Reply
Mon 24 Oct, 2005 09:42 am
I believe an extensionality for beings. That basically means that if two beings share exactly the same characteristics, then they are the same being. Twins, or even perfect copies, are unequal because they occupy different parts in space. That would mean there are two twins. With God, there are no different and equal Gods. If hypothetical God #2 existed, it would either be omnipresent or not a God. By assumption, the second choice is eliminated. Then, God #2 is omnipresent. Then God #2's location coincides with God's location at all possible locations.
Now apply that argument infinitely many times to every characteristic of God: God #2 would either have property G or not be a God. Since by assumption GOd#2 is a God, God #2 must have propert G. Note that property G was arbitray; so God #2 has all the properties God has. Therefore, by the second sentence in the previous paragraph, God equals God #2. Thus God is unique.
It is a lot like two points on top of each other, say, located at point O on a Cartesian plane. (Point O will be called the origin.) Suppose there is a second point at O, named point P. O has the coordinates (0,0). Also with P: P has coordinates (0,0). Two points that have the same coordinates are, in fact, the same point and there aren't two points at all: there just are two different names for the same point.
So call it what you will, but there is only one.
Your assumption that God can be identified by Cartesian coordinates is inconsistent with the nature of God whose name, Jehovah, means 'he who causes to become.' Our perceptions of space and time do not necessarily apply in whatever 'dimension' God exists.
However, I am in accord with you in regards to God's personality and will. It is inconceivable that God, his son (who he created and has a beginning) and the holy spirit (the impersonal force by which God creates or operates) could have the same personality (or, rather, be the same person).
There was an interesting discussion a while back:
http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=51117
neologist wrote:Your assumption that God can be identified by Cartesian coordinates is inconsistent with the nature of God whose name, Jehovah, means 'he who causes to become.' Our perceptions of space and time do not necessarily apply in whatever 'dimension' God exists.
However, I am in accord with you in regards to God's personality and will. It is inconceivable that God, his son (who he created and has a beginning) and the holy spirit (the impersonal force by which God creates or operates) could have the same personality (or, rather, be the same person).
There was an interesting discussion a while back:
http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=51117
Hi thanks for the feedback. I think you missed the words, "It is a lot like." In other words I wasn't giving coordinates for God at all. Those coordinates were for two points --er-- actually one point with two names. You'd really get the essence of what I wrote if you just ignore the analogy.
You're making a pretty large assumption that the alleged characteristics of God are correct and/or can actually be known.
Mills75 wrote:You're making a pretty large assumption that the alleged characteristics of God are correct and/or can actually be known.
I thought we were in a roundabout discussion of the trinity. Is God = Jesus = holy spirit as in the
Athanasian Creed?
I took the initial post as a proposed proof against polytheism. Oh well, either way it's tautological. Its truth value rests entirely on unprovable and, perhaps, unknowable assumptions about the nature of God.
Re: There can be only one
Your argument is circular in that it relies on its conclusion. Even if the assumption forming the loop is left unspoken, it is necessary to form it into a valid argument. You've failed to realise you are basing your premise on your conclusion because since you believe in the conclusion already you're happy to incorporate the assumptions of your pre-existing belief as premises.
Quote:Now apply that argument infinitely many times to every characteristic of God: God #2 would either have property G or not be a God.
Because there is only one god, any god must have identical traits
:. Because gods have identical traits there can be only one god.
And we are left asking ourselves the question "how many gods can dance on the point of a cartesian plane?"...
Re: There can be only one
BrianT wrote:... That would mean there are two twins. With God, there are no different and equal Gods. If hypothetical God #2 existed, it would either be omnipresent or not a God. By assumption, the second choice is eliminated. Then, God #2 is omnipresent. Then God #2's location coincides with God's location at all possible locations.
Now apply that argument infinitely many times to every characteristic of God: God #2 would either have property G or not be a God. Since by assumption GOd#2 is a God, God #2 must have propert G. Note that property G was arbitray; so God #2 has all the properties God has. Therefore, by the second sentence in the previous paragraph, God equals God #2. Thus God is unique.
Okay here's the deal...What if there are several different galaxies and universes and each one has it's own Main God but it turns out that in order for everything in the greater realm of existence to continue and thrive all of these Main Gods need to work with each other? Doesn't this mean that there is more than one God? This is admittedly my own belief and theory but what if it turns out that I am right? You see, what I am placing here before you BrianT; is , the idea that for each universe there is but one God however in the greater scheme of things there are many Gods who work in conjunction with each other..in unity if you will. If the God in charge of our universe does something it will in some way cause a ripple effect over to a universe far off beyond our Earthly sights and the God of that universe may need to take it up with the Council Of Gods. Something to mull over I suppose. The main point being that, yes the God who covers Earth is fully in charge and indeed unique but not alone.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace