Re: If god exists, what created god?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Robert Roosen: "Lysenko or Hitler?"
• Previous message: Drew & Laurie Beck: "Re: ethnography on race"

In article <1MAY199511535963@uhcl2.cl.uh.edu>, swen2a54@uhcl2.cl.uh.edu
says...
>
>In article <3o2sdr$9p@CUBoulder.Colorado.EDU>,
wrightjp@ucsub.Colorado.EDU (WRIGHT JACOB PHILIP) writes...
>>If god is all-powerfull, he cannot
>>be destroyed, as that would be a limitation on his power, agreed?
>>However, as you pointed out, if god is all-powerfull he can do
anything,
>>so we have two incompatible logical statements. Throw in the added
>>complication that this hypothetical God may not be subject to logic
>>as we know it and you have a difficult question. (some of you may find
>>this easy, I dont) Also, if god has the ability to create himself
>>(interesting concept!) can he ever really be destroyed? Thanks for
>>provoking me, it makes me think!
>
>The eternal God of the universe did not create himself, And as he is
eternal he
>cannot be destroyed!! So where is the logical fallacy here??

There is none. And to forestall the question which is being begged:-

God is eternal, or else He would not be God.
What does "eternal" mean? It means without beginning and without end.

Therefore, nothing created God, and nothing will destroy Him.

Or:
"Creation" and "Destruction" are activities which belong in the realm
of relativities. God exists in the realm where there are no relativities.
If this were not so, then we could compare God's "term of existence"
relatice to something else, but we cant't because, as we know, God is
eternal.

Quod Absit. :)

Instead of saying "God" we could say "The Eternal". What's in a name
anyway?

-- 

Nasser

"Whatever can be said about the Tao is not the Tao" - Lao Tzu

• Next message: Robert Roosen: "Lysenko or Hitler?"
• Previous message: Drew & Laurie Beck: "Re: ethnography on race"