Is God part of existence or cause of existence

@Alan McDougall,

There's actually another way to understand time, that some philosophers adhere to. Rather than describing a temporal moment as happening some distance from the starting point, you can simply describe the moment has happening some temporal distance from another event. Thus, 2009 didn't happen x years after the creation of the universe, it happened x number years before WWII, which happened y years before the crusades, which happened z years before the death of Christ, and so on. On this view, it doesn't matter if there is a beginning: we refer to moments in relation to others. It's argued that on this account we couldn't know when any moment actually "is", if there's no absolute reference. However, in this time-frame, it wouldn't matter. So I'm not convinced that there has to be a beginning.

Alan: your analogy sounds like the argument against motion (Pythagoras I think?) We can never get to a point until we first get to the point half-way there. But we can't get to that point until we first reach the half-way point. There is an infinite regress and since we can never get to that first mid-point (because they're infinite) we can't move. Thus motion is impossible. This is of course falls. Like your example, I don't think that going about the issue as one of infinite regress is correct.

Click here: I know what you said about logical impossibilities actually being limits on our ability to understand, but I disagree, for the same reasons Welshie stated. If these "impossibilities" are actually possible for God and we simply can't understand, then God can do ANYTHING. That includes making three-sided objects that have four-sides and actually being an all-powerful, evil demon. The only thing keeping God from actually being evil is his nature. But if he can do the logically impossible, then he can act outside of his nature. Thus, he can actually be a demon bent on destroying us, thanks Descartes. Our only way, on your view, to believe he isn't is sheer blind faith (appealing to scripture is no good because it could just be one of the tools he uses to fool us).

2 Replies

@Axis Austin,

Axis Austin wrote:

Click here: I know what you said about logical impossibilities actually being limits on our ability to understand, but I disagree, for the same reasons Welshie stated. If these "impossibilities" are actually possible for God and we simply can't understand, then God can do ANYTHING. That includes making three-sided objects that have four-sides and actually being an all-powerful, evil demon.

God can do anything. That means that God can do anything that can be done. But that does not mean that God can do anything whether or not it can be done. God can do only anything that is doable. What does that mean? God cannot create a five-sided triangle because that is not something that can be done. That is because there cannot be such a thing (it is contradictory) and, therefore, it is not doable, and, therefore, cannot be done.

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

Kennethamy: You're exactly right: I agree completely. Click here is arguing, it appears, that God can do the logically impossible, such as making five-sided triangles, but we simply can't understand that concept. I agree with you, and am pointing out, that God can't do the logically impossible. So thanks!

1 Reply

@Axis Austin,

Axis Austin wrote:

Kennethamy: You're exactly right: I agree completely. Click here is arguing, it appears, that God can do the logically impossible, such as making five-sided triangles, but we simply can't understand that concept. I agree with you, and am pointing out, that God can't do the logically impossible. So thanks!

But that is, remember, because creating the logically impossible is not something that can be done. It is not because creating the logically impossible is something that can be done, but that God cannot do it. I think I understand the concept of a five-sided triangle. It is not meaningless. It is just self-contradictory. After all, you understand that creating a five-sided triangle is not doable, and how could you understand that unless you understood the concept of a five-sided triangle.

0 Replies

@Axis Austin,

Axis Austin wrote:

There's actually another way to understand time, that some philosophers adhere to. Rather than describing a temporal moment as happening some distance from the starting point, you can simply describe the moment has happening some temporal distance from another event. Thus, 2009 didn't happen x years after the creation of the universe, it happened x number years before WWII, which happened y years before the crusades, which happened z years before the death of Christ, and so on. On this view, it doesn't matter if there is a beginning: we refer to moments in relation to others. It's argued that on this account we couldn't know when any moment actually "is", if there's no absolute reference. However, in this time-frame, it wouldn't matter. So I'm not convinced that there has to be a beginning.

I know there are other ways to view time. I was just using the example to push at how Welshie has no problem conceiving a universe with no beginning.

Axis Austin wrote:

Click here: I know what you said about logical impossibilities actually being limits on our ability to understand, but I disagree, for the same reasons Welshie stated. If these "impossibilities" are actually possible for God and we simply can't understand, then God can do ANYTHING. That includes making three-sided objects that have four-sides and actually being an all-powerful, evil demon. The only thing keeping God from actually being evil is his nature. But if he can do the logically impossible, then he can act outside of his nature. Thus, he can actually be a demon bent on destroying us, thanks Descartes. Our only way, on your view, to believe he isn't is sheer blind faith (appealing to scripture is no good because it could just be one of the tools he uses to fool us).

