By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
mmnin on 28 March 2009
Edit Thread
appolose said:
mmnin said:
appolose said:

While I must (respectfully) disagree, in that I find logic to be unchanging at any level, and that God is "bound" by logic (although that isn't the apt description), we can both agree that the rock question isn't a problem, eh? :)

 

Ah well there in lies a question of how we define God.  The initial assumption that God is all powerful would seem to imply that He transcends all we know.  Which brings us to how we define all powerful.  If you simply define all powerful as what can be within the confines of our known existence, then you are not considering the possibility that He created all that we know to exist.  In which case, He would thus transcend all that we know.  If you are saying that God is "bound" by logic then He cannot be all powerful in the fullest extent of the concept. 

My argument and explored idea is that He has actually made logic as we know it, and that undiscovered qualities of our existence may actually be far beyond our current levels of thinking and logic.  So much so that our currently accepted logic does not apply.  Which brings me to my prior posts about logic being a relative terms and is technically without bound, and thus if God is "bound" by logic, then in this case, He would be boundless and again the fullest extent of the concept "All Powerful."  I believe it is also possible that God IS theoretical embodiment of the truest form of logic which also fits into some beliefs that God is omnipresent and would also imply that He has been forever changing, but in that He has always been and is forever changing for all possible changes, then He has actually been forever the same.

 

I hesitated to use bound, for I do not think that correct.  And I can agree with you that God might embody logic.  But it is with that that I find God "unable" to do absurd or meaningless things, in that a meaningless "thing" cannot be done because it does not exist.  To say God cannot do what isn't is limiting; it's definitive, as the alternative says nothing (and thus is not limiting).  Also, I think it false to say that there is "our logic" and then there is "God's logic".  There is no such distinction, for logic is simply non-contradiction.  One might say that we don't always use logic correctly or get it wrong occasionally, but that does not imply there is a different logic to be had.  Furthermore, the argument "God does not have our logic.  This action a contradiction.  Therefore, God can do this action" is using "our" logic again to prove our logic isn't the highest form of logic, and thus defeats itself (which is logical).

 

Actually I've been saying that "logic" or truth is possibly relative to the environment in which it is applied, and if it is relative, then there are an infinite many number of subsets to which can be in the overall set of logic.  I am saying that while our logic may be a subset of the overall set of logic, with God possibly being the whole set of logic, our subset would not equate the set since there are many logical environments that exist that we do not know about.

Oh and guys, I really appreciate you allowing me to explore thoughts like this.  I'm enjoying these discussions.  Not sure when my mind is going to give out though.  lol.  The mind has been shown to take up the most energy of any other body part.