Agnostic Theist

You've also opened up another can of worms by saying "God is beyond logic". If God is beyond logic, then for one he wouldn't possess the logic needed to create logic, and two a being that is "beyond logic" (an identity) would not be constrained by the law of non-contradiction... and is thus bound by logic. Due to being "beyond" non-contradiction, any identity that this God has (like being "beyond" logic) would also be supplimented by its opposite (like NOT being "beyond" logic).


What so because He can contradict Himself, now He has to? I can say good day in French, does that mean I greet everyone with 'Bonjour'? Of course not. Likewise, if God transcends logic He can be self-contradictory without having to be x and not x in every possible form, manner or way.

He can do the logically impossible just like He can do the logically possible.

Isn't that what every perspective concerning God is about then? You said..."If God is beyond logic then" ....which follows the perspective that you suggested. "If God were <x>, then <y>. It follows even with "if God is unknowable, then <y>".

I mean, why not assert that a little green fairy makes the grass grow? "If a fairy makes the grass grow, then" "If the fairy can do anything, then <y>"

"If we can't prove there is a fairy, then why say there is one?" Is it because you wouldn't understand how the grass grows?

So, why do you discuss it?

show_no_mercy

The context of your first post and mine was of identity while this subsequent post of yours is about actions.

If God is DESCRIBED as being "beyond" logic... then he can also be described as NOT being beyond logic due to his being "beyond" the law of non-contradiction.

The phrase "beyond logic" is meaningless wordplay when used as a descriptor, and amounts to nothing more than verbal masturbation.

Agnostic Theist

Right, but why should that imply anything other than He can do things logically and illogically?

Magus55

God is self-sustaining, so its fairly safe to assume God wouldn't need what we consider time to take actions.

But this question could be directed at atheists too. Did time exist before the Big Bang? If not, where did the universe come from if time didn't exist?

Mageth

Hiya Magus. Long time no see.

I fail to see the connection...

I think that question would be better directed at cosmologists, physisicts, and/or astrophysicists...you know, to people in the fields that are looking into such questions...

Gawen

And how can one have a personal relationship with it?

(rhetorical question...no need to answer)...

Magus55

Hi, how ya been? I see you've been posting a lot. Dang, how am I ever gonna catch up to your post count now



Just seems to me that if God needs nothing, and existed for eternity prior to the Creation of the Universe, a materialistic universe wouldn't be necessary for Him to follow through with actions. Maybe time works differently for God than us? Maybe He has His own internal "clock". I just think its a faulty assumption to assume God requires what we think of time, in order to function.



True, I was just trying to express the reciprocal problem inherent with this issue. It isn't necessarily just a theist issue.

Bobinius

This is just meaningless talk. 'Eternity' before the beggining of time is non-sensical. Maybe it is non-sensical to talk about something that exists outside of time. You cannot understand that (or anybody).

A God outside of time is outside of existence, since existence is defined on spacetime. Time is defined on relative changes within the Universe. If God is out of time, he is impossible to be differentiated from non-existence, since he causes no change within this universe. If he causes something he becomes bound by time.


If the Big Bang is the beggining of time, then it is non-sensical to ask a question about 'before' the BB. 'Before' is a temporal notion and it presupposes the existence of time, which in our premise is false, time began at the BB. Contradiction.

For example, if Hawking is right, and the information is deleted in the spacetime singularity, then BB is considered the 'beggining of our time', since if there was something before (however meaningless, but for the sake of the debate), it could not be differentiate from nothingness, it has no observable consequences in our space-time.

Alf

If god is not bound by logic then you can picture the following discussiong between Joe and God.

Joe: Hey, God, you are not bound by logic, right?
God: Of course not! I create logic, I am its master, I am not its slave!
Joe: And you are all powerful also, right?
God: Of course, I can do anything I please.
Joe: Can you then create a rock so heavy that you can\t lift it?
God: Of course, here it is <pointing to rock>.
Joe: And you are still all powerful, right?
God: Of course, I can do anything I please.
Joe: So, then you can lift that rock?
God: Of course, look here! <lifting rock>
Joe: God!?
God: Yes?
Joe: You just lifted that rock!
God: Of course!?
Joe: So, then you couldn't create a rock so heavy you can't lift it.
God: Sure I can! I just created this rock.
Joe: But you are lifting it, so it is not so heavy you can't lift it.
God: Oh, why are you pestering me with this logic stuff!

The old defence that theologians have against this reasoning is that God is NOT beyond logic. There are some things that god cannot do - yet we still call him omnipotent - or rather they do.

For example, God cannot sin, he cannot create square circles and he cannot create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it. It is not lack of potency that causes him to be unable to create or do these things but it is rather that they are contradictory and logically impossible for God to do. God can lift any stone, consquently he cannot create a stone so heavy he cannot lift it.

If you now claim that God is beyond logic and not bound by logic you are effectively kicking the legs on this defence and the theologians are left without defence.

Trust me, you don't want to go that road - you are sure to end up in a position that cannot be defended.

Alf

Alf

If there was no time "before" the unvierse existed, then there really was no time and there never was such a condition. It follows that the universe has always been even if "always" is no older than around 13.7 billion years old.

Since the universe has always been there is no meaning to ask what was before it. There wasn\t any "before".

Alf