Yet if God's nature is that he does not wish to act outside his nature then by all means he could he just chooses not to. It was not that Jesus could not commit a sin, there was no binding unseen restraints. He had the power to not sin and by his nature chose not to.

I'm only theorizing when I say what I said in my OP. People have said things like "can God make a rock so big he can't lift it". I just have wondered that those are our laws of how things work. The 'answer' to that question if there could be one would not be understandable to us. If there is an answer to logical impossibilities then the answer lies outside our knowledge. That is all I am theorizing/saying.

As the first sentence in my OP said: "Let me tell you something that I think about sometimes."

1 Reply

@click here,

Justin

Quote:

God does not dwell. Only a man created god can dwell within existence. He can also be the cause of such existence as well as a father to another man who was Jesus. All of this, in it's entirety created by man.

No one can say what God can or what God or what God cannot do."God dwells in the praises of his people"

Quote:

God is man's creation. God as man refers to comes in so many shapes and sizes and flavors it's almost impossible to choose which breed or variety of God one shall follow. Most of these Gods that man has defined to fit the bill are separate from matter.

I disagree Justin ,man is Gods creation not the reverse God created man in his image Or put another way "God created man from his own imagination"

"IMAGE"-"INATION"

kennethamy

Quote:

God can do anything. That means that God can do anything that can be done. But that does not mean that God can do anything whether or not it can be done. God can do only anything that is doable. What does that mean? God cannot create a five-sided triangle because that is not something that can be done. That is because there cannot be such a thing (it is contradictory) and, therefore, it is not doable, and, therefore, cannot be done

Can God lie? or can go against his own words or promises?. Can God be stupid?

Can God kill himself? I once asked my granddaughter this question and she said Yes he can grandpa but he is not stupid and will never do it

1 Reply

@Alan McDougall,

Alan McDougall wrote:

Can God lie? or can go against his own words or promises?. Can God be stupid?

Can God kill himself? I once asked my granddaughter this question and she said Yes he can grandpa but he is not stupid and will never do it

lie? sure,
go against his words/promises? sure
Doesn't mean he will choose to.

be stupid? kill himself?
I'm not exactly sure how to answer these, haven't ever thought about them.

1 Reply

@Alan McDougall,

I, too, think it's possible for the universe to not have a beginning. (After-all, God doesn't have a beginning, but he's here).

Kenneth: I think you mistook the way I phrased my last message (I completely agree with you).

Anyway, I don't think I have anything further to add, I've already said everything. But if you have questions, feel free.

0 Replies

@click here,

click here and all

If God is not everything, then what "stuff" is not him?. Has energy always existed eternally but separate from him?

Did he use this eternal matter and energy to build himself a big house that we call the universe? :perplexed: :perplexed:

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

I'm replying to the first post; I hope that is ok.

Alan, I would argue that God must be part of existence, because he is part of the collective imagination. If you will allow that a persons thoughts exist. Is this what you mean?

2 Replies

@Allen phil,

Allen wrote:

I'm replying to the first post; I hope that is ok.

Alan, I would argue that God must be part of existence, because he is part of the collective imagination. If you will allow that a persons thoughts exist. Is this what you mean?

Of course the thought of God exists. Atheists would not deny that. But since the thought of God is not God (just as the thought of a kangaroo is not a kangaroo) that the thought of God exists does not mean that God exist (just as from the fact that the thought of a kangaroo exists, it does not follow that kangaroos exist). Atheists agree with theists that the thought of God exist. But they disagree with the theist the God exists.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy wrote:

Of course the thought of God exists. Atheists would not deny that. But since the thought of God is not God (just as the thought of a kangaroo is not a kangaroo) that the thought of God exists does not mean that God exist (just as from the fact that the thought of a kangaroo exists, it does not follow that kangaroos exist). Atheists agree with theists that the thought of God exist. But they disagree with the theist the God exists.

The post gave me two options- God is either part or cause; Because God is imaginary, God can't be the cause. So, I was to deduce God was part of existence in the sense Santa Claus is part of existence. I was trying to stay within the context of the question. Thank you for your response.

