| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Pastor Frank" |
| Date: |
29 Oct 2004 12:44:32 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Arguments for the existence of God |
"Mark T" <mark@home.in.oz> wrote in message
news:4181c4da@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Arguments for the existence of God
The Ontological argument
C2: Therefore, God is not just a concept and must exist in reality.
Thus the fact that we define God to be the greatest possible being means
that He must exist, or else He would no longer be the greatest. Another
way
to understand the argument is to distinguish between a necessary being
(that
is, one that necessarily must exist) and a contingent one (that is, one
that
may or may not exist, depending on the circumstances); according to the
ontological argument, then, it would be greater for God to exist as a
necessary being than as a contingent one. Notice that this argument
depends
only on the definition, not any facts about the world. It is perhaps for
this reason that many people find it unsatisfactory at first glance, since
it doesn't seem right to be able to define God into existence. However,
saying what is wrong with it has historically proved rather more
difficult.
The other argument Aquinas offered runs thus:
P1: Contingent beings exist;
P2: If a contingent being exists then a necessary being must also exist;
C: Therefore, a necessary being exists (i.e. God).
We discussed necessary and contingent beings above, but the idea here is
that if everything in the universe was contingent then there must have
been
some time when there were no contingent beings at all. In that case, how
could the universe have come into being, since contingent beings would
require a cause? This means that there must be some necessary being, which
we take to be God.
There seems to be something amiss with a God who has no choice but to
exist as a "necessary being". It all depends on the definition of the
word"God". If we take the Christian one, i.e. "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16),
then God can exist physically as in Jesus Christ our God incarnate, or God
can exist as as an eternal ideal, such as love. Therefore God is not
choiceless in the matter of physical existence, but can choose to exist
physically in time, or exist as an ideal without the need of a body.
Pastor Frank
THE MANDATE OF JESUS
**Jesus in Lk:4:18: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath
anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the
broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of
sight to the blind.
**Jesus in Mk:2:17: When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are
whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
**Jesus in Lk:9:56: For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives,
but to save them.
**Jesus Mt:18:11: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
**Jesus in Jn:12:47: And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge
him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
**Jesus in Mt:11:28-30 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened,
and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am
gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my
yoke is easy and my burden is light."
.
|
|
| User: "bluskie" |
|
| Title: Re: Arguments for the existence of God |
30 Oct 2004 05:45:41 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.com> wrote in message news:<1099073933.zcnWSnGfYGicRyuRqSyF1A@teranews>...
"Mark T" <mark@home.in.oz> wrote in message
news:4181c4da@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
There seems to be something amiss with a God who has no choice but to
exist as a "necessary being". It all depends on the definition of the
word"God". If we take the Christian one, i.e. "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16),
then God can exist physically as in Jesus Christ our God incarnate, or God
can exist as as an eternal ideal, such as love. Therefore God is not
choiceless in the matter of physical existence, but can choose to exist
physically in time, or exist as an ideal without the need of a body.
Pastor Frank
well your god of love seems to be on permanent vacation pastor frank,
considering all the innocents victimized by your christian god of war.
Do they regenerate in the afterlife after the warmongering hordes have
butchered them pastor frank? Just like Jesus did? where are they?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark T" |
|
| Title: Re: Arguments for the existence of God |
29 Oct 2004 05:43:35 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Frank" wrote:
THE MANDATE
Mmmm ... the ol' Grizian mandate for ACC again????
Springtime for Hitler"
from Mel Brooks' The Producers
Germany was having trouble, what a sad, sad story
Needed a new leader to restore its former glory
Where oh where was he? Where could that man be?
We looked around, and then we found, the man for you and me,
And now it's ...
Springtime for Hitler and Germany,
Deutschland is happy and gay.
We're marching to a faster pace,
Look out, here comes the master race.
Springtime for Hitler and Germany,
Winter for Poland and France.
Springtime for Hitler and Germany,
Come on, Germans, go into your dance ...
I was born in Dusseldorf, and that is why they call me Rolf.
Don't be stupid, be a smarty, come and join the Nazi party.
Springtime for Hitler and Germany
(Gun fires twice)
Goose-step's the new step today
(Machine gun fires)
Bombs falling from the skies again,
(Bomb falls and explodes)
Deutschland is on the rise again
Springtime for Hitler and Germany
U-boats are sailing once more
[woman's voice]: "Well! Talk about bad taste!"
Springtime for Hitler and Germany
Means ... that ... soon we'll be going ...
We've got to be going ...
You know we'll be going to ... WAR!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Libertarius" |
|
| Title: Re: Arguments for the existence of God |
29 Oct 2004 07:59:57 PM |
|
|
Pastor Frank wrote:
"Mark T" <mark@home.in.oz> wrote in message
news:4181c4da@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Arguments for the existence of God
The Ontological argument
C2: Therefore, God is not just a concept and must exist in reality.
Thus the fact that we define God to be the greatest possible being means
that He must exist, or else He would no longer be the greatest. Another
way
to understand the argument is to distinguish between a necessary being
(that
is, one that necessarily must exist) and a contingent one (that is, one
that
may or may not exist, depending on the circumstances); according to the
ontological argument, then, it would be greater for God to exist as a
necessary being than as a contingent one. Notice that this argument
depends
only on the definition, not any facts about the world. It is perhaps for
this reason that many people find it unsatisfactory at first glance, since
it doesn't seem right to be able to define God into existence. However,
saying what is wrong with it has historically proved rather more
difficult.
The other argument Aquinas offered runs thus:
P1: Contingent beings exist;
P2: If a contingent being exists then a necessary being must also exist;
C: Therefore, a necessary being exists (i.e. God).
We discussed necessary and contingent beings above, but the idea here is
that if everything in the universe was contingent then there must have
been
some time when there were no contingent beings at all. In that case, how
could the universe have come into being, since contingent beings would
require a cause? This means that there must be some necessary being, which
we take to be God.
There seems to be something amiss with a God who has no choice but to
exist as a "necessary being". It all depends on the definition of the
word"God". If we take the Christian one, i.e. "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16),
then God can exist physically as in Jesus Christ our God incarnate, or God
can exist as as an eternal ideal, such as love. Therefore God is not
choiceless in the matter of physical existence, but can choose to exist
physically in time, or exist as an ideal without the need of a body.
Pastor Frank
===>Wrong again, Sheepherder Frank, as usual.
It is not any "God" who chooses to appear in one form or another,
it is the HUMAN IMAGINATION that makes that imaginary being
appear in various forms, like a shapeshifter in a scifi story. -- L.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
