Jump to content
Michael Llenos

More Concerning God....

Recommended Posts

Tonight's dialectical musings on the ontological argument...

 

1. If God doesn't exist,

God cannot exist.*

 

2. But God can exist,**

Therefore, God must exist.

 

----------------------------------

Footnotes:

 

*E.g. existence cannot support perfection.

 

**E.g. 1. It is possible for the universe to have a creator. 2. One absolute property of existence (as a whole) includes perfection. (Spinoza: There is nothing stopping God from being real.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Onto. Arguments:

 

Anselm. If God exists in the mind, he must exist in reality.

 

Descartes. Perfection equates existence.

 

Spinoza. There is no cause for God to not exist.

 

My own. Only an all powerful God can stop an all powerful God from existing. But to stop the 2nd God from existing you would need a 3rd, and a 4th to stop the 3rd, and so on for all eternity etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a supreme God not to exist, you would need an infinite number of supreme Gods to exist to make this happen. This is impossible. Therefore, a supreme God exists.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...interesting thoughts, Michael.

 

I hope you'll hop over to Meet and Greet and introduce yourself so everyone will know you are here and can welcome you. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tonight's dialectical musings on the ontological argument...

 

1. If God doesn't exist,

God cannot exist.*

 

2. But God can exist,**

Therefore, God must exist.

 

----------------------------------

Footnotes:

 

*E.g. existence cannot support perfection.

 

**E.g. 1. It is possible for the universe to have a creator. 2. One absolute property of existence (as a whole) includes perfection. (Spinoza: There is nothing stopping God from being real.)

You're right: if God can exist, then He must exist.

 

In fact, that the thought of God could even flash through the mind of man is a pointer to the existence of God.

 

God has deliberately cast the thoughts about Himself across the hearts of men, so they can think about Him and ultimately come to the realization of His existence and, most especially, to the saving knowledge of His Son Jesus Christ.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're all-powerful, you cannot be a creation of the human mind. Therefore, God exists in reality.

For to be all-powerful is to be able to create a universe like ours such that the created universe could still amount to the least of things that could be created.

 

The power of God can never be exhausted, even if God decides to create better, bigger and grander universes apart from the one we are in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ChristAddict,

Thanks for the positive replies. I believe the same as you. However, it is quite possible for someone to play the evil-advocate. For example, the skeptic might ask: 'If God's power can never be exhausted, why did he rest on the Sabbath in Genesis?' And: 'If Jesus is part-God, why did he get tired, at times, in the New Testament?' (I will reply in the next post.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ChristAddict,

It's simple to answer the skeptic's questions. 1. God wasn't tired when he rested. He was simply, passively overseeing his creation. And, 2. The mediator between God and mankind (the God-Man, or Jesus) is fully man and fully God. [so like you said: God's power can never be exhausted, even if he created bigger universes than our own.]

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ChristAddict,

But to really settle the score, one could say that God is infinite in character. Meaning, a finite mind (like what we all have as regular people) cannot understand the infinite. So God's power is a mystery to normal man. And that's why we need a God-Man as a mediator that can relate to both God and Man. So we need Jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ChristAddict,

Please forgive me for being the evil-advocate. Sometimes I like to look at both sides of the coin to get at the truth better. I, however, believe God's truth is superior. As God says to spur us on in the Old Testament: "This generation is wise in evildoing, but foolish when it comes to goodness." I.e. something I remembered God saying in the Bible. (The sentence was paraphrased from Amos; I think, if I can remember correctly?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ChristAddict,

When I said God's truth is superior, I meant: your's and all other Christian's (& monotheist's) and God's own truth. But other people have faded into such wickedness that reasoning with them is very hard to do. That is why I try to look at both sides of an argument sometimes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, the term God-Man (for Jesus) comes from book 10 of Augustine's Confessions. I was just borrowing it from St. Augustine. I do not think it is said directly, though, but rather it is implied.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChristAddict,

Thanks for the positive replies. I believe the same as you. However, it is quite possible for someone to play the evil-advocate. For example, the skeptic might ask: 'If God's power can never be exhausted, why did he rest on the Sabbath in Genesis?' And: 'If Jesus is part-God, why did he get tired, at times, in the New Testament?' (I will reply in the next post.)

