Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 12-05-2005, 01:10 PM
bocablkr bocablkr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 55
Default Re: A Smart Christian

[ QUOTE ]
This guy may not be a smart as David. Then again he Was nominated for the Nobel Prize.

A Smart Christian


Not saying I agree or disagree with him. Just that he's evidently pretty smart - and a Christian.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF???
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-05-2005, 03:03 PM
DavidL DavidL is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 3
Default Re: A Smart Christian

[ QUOTE ]

Not saying I agree or disagree with him. Just that he's evidently pretty smart - and a Christian.


[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that Dr Schaeffer's statement in point 3 (which is correct, IMHO) contradicts his statements in point 4, where he makes assumptions whose implication belie the omnipotent nature of God.

According to Dr Schaeffer:

(Point 3): "In philosophy, many errors result from supposing that the conditions and limits of our own finite existence apply to God"

(Point 4): "God is omnipotent. But omnipotence does not mean that God can do literally everything...God cannot sin...God cannot lie...God cannot change His nature. God cannot deny the demands of His holy character. God cannot make a square circle, for the notion of a square circle is self–contradictory."

If God is omnipotent, then (IMHO) the statements in point 4 resolve themselves into absurdity.

Consider carefully the nature of an omnipotent being. God is the creator of everything: every concept, including the space-time universe, energy, and the potential for thought, which encompasses knowledge, logic, language, and abstracts like morality, justice, and the "law". Taking this further, God has even created the concept of a "concept", along with the concepts of "possibility" and of "probability". As their creator and sustainer, God Himself is not subject to any of these. Thus God can not be defined in human terms, terms which He Himself has created (supposedly for the benefit of the creation). As the Bible attempts to put it, He is simply "I am who I am", the "Alpha and the Omega", timeless, infinite, sovereign.

As an example, it is meaningless to debate whether God could do evil if He chose. Everything God does is good, by divine definition, simply because He is God. The moral law can not be applied to God, because it is subject to its Creator, not the other way around. Evil is simply everything that is contrary to the will of God. Whether God chooses to create or destroy, who can judge Him, and moreover judge Him by standards and values that were not ultimately of God's own definition? The same applies to any other concept, which highlights the impotence of the created being in the face of God. As soon as we say "God is just, righteous, or compassionate" we are trying to describe God in human terms, ideas that He Himself has created. Sure, the Bible describes these as "truths", but that is because God has, using divine prerogative, created these concepts as humanly intelligible ways that He would have us view Him. The Bible is an act of reduction: God attempting to explain Himself in terms of concepts that he has granted us the "intelligence" to "understand".

Let me attempt to put this another way. God can not be constrained by "His nature", for God and "His nature" are one and the same. God's nature exudes His very essence; He is never "at odds" with Himself.

The creation apparently exists for God's glory, and His good pleasure. The process of creation supposedly requires simultaneous acts of inclusion and exclusion. For example, the creation includes a space-time theater, but in doing so supposedly excludes an infinite range of other possibilities (that we can only try to imagine). The creation could exist without knowledge (Bible: "knowledge will pass away"), without language, and (dare I suggest it) without logic. God could have chosen to create a universe within which no being has the capacity for any kind of thought. For "with God, all things are possible"!!

Returning momentarily to debate Dr Schaeffer's point 4:

a) I disagree with "omnipotence does not mean that God can do literally anything". Who, or what, is holding Him back?

b) "God cannot sin" – already covered above. Whatever God does is good, because He is God. If God were to sin, He would be in conflict with Himself ("a kingdom divided against itself will fall").

c) "God cannot lie" – similar concept. Whatever God says is true, because He has defined the very idea of truth. He (as Christ) claims "I am the Truth" – by definition, everything contrary to the character of God character is, by divine definition, false.

d) "God cannot change His nature" – utterly meaningless, because it implies that there are other "options" for God to choose from. But if there is no being greater than, or pre-existing God, then who created these options?

e) "God cannot deny the demands of His holy character" – The omnipotent creator can only be "holy" by His own definition of holiness. Again, this pre-supposes that God has "options" that are "foreign" to Him. Same question: what higher being created these options?

f) "God cannot create a square circle". Only because God has, through the process of exclusion in creation, decided that there should be a space-time world, an which furthermore should include the very concept of "geometry"...

The question of "who created God?" is likewise reduced to absurdity. Such an act of creation would have supposedly had to take place in time, and God, as the creator of the concept of time, can not be subject to time. Hence it is an anachronism to think of God as the "first cause"; He is more like the "primary eternal cause".

We "discover" our own consciousness. As an infant, at some point in time I become aware of the fact that I'm alive. But the same idea can not be applied to God. God did not suddenly "discover Himself". He is simply the "I am", who (viewed from the perspective of time) always "was" and always "will be".

Return to Dr Schaeffer's point 3, where I believe he is both correct and articulate. Then he betrays its merit, with total contradictions in point 4.

(I also believe that, as part of the creation process, and culminating with Calvary, God voluntarily divests Himself of elements of His power, but that is potentially the subject of another essay.)

