| Question Home |
Position:Home>Philosophy> Minimal creator?Question: Minimal creator!? If we 'need' to invoke some sort of creator to explain the universe, should it not be the simplest one imaginable, in the absence of evidence of other qualities attributed to God/s!?
For example, a random number generator that only displays 0 or 1, and when it hits 1 the Big Bang happens!. Would this not be the 'most logical creator being'!?Www@QuestionHome@Com Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: Misuse of Okham's Razor!. You should be ashamed of yourself!.Www@QuestionHome@Com I think you are referring to infinity before the beginning!. God has to many cliches attached to his name!. We need new words to describe new understandings!. Your theory is impossible to prove, therefore, it is just a stimulation of your imagination!. Energy does not just come from a machine!. You have to ask where did the machine come from!. Energy is eternal anyways!. Think about any object, and destroy it via imagination, it does not disappear, it just changes!. We can't destroy the atom, only split it!. This is a law of thermodynamics, and means the universe is an infinite state, whatever that might really mean!?Www@QuestionHome@Com Well, assuming there was a ''logical creator'' then that creator would create logical beings!. Except humans are the most illogical beings of all!. We laugh at stupid things, ingore our brains and go with our ''gut'' and lets not forget the fact that most people on this website don't even have a brain to begin with!. Not very logical is it!? also, numbers are a human invention, so why would a logical creator use an illogical idea!?Www@QuestionHome@Com 0_o what!?! you don't believe in Raptor Jesus!? http://www!.encyclopediadramatica!.com/ind!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com it is betteer than tryting to explain everything our selves,!., you knoiw what if we did come from monkeys then i think we would have better common sence than i have ever seen in a person i am not friends with!Www@QuestionHome@Com No because 0 and 1 didn't exist until mankind invented them, several billion years after the big bang!.Www@QuestionHome@Com The minimal creator can be expressed thusly: In order to be free God had to not be God!. From that negation everything else follows--being, life, self-awareness, logic, number, and prediction/confirmation!. This event had to be performed in such a way so as God could both be and not be God in the same phenomenon!. Her solution is doable, even logically doable, in the form of being what is not while not being what is!. In this double negation, God becomes free in the phenomenon of not, not being God, while affirming (by implication) the God that is free to not be God!. In other words, the liberation of God’s non-being becomes God’s immanence while, at the same time, there exists an implied transcendent God!. God’s immanence is particularly important to humans because divine immanence gets called “reality!.” [The idea that God is free to not be God is unusual but not unique!. In the journal, Deconstruction and Theology (1982, p!. 89-90), Robert P!. Scharlemann, in the article The Being of God When God is Not Being God, adds some commentary to this idea when he says: “The thesis I should like to propound here is that, in the theological tradition of this picture (the concept of finite being as ens creatum) is that the world is itself a moment in the being of God; what cannot be thought is that the world is the being of God when God is not being deity, or the being of God in the time of not being!.” It follows from this view that an infinite amount of diversity is both permitted and discovered in God’s freedom not to be, a diversity that, ultimately, is at one with God!. What makes this possible (and logically consistent) is the peculiar state of being-what-is-not-while-not-being-what-i!.!.!. for this being, in addition to characterizing God’s freedom, also characterizes the liberation process that evolves God’s freedom (God becomes more free as freedom evolves) and this freedom, ultimately, characterizes physical events, biological events, and psychological events, (or the divine self-consciousness of the here and now)!.]Www@QuestionHome@Com |