1 Reply

@Allen phil,

click here wrote:

I am simply saying that people think we will have the answer to everything one day. There is no proof of that.

Just as there is no proof of this god creature you all keep talking about like it's a him. There is much more overwhelming proof of God, (source energy) within man then anything else. All one has to do is look around.

click here wrote:

I'm not quite sure what you are referring to. I never was talking about God within creation or outside.

Quote:
Originally Posted by click here
And why is a 3 sided square impossible? Because we have defined what a sqaure is. So it is only impossible under the laws by which we define a square as. So again it is only logically impossible within our laws and views of the world.

You were talking about a 3 sided square and the impossibilities of referring to how 'we' have defined the square. 'We' have also defined the God so 'we' cannot logically fathom anything outside our perception of our definition.

click here wrote:

Caveman logic? I don't see how you don't understand the example. I want you to try this. Count to 100 but don't start counting. You say, "how can I get to 100 if I never start counting?" that is the whole point. If you don't have a specific number to start from like, -1000, you will never ever get to 100. You absolutely must have a starting point otherwise you can't get to 100.

In this example 100 is a representation of 'now', 'here', or 'present day' (ignoring the fact that 'now' is always 'moving' to keep things simpler)

You will never ever count to 100 unless you start counting at a specific number. How can the universe have no beginning and get to present day?

Yeah, caveman logic. If the caveman cannot start the counting from a specific point then how is he or she to arrive here? While the caveman tries to figure this out, other cave men come to assist. Together these cave men come up with a solution but it's only good enough to last until the next cave man comes along and shows them another way to count.

Meanwhile, years and decades and centuries pass and today the caveman is still doing the same thing. All this time the sun kept rising the seasons changed the earth evolved and the caveman evolved. The only thing that has yet to evolve is the cave man's thinking. He's still in the cave trying to figure out how you can get to 100 without a starting point. Meanwhile the caveman has built cities and economic systems, discovered the moon, created religions, discovered thermodynamics and all these other things. Now all the caveman has to do is come out of the cave and see what he has become and what it is that he has created and see that today is not different then yesterday when it comes to time... the only difference is what the caveman thought and then created.

There is no beginning and no end. The number starts and ends at One. 1. There's no need to count further. If our cavemen could figure out the significance in the first number, the others are simply caveman logic at work today.

Alan McDougall wrote:

No one can say what God can or what God or what God cannot do."God dwells in the praises of his people"

Sure they can. You do. The bible does. So does every other swinging donkey in the world today and yesterday. They say god does this and god does that and people believe it or fall for it or are simply to caught up in the physical existence and ego to go deeper into the rabbit hole to actually take a look around.

Man has said what God can and what God cannot do for thousands of years which has formed what we call god today... Yet another dogma of man.

Alan McDougall wrote:

I disagree Justin ,man is Gods creation not the reverse God created man in his image Or put another way "God created man from his own imagination"

"IMAGE"-"INATION"

Says who?... MAN. Let's correct this now. You are disagreeing with me and paraphrasing something from a story that man said. So if God created man, then why is man defining god? Man called it god. Heck, god used to be the sun god before we came up with a more fashionable alternative. My point is man created your definition of god and your disagreement is only because you believe another man. LOL. You are not alone in this.

God created man because man says he did. God is a 'he', because man said he is. He was a male because men and women were not equal in those days... Therefore according to man, God is a man. LOL. Who said that god created man in his own image?... Another man! I'm not sure what there is to disagree with. If man did not create this god you all are talking about then I'm the pope... because I said I am.

I'm not trying to be critical of anyone here I just look at things differently than most and always have. If you want to believe someone's definition of god, who at the time thought the world was flat and there was no such thing as airplanes or quantum physics, then by all mean go ahead but to me, that seems absurd to say the least. I feel as though I'm here in this world among people who do nothing but follow each other around and assuming anything and everything with blinders on.

Alan McDougall wrote:

Can God lie? or can go against his own words or promises?. Can God be stupid?

Does the man say he can? What does man say about this?

Alan McDougall wrote:

Can God kill himself? I once asked my granddaughter this question and she said Yes he can grandpa but he is not stupid and will never do it

What does man say? What did man say in the bible?

1 Reply

@Justin,

Allen

Quote:

I'm replying to the first post; I hope that is ok.

Alan, I would argue that God must be part of existence, because he is part of the collective imagination. If you will allow that a persons thoughts exist. Is this what you mean?