I believe that there are flaws in my "logic", in that I too fall into the trap of "applying conditions and limits of our own finite existence" to an omnipotent Creator. But my intention to provoke discussion along more mature lines about the possible character of an omnipotent being ("God"). If we are to somehow gain any kind of understanding about God, then, just for starters, we have to try to think from outside a space-time perspective. To whatever extent this is humanly impossible we must humbly acknowledge our finitude. The alternative is to concede defeat and become an atheist :-)

David
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-05-2005, 03:18 PM
imported_luckyme imported_luckyme is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1
Default Re: A Smart Christian

it sounds like you're referring to Gid, the creator of God of this universe, who may well have some limitations placed on him by Gid, however minor, and whether we can know them or not. Why or why not?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-05-2005, 03:45 PM
DavidL DavidL is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 3
Default Re: A Smart Christian

[ QUOTE ]
it sounds like you're referring to Gid, the creator of God of this universe, who may well have some limitations placed on him by Gid, however minor, and whether we can know them or not. Why or why not?

[/ QUOTE ]

In your scenario it appears that Gid is greater than God. Is Gid omnipotent, or was he too created, and if so, by whom?

You can argue that God was created by A, who was created by B, etc, ad infinitum. For the effect to follow the cause, all creation must take place at a certain point of time. Therefore either time is greater than everything, or there is a being who is not subject to time, that created time. Such a being could not be created.

Given the hypothetical nature of any scenario, it is possible that (an omnipotent, eternal) God created Gid, gave Gid certain powers, and, as a further exercise of divine prerogative, voluntarily subjected Himself to some or all of the "laws of Gid".

Alternatively, if you're suggesting that Gid is simply the omnipotent creator of God, then all we're doing is toying with names.

As to the question of why, please re-read my post. I believe that God has created the very idea of reason itself. Therefore God is not subject to reason. Otherwise, reason would be greater than God, and would therefore be created by another being, i.e. God (or call Him wahtever you like).
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-05-2005, 04:08 PM
imported_luckyme imported_luckyme is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1
Default Re: A Smart Christian

[ QUOTE ]
You can argue that God was created by A, who was created by B, etc, ad infinitum. For the effect to follow the cause, all creation must take place at a certain point of time. Therefore either time is greater than everything, or there is a being who is not subject to time, that created time. Such a being could not be created.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I'm not arguing anything. I was wondering how, given your statement - [ QUOTE ]
I believe that God has created the very idea of reason itself. Therefore God is not subject to reason.

[/ QUOTE ] how there was any way we could use reason to rule out the Gid/God possibility? You certainly wouldn't be allowed to pull out some "well that's unreasonable" argument against it, or would you? Why would cause and effect, or time or any of the things that we experince apply to beings that are premised to be beyond such limitations?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-05-2005, 06:25 PM
chezlaw chezlaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 58
Default Re: A Smart Christian

[ QUOTE ]
I believe that Dr Schaeffer's statement in point 3 (which is correct, IMHO) contradicts his statements in point 4, where he makes assumptions whose implication belie the omnipotent nature of God.

According to Dr Schaeffer:

(Point 3): "In philosophy, many errors result from supposing that the conditions and limits of our own finite existence apply to God"

[/ QUOTE ]

Your refer to how correct and articulate point 3 is but it is wrong. Philosophers are exploring what follow from claims made about gods properties i.e if by god being omnipotent you mean ... then ... follows.

No errors about anything result from this method. They do however show that most people who talk about the omnipotence etc of god are talking nonsense.

chez
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-05-2005, 06:31 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: A Smart Christian

Not so smart on this answer:

[ QUOTE ]
4. Can god make a rock so big that he can’t lift it?

...

God cannot change His nature.

[/ QUOTE ]



John 1:
1| In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
14| The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

Matthew 24:
36| "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."


Philippians 2:
5| Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6| Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7| but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
8| And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death — even death on a cross!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-05-2005, 09:46 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: A Smart Christian

Isn't hating America a prereq for getting a Nobel prize?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-06-2005, 12:17 PM
NotReady NotReady is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 70
Default Re: A Smart Christian

[ QUOTE ]

Not so smart on this answer:

Quote:
4. Can god make a rock so big that he can’t lift it?

...

God cannot change His nature.


[/ QUOTE ]


His answer was correct. Jesus was both God and man. As man, He was subject to change. He was born then matured. He learned. As man, he wsn't omniscient. And He died, then was resurrected. As God, He is the same yesterday, today and forever.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-06-2005, 02:32 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: A Smart Christian

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Not so smart on this answer:

Quote:
4. Can god make a rock so big that he can’t lift it?

...

God cannot change His nature.


[/ QUOTE ]


His answer was correct. Jesus was both God and man. As man, He was subject to change. He was born then matured. He learned. As man, he wsn't omniscient. And He died, then was resurrected. As God, He is the same yesterday, today and forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't want to have a religious/Christian argument... because I'm not a Christian, so my motivation is about nil. However, as a former Christian, I would disagree with you. The verses I quoted show that God BECAME flesh. Jesus existed before he ever came to earth. He was not a MAN at that point, and he is not a MAN now (according to Christian doctrine). He BECAME a man... his nature changed. As a man, Jesus did not consider himself to be equal in nature to God. However, before and after being a man, Jesus is in nature, equal to God.

[ QUOTE ]
"As man, He was subject to change. He was born then matured. He learned. As man, he wsn't omniscient."

[/ QUOTE ]

Is Jesus omniscient now? If so, then his nature changed. Jesus is God, so God can change his nature.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.