Thanks for your reply, Michael. In fact, I like the way you try to look into the minds and determine their possible questions about God's existence and its proofs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, the term God-Man (for Jesus) comes from book 10 of Augustine's Confessions. I was just borrowing it from St. Augustine. I do not think it is said directly, though, but rather it is implied.

Yes, I perfectly understand you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChristAddict,

When I said God's truth is superior, I meant: your's and all other Chrith's (& monotheist's) and God's own truth. But other people have faded into such wickedness that reasoning with them is very hard to do. That is why I try to look at both sides of an argument sometimes.

You're right, Michael. Looking at the both sides of the argument helps us to properly, with the help of the Holy Spirit, give answers to skeptics' questions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChristAddict,

It's simple to answer the skeptic's questions. 1. God wasn't tired when he rested. He was simply, passively overseeing his creation. And, 2. The mediator between God and mankind (the God-Man, or Jesus) is fully man and fully God. [so like you said: God's power can never be exhausted, even if he created bigger universes than our own.]

 

'Rest' in Genesis 2:2-3 is gotten from the Hebrew word 'Shabat', it is also observed by Jews. It means 'to end'. Therefore REST does not necessarily mean 'TIRED'. The Bibles states 'the Word became flesh'. He took human form so he should sleep like humans sleep.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tonight's dialectical musings on the ontological argument...

 

1. If God doesn't exist,

God cannot exist.*

 

2. But God can exist,**

Therefore, God must exist.

 

----------------------------------

Footnotes:

 

*E.g. existence cannot support perfection.

 

**E.g. 1. It is possible for the universe to have a creator. 2. One absolute property of existence (as a whole) includes perfection. (Spinoza: There is nothing stopping God from being real.)

 

Existence does not define God because he created the heavens and the earth. Time is His tool not the other way round.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Njoku said:

[Rest' in Genesis 2:2-3 is gotten from the Hebrew word 'Shabat', it is also observed by Jews. It means 'to end'. Therefore REST does not necessarily mean 'TIRED'. The Bibles states 'the Word became flesh'. He took human form so he should sleep like humans sleep.]

 

When I said the God-Man is fully God and fully man, I meant although Jesus is part-divine, he could get tired because he is also a man. So I do agree with you there.

 

As for God the Creator getting tired, I was just implying what an atheist or agnostic may impute or attribute to the Creator. Shabat is also why there exists a 4th commandment in the Decalogue. God rather rested from all things than ended all things. For if he ended all things we would all be dead. And if he ended his participation in the universe, you are ascribing Deism to God. (Or that he made the universe like an all self functioning Clock.) And if you are a Jewish, Christian or Muslim worshipper, you cannot be a Deist. Or at least in the traditional sense.

 

Njoku also said:

[Existence does not define God because he created the heavens and the earth. Time is His tool not the other way round.]

 

I agree that time is God's tool. Time is not infinite in length, otherwise God would not be the creator of time. But God is the creator of all things. So because God is the creator of time, their existed a First Cause of time. This First Cause (or First Mover) is what we know to be God. So time is not only God's tool but it is also his creation. For God to always have used time as his tool in the past, he would have had to create time itself. So I agree with you.

 

And as far as your belief that existence does not define God, I rather disagree. Any college Philosophy 101 course will teach you Descartes' ontological argument: 'perfection includes existence.' Since the time of Decartes, this ontological argument has never been bettered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Njoku said:

[Rest' in Genesis 2:2-3 is gotten from the Hebrew word 'Shabat', it is also observed by Jews. It means 'to end'. Therefore REST does not necessarily mean 'TIRED'. The Bibles states 'the Word became flesh'. He took human form so he should sleep like humans sleep.]

 

When I said the God-Man is fully God and fully man, I meant although Jesus is part-divine, he could get tired because he is also a man. So I do agree with you there.

 

As for God the Creator getting tired, I was just implying what an atheist or agnostic may impute or attribute to the Creator. Shabat is also why there exists a 4th commandment in the Decalogue. God rather rested from all things than ended all things. For if he ended all things we would all be dead. And if he ended his participation in the universe, you are ascribing Deism to God. (Or that he made the universe like an all self functioning Clock.) And if you are a Jewish, Christian or Muslim worshipper, you cannot be a Deist. Or at least in the traditional sense.

