The first question involves a logical contradiction--the statement "God is perfect" being simultaneously true and false--so of course it is impossible for us to imagine what it might mean, and since I think the laws of logic are unchangeable I think it's a completely meaningless description. But if you believe God can change the laws of logic, you should believe God can change the logical rule known as the "law of noncontradiction" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_noncontradiction ) which says a proposition cannot be both true and false.
On Monday, December 2, 2013, Samiya Illias wrote: > I agree that perfect knowledge and command of logic and math and et al are > necessary attributes of God. > When I say God is consistent, I mean that God is so perfect in His plan > that He doesn't even have any need to change His decree or methods. > However, God reserves the power and the right to do what He wills, when He > wills, and that may appear imperfect to us mortals within our limited > senses and knowledge. > However, Jesse, I won't try to answer the following questions, as that > would be pure speculation. I'm not even sure if I understand the first > question properly. > > Samiya > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 02-Dec-2013, at 6:38 PM, Jesse Mazer <[email protected]> wrote: > > But consistency is itself a logical notion. If you think God can change > the laws of logic, can God make it so that he is both perfect and > not-perfect, with "perfect" having exactly the same meaning in both cases? > > Note that believing God cannot change logic need not imply logic is > "independent" of God for theists, they may say that logic is grounded in > God's eternal "understanding", to use the same word as Leibniz. So perfect > understanding of logic and math can be seen as necessary attributes of God, > along with other more specifically theistic attributes like > perfection, omnipotence, omniscience etc. Do you believe that God has > necessary attributes that God cannot change, so for example God cannot make > a new being more powerful than Himself since this would violate omnipotence? > > On Monday, December 2, 2013, Samiya Illias wrote: > > I agree that God is consistent. In my understanding, God is perfect in > every possible meaning of the word. > I was objecting to the assertion below that 'Most theistic philosophers > and theologians who have considered the issue agree that God did not create > the laws of math and logic, and does not have the power to alter them (or > any other "necessary" truths, ...' > > Samiya > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 02-Dec-2013, at 3:01 PM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 02 Dec 2013, at 06:11, Samiya Illias wrote: > > This is strange! What 'theism' it is if it limits God? > > > Making It consistent is not really limiting it. > > Accepting the idea that God can be inconsistent quickly leads to > inconsistent theology, which is the fuel of atheism. > (that is why atheists defends all the time the most inconsistent notion of > God, and deter people to search by themselves in the field). > > > > We believe that God is the Reality, the Prime Originator, the Sustainer, > and the Final Goal. > > > OK. > > > > Everything is as God wills and allows it to be. > > > I don't know. > > Bruno > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 02-Dec-2013, at 4:13 AM, Jesse Mazer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Most theistic philosophers and theologians who have considered the issue > agree that God did not create the laws of math and logic, and does not have > the power to alter them (or any other "necessary" truths, which for theists > might include things like moral rules, or qualities of God such as > omnipotence). Do you think the Mandelbrot set, or any other piece of pure > mathematics, functions without a government, or are mathematical rules > themselves a form of government even if God didn't create them? Certainly > most atheists now think the universe follows mathematical laws, and one > could even adopt Max Tegmark's idea and speculate that our universe is just > another part of the uncreated Platonic realm of mathematical forms. > > > On Sunday, December 1, 2013, Roger Clough wrote: > > How can a grown man be an atheist ? > > An atheist is a person who believes that the universe can > function without some form of government. > > How silly. > > > Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000] > See my Leibniz site at > http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough > > > ------------------------------ > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:_e({}, > 'cvml', 'everything-list%[email protected]');>. > To post to this group, send email to > [email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', > '[email protected]');> > . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
