where and when you wear hats, and who you have sex with and in what position. It is an impossible step for many, as it is only justified by faith.

 

[lemondiesel]

We can logically deduce that

1. The universe is finite in time
2. Therefore, it was created
3. Something created it

Care if I debate this?
Singularity created the matter of our universe. All that matter revolves slowly on around this singularity’s gravitational pull. This universe is contained in an infinite nothingness, its irrelevant to even think about it. Picture a bubble in an infinite sized ocean. Even that is impossible to comprehend.

1. universe is where matter exists
2. UNIverse is where other possible singularities can occur.

I wish I could receive faith, I would love for there to be a personal loving God. To reveal the truth and prove my beliefs wrong.

 

[Apollos]

Singularity created the matter of our universe.

Isn’t that like saying meat created the matter of a meatball? You’ve said nothing more than that the matter of our universe was created by matter.

 

[lemondiesel]

Isn’t that like saying meat created the matter of a meatball? You’ve said nothing more than that the matter of our universe was created by matter.

It is more like matter of our universe was created because there is no such thing as nothingness.

the meatball did not develop cognitive thinking. It only become a meatball in a result of cognitive thinking. how trippy

 

[Mojoforyeshua]

Care if I debate this?
Singularity created the matter of our universe. All that matter revolves slowly on around this singularity’s gravitational pull. This universe is contained in an infinite nothingness, its irrelevant to even think about it. Picture a bubble in an infinite sized ocean. Even that is impossible to comprehend.

1. universe is where matter exists
2. UNIverse is where other possible singularities can occur.

I wish I could receive faith, I would love for there to be a personal loving God. To reveal the truth and prove my beliefs wrong.

The result of a singularity causes singularities? A bit circular but alright. Even if they universe is infinite, it still requires a Creator just a a circle on chalk board needs to be drawn. However, the infinite universe theory is no more scientifically provable than God’s existence.

People often ask, if there is a God then why isn’t it blatantly obvious? Well, it is but only if we pay attention to it. It is much like looking at a garden from inside your house, you don’t realize you are looking through a window to see it until you mind the window. Or when you are reading this text, you don’t think about your eyes until one mentions it. Both of these facts are quite obvious but often over looked. If you begin to look at the universe as if there is a God then He will be right in front of you at all times and will be more than personal. Remember, that faith isn’t a feeling but rather a conscious choice. If something in your intellect has already decided that there is a God, then the most ethical and honest thing to do would to be to live your life as if you believed it.

disclaimer I’m not making an argument, it’s more like advice from my life experience.