 

Njoku also said:

[Existence does not define God because he created the heavens and the earth. Time is His tool not the other way round.]

 

I agree that time is God's tool. Time is not infinite in length, otherwise God would not be the creator of time. But God is the creator of all things. So because God is the creator of time, their existed a First Cause of time. This First Cause (or First Mover) is what we know to be God. So time is not only God's tool but it is also his creation. For God to always have used time as his tool in the past, he would have had to create time itself. So I agree with you.

 

And as far as your belief that existence does not define God, I rather disagree. Any college Philosophy 101 course will teach you Descartes' ontological argument: 'perfection includes existence.' Since the time of Decartes, this ontological argument has never been bettered.

Thanks for your reply Micheal. With due respect, I view these findings quiet differently but I respect your opinion. With the help of the Holy Spirit, He will give us understanding and answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Njoku,

Please forgive me if my beliefs are divisive. And thank you for your kind words. I agree that the Holy Spirit will give us answers and understanding. Thank you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Onto. Arguments:

 

Anselm. If God exists in the mind, he must exist in reality.

 

Descartes. Perfection equates existence..

 

I have a problem with the word 'equates' in that statement. Perfection, necessarily, includes existence, but perfection is not equal to existence because that would necessitate existence being equal to perfection. We exist but, clearly, we're not perfect.

 

And I outright reject the notion that 'If God exists in the mind, he must exist in reality' because anything can exist in the mind. Existing in the mind doesn't mean that something must exist in reality.

 

The fact that God exists is not because someone thought that He exists. It's because God has proven that He exists by the works of His hands.

 

For example, do you know how the first DNA was formed? Scientists don't, and yet it contains all the instructions for each living cell to continue living.

 

The reason why we can think of God's existence is because we recognize features of intelligent design and we know whomever created them is smarter and more powerful than we are.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equates was a poor choice of words. I meant the original saying or perfection includes existence.

 

I was just summarizing Anselm by the way. He meant that:

 

If God is that which nothing greater can exist,

And he exists in the mind,

Then he must exist in reality.

Otherwise he would be that which something greater can exist:

And that would conflict with the original argument.

 

By the way 'creation by intelligent design' is banal and trite. It is a platitude. It can be originally found in the 5th century pagan works of Xenophon's Memorabilia. It didn't originate in Christian thought. On the other hand, the ontological arguments of Descartes and Anselm came from two Catholics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way 'creation by intelligent design' is banal and trite. It is a platitude. It can be originally found in the 5th century pagan works of Xenophon's Memorabilia. It didn't originate in Christian thought. On the other hand, the ontological arguments of Descartes and Anselm came from two Catholics.

 

Banal and trite doesn't make it wrong. The fact that it's been repeated for so long, and is scientifically accurate, has weight.

 

Some people ask, 'If God created everything, where did God come from?'

 

Other people may ask, 'If life on earth were created by aliens, where did the aliens come from?'

 

The fundamental question is, or should be, 'How did DNA come into existence?'

 

There are several amino acids. They each have their own shape. They form together into a long chain that folds itself into a shape. How the chain folds is determined by the shape of each amino acid in the chain. The shape that the amino acids form into is called a protein.

 

But proteins cannot do anything by themselves. They need instructions found in DNA. DNA can't make proteins. Proteins cannot make DNA. But they need each other to be able to form the structure of a cell.

 

If anyone asks 'Where did the creator of the universe come from?' they are necessarily asking 'Who created DNA?'

 

Since DNA is a construct inside the universe, whomever created the universe must exist outside of the universe to be able to have made DNA.

 

DNA, in any usable form, is not something that can spring up from nothingness or form itself.

 

DNA has to be specifically designed (coded) for each species. Bill Gates (of Microsoft) said that DNA is the most complex programming language. And DNA would have had to be written for each creature that has a biological form.

 

Whether or not a Catholic thought of intelligent design is meaningless. The presence of DNA, and it's necessity in biological species, means that God necessarily exists.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

About Us

ChristianWriters.com is a friendly community of writers, readers, publishers, and other literary professionals who share a love for the written word and salvation through Jesus Christ.

 

Follow us

CW on Facebook

Recent Tweets

×