RE: God's God
April 11, 2013 at 2:00 pm
(This post was last modified: April 11, 2013 at 2:16 pm by median.)
(April 11, 2013 at 1:45 pm)Lord Privy Seal Wrote: We have no reason to assume that non-existence and randomness are ontologically primary, thus requiring a god to show up and impose existence and order from "outside."
(April 11, 2013 at 1:45 pm)Lord Privy Seal Wrote:(April 8, 2013 at 12:50 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Either the physical universe is complete random chaos or it has an inherent order. Take your pick. Either could be true. What you will find however, is that such a transcendent inherent order has many attributes traditionally associated with a monotheistic god.
Some, perhaps, but not the ones the theists are most interested in. The equation "2+2=4" is eternal (valid throughout all possible instances of time), omnipresent (there is no conceivable place where it does not apply), and omnipotent (every 2, added to another 2, inevitably results in 4, and no force can make it otherwise). Does this make "2+2" Divine? Should we worship it? How do we know that the fundamental root of order and existence is not something similar--something that could be represented by an equation? We know equations exist, and (when valid) possess the required attributes.
A "monotheistic god" is most commonly represented as a type of thinking, language-using, social person who engages in status-seeking among humans ("Praise me! Worship me! Obey me! Or else!"). A monotheistic god by definition does not tolerate the worship of other gods and goddesses, demanding a monopoly on human attention and reverence.
The Kalam argument doesn't lead us to anywhere within light-years of such a thing. If anything, those attributes--which are the ones religious monotheists care the most about--are contradicted by the Kalam. For one thing, if there can be no such thing as an actual infinity, then the god cannot have an endless sequence of thoughts, intentions, emotions, etc. There must (by the logic of the Kalam) be a First Thought, a First Emotion, a First Intention, and so on. On the other hand, if the god was not always a thinking, feeling, talking person whose primary desire is to be the sole, undisputed King of the Humans, then he was not always "god" as defined and desired by monotheists, and something must have caused him.
And so we've returned to question posed by the OP.
Checkmate!
![[Image: CM250_zps67587f7f.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i3.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy52%2Fmedian%2FCM250_zps67587f7f.jpg)