Why, that's not my God cannot escape the ti' s animistic- reduced animism- anyway as long as He plays a role in the Multiverse, because no divine directed outcomes happen as with full animism. And thus, without causing outcomes, He cannot have referents as Creator and so forth, and thus cannot exist. Should one maintain, that no, He is Himself, but not a principle nor a being nor an entity, He still cannot be Himself, because He cannot implement Himself to be the Ultimate Explanation, or is just a sort of pantheistic God.
Anyway, being superfluous as an explanation, again, He cannot be that Explanation!
All teleological arguments beg the question of directed outcomes.
Dwight's serial cosmological argument argues that were He part of the series, He wouldn't be the Creator, or He could not create being outside it. His history/ contingent cosmological argument argues that not being contingent, He could not create or should a contingency lie with Him, He'd be incoherent as that Necessary Being. And his factual-logical argument argues that with no facts to instantiate Him, He doesn't probably exist.
Furthermore, timeless God cannot exist as God, because He again, could not create, because to create requires a God in time, and this also refutes in part the Kalam, which finds Him prior to creation timeless but in time thereafter.
Existence encompassing all, He cannot transcend it and again, cannot be Himself. And trancendence contradicts omnipresence, thus again, He cannot exist as Himself.
Cause, event and time presuppose previous ones, so Existence does not need Him as Creator.
Cataphatism describes Him such that He is incoherent and contradictory, and again, without having referents, He cannot exist. Apophatism says that He is neither this nor that, and again, He is incoherent and cannot exist!
Omni-God has His problems, and so does limited God.
No matter how one defines Him, He cannot possibly exist, and definition without evidence is vacuous as factual, whilst meaningful semantically. In principle, never will evidence arrive to instantiate Him whilst evidence arrives for scientific matters. The verification principle does then work.
Thus, theologians can flutter from one position to another, but never can they ever fructify theology as a subject with a subject!
Theology is the subject without a subject!
What rational being then would want a relationship with an incoherency?
Yes, that's your God!
I expand on the various arguments here with names for them in articles in this blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment