Before someone can truly believe in God, they have to believe in what they are.
Um… no. Perfection and all powerful are two different things.
1 Like
Wouldn’t that mean that God could only create God which would be impossible because of the Principle of the Identity of Indiscernables?
Interesting question. Idk what that principal is…?
As an aside I’m not sure “perfection” even exists outside of our own conception
I don’t know what it is either.
It is clear “perfection” must be subjective. Objective perfection likely doesn’t exist. I can’t conceive of it with my human mind, at least.
1 Like
The Principle of the Identity of Indiscernibles states that you can not have separate entities or objects that have all their properties in common. You could not have two separate Gods that have all the characteristics of God - the omnipresence of God being the characteristic that according to the Identity of Indiscernibles that if God tried to create another God that God could not be a separate entity, but part of the same entity as every characteristic was completely identical to the original, down to where it was.
The Principle of the Identity of Indiscernibles would then necessitate that a God would have to create entities with imperfections or have limitations of space, location or time.
Ok, I understand now thanks. But God cannot create a ‘separate’ God because of this principle - the principle either preceeded God, was created by God, or is part of God himself. The whole notion of a “split” occuring in time of some arbitrary entity type is the nature of God imo. Where, God isnt an entity, but rather a ruleset, namely a ruleset governing change of matter and energy in a time context. But I am still having trouble understanding where this notion of “perfection” comes from, outside of our own human ideals.
In a naturalistic world, “perfection” only is in the human mind. Nature just is. There is no value judgement in nature you need a human mind to adjudicate what perfection is. Even if there were a god, perfection could be defined by that god but it still would be a subjective definition. There is no objective definition.
1 Like
If I was God and couldn’t create a second perfection, or something that’s imperfect, I might get the idea to make a bunch of “me”, inhabit all of “them” at the same time, and give myself amnesia. That way, I could be “imperfect” and have someone to talk to at the same time.
1 Like
So you won’t be in hell in the this life or the next…
1 Like
You’re most certainly welcome. On the rare occasion that I do use it, it’s not
good for Liberals on here, because then they tend to attack me, and they end up looking like idiots(because I make a mockery out of them), especially through them making several threads on here, whining about me indirectly. lol. 
I’m very very happy that You’re not God.
I laugh at how your heart rate is affected by my posts. Comedy gold. 
Trust me, you do absolutely nothing for my heart rate. Earlier today I had 2
bacon, tomato and egg sandwiches though. That probably did something for my
heart. lol.
[/quote]
There is no value or worthwhile pursuit in believing in god.
[/quote]
You can believe that if you like. When you find God is real, if after this life is over, it will be too late. There is indeed great value in believing in God.
So if God didn’t create everything and everyone, then what did?
Wouldn’t it make sense, that a perfect being would create the world, and everyone in it?
Why should perfection precede creation?
If “God” can “just exist” why can’t the universe just exist?
Gods creation isnt “perfect”? If you assert that the creation is perfect, then you are saying the universe as is is already perfect.
so what are who would create everything, if not something perfect?
The universe exists, because God exists. It’s in the Bible.
6 days, and on the 7th day he rested.
Why does there need to be a single creator of “everything”? Why does “perfection” precede creation? You’re operating under a lot of assumptions. Maybe the universe is perfect in it’s own right. Define “perfect”
1 Like
