HOME   People do good because they are human, not because they are religious! 

Do not give God any credit for the good they do, they did it!

 

DOES GOD HAVE ONLY ONE ATTRIBUTE?

 

If God exists he is infinite for he causes himself to exist and it takes infinite power to cause something to exist for the distance between nothing and something is infinite.

Suppose it is true that the simplest and the most probable explanation for the universe is that a spirit, a partless entity created or made it.
 
Whatever attribute the spirit has it has it infinitely. It is infinite power because it takes infinite power to exist. Infinite power is required to hold something in existence because the distance between something and nothing is infinite. Any spirit, God or not, has no parts so it is wholly anything it does (page 53, God and the Human Condition, Part 1).

We know that such a maker would have to have one attribute especially when it is infinite. If it were justice and were love it would be two attributes because they are not the same. To assert that it is infinite love and infinite justice would be contradictory.

So if divine spirit made or created the universe it must have one power. It must be that power, that energy. God is the power to create. It is foolish to say that it is love or any other abstract thing for that is absurd.
 
Another problem is its infinity. Infinity means it is everything that is for there is no power but its power. The notion of a God who is his power and whose power is infinite contradicts the notion that God can order a universe to appear out of literally nothing (the