I don't see it that way ,God is not part of our puny imagination , it is we who are a thought in the mind of God

In my opinion, for what it is worth, is that "God is everything" "Existence equates to God".

Our consciousnesses are but part of the infinite consciousness. During a profound near death experience, I seem to somehow have plugged into this awesome mind and knew everything just as it I were God.

An analogy would be like giving a kid the controls of a supersonic jet fighter.

There is one absolute fact, what we call existence has always existence

And to me the greatest enigma is the Existence of Existence.

I know I exist and when I contemplate this fact it becomes an awesome undeniable truth

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

If humans are created in God's image, God necessarily would be horribly flawed; and if humans are created out of God's imagination, God has a twisted mind that exhibits many symptoms of mental disorders.

1 Reply

@Theaetetus,

Theaetetus

Quote:

If humans are created in God's image, God necessarily would be horribly flawed; and if humans are created out of God's imagination, God has a twisted mind that exhibits many symptoms of mental disorders.

I did not mean literally in his image, but the thing we call LIFE is the part of man that is in Gods image

We were given a free will and messed up nearly everything we put our silly hands on.

To equate the awesome infinite mind and attributes of God, to that of that of mere mortal man, is really silly to me, and that is what you were doing your comment

Boagy

Can I use your excellent description of God you use in your signature?

"God is a metaphor for that which transcends all levels of intellectual thought. It's as simple as that".

"Realy great summation Boagy"!!

1 Reply

@Alan McDougall,

I would love to hear your response to my previous post, Alan. I don't want to try or attack anybody else's ideas...

1 Reply

@hammersklavier,

hammersklavier

I am really sorry if I appeared to overlook your post, but it was an error by me as I always try to respond to each message directed at me

Quote:

Corollaries to your question Alan:

1. Should God be the cause of existence but not part of existence (i.e., acting ex mundi), His being must be separate and therefore definable. Since definability, although it does not necessitate finiteness, certainly does seem to dictate it, such a God would necessarily not be truly and totally infinite but must instead be somewhat infinite. If God is, as we perceive Him to be, totally perfect in every way, then any non-infinitude on His part would itself necessitate His nonexistence (since what is perfect is infinite and beyond the realm of human understanding).
2. Should God be part of existence but not the cause of existence, how could He be omnipotent? If He is not omnipotent, how could He be perfect? If He is not perfect, how could He be God?
3. Should God be neither a cause nor a part of existence, how could we say He even exists at all?

Therefore, I subscribe rather to the theory of God as self-causing monism*: I think God is a self-causing causer, that is, not only did He cause the Universe but also that He sustains it, and more bluntly, is it, and we are in him in a similar manner as, say, the pancreas and the liver are in the human body.

--------
*If you're wondering why this sounds familiar, it's because it's the Hindu perception of Brahman, the Taoist perception of the Tao, and the Sufi Muslim concept of Allah (among others). One of the reasons I think this characterization has come about so widely is because this is, by far, the best way to resolve the causal-monist dilemma (that is, should God exist, His nature is more likely to be this than any other).
__________________

Much of Hindu religious an philosophy makes great sense to me, and I wrote many essays on my perceptions about god until someone pointed it out to me how similar my idea of God is similar to theirs

To me God is the Uncaused Cause, the Buck stops here, from him there is no infinite regression, he is the Alpha Point, the Omega Point.

Yes God it the Cause of existence and maybe what "we think is existence might no really not be existence at all".

But from this infinite mind all things came into being, he weaved the fabrics of existence together and can change it when ever he wants to. He is the Ceaseless Creator he never stops creating

Was he all alone in some eternal dark and plunged his light into it? I don't really know

We finite beings are too limited to describe God but hey why not try?

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

Alan McDougall wrote:

I did not mean literally in his image, but the thing we call LIFE is the part of man that is in Gods image

We were given a free will and messed up nearly everything we put our silly hands on.

To equate the awesome infinite mind and attributes of God, to that of that of mere mortal man, is really silly to me, and that is what you were doing your comment

It wasn't meant to be taken seriously. My comment was only a joke.

0 Replies

@Allen phil,

Is not what we live within a condition, is not what we are a condition, is not the cosmos itself a condition, why is it necessary to personify this said condition of the cosmos---------duh!! :nonooo: Zeus and lightning bolts -please!

1 Reply

Is God part of existence or cause of existence

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know