- 14 Nov 2018 20:26
#14963424
The one you refuse to write here?
Sorry, I thought you accepted the orthodox Christian view of God as infinite.
No, we are both agreeing here:
God is present in the toilet, but is not the toilet because He is omnipresent but simultaneously separate from His creation. Or, if you like, he is present but has a different identity.
No. God’s finiteness is true even if we see God as a transcendent being separate from His creation yet present everyhwere. This is becuase he is only transcendentally present everywhere. God would have to also be immanently omnipresent to be truly infinite.
I completely agree with the first sentence, but since my argument is based on that, my argument does not rest on a false dilemma.
The point of comparison is your belief in the incorrectness of both claims.
If you are calling your own argument a DOA shitpost, you are conceding.
That does not address my point about god’s finiteness.
There is a crack in everything,
That's how the light gets in...
Victoribus Spolia wrote:Its handled in my argument, the one you refused to debate.
The one you refuse to write here?
I don't hold to your position, so you are debating yourself, not me.
Sorry, I thought you accepted the orthodox Christian view of God as infinite.
Correct.
False. He can be a non-toilet and still be present in your toilet. Identity is not Presence.
Omnipresence is that God is all present, not that ALL things are God.
Your are confused with your terms.
No, we are both agreeing here:
God is present in the toilet, but is not the toilet because He is omnipresent but simultaneously separate from His creation. Or, if you like, he is present but has a different identity.
That would only be the case if the creation and the Creator were regarded as of being either the same substance, or of substances that were different and being spatially exclusive of one another (not being able to share the same space without mixture).
Neither are true.
No. God’s finiteness is true even if we see God as a transcendent being separate from His creation yet present everyhwere. This is becuase he is only transcendentally present everywhere. God would have to also be immanently omnipresent to be truly infinite.
If the substances are different, but not spatially exclusive, such can occupy the same space without identity, hence presence without identity.
Your argument rests on a false-dilemma.
I completely agree with the first sentence, but since my argument is based on that, my argument does not rest on a false dilemma.
How so?
The point of comparison is your belief in the incorrectness of both claims.
What it seems to you does not necessarily imply what it is.
If you are calling your own argument a DOA shitpost, you are conceding.
As you wish.
The Proof.
That does not address my point about god’s finiteness.
There is a crack in everything,
That's how the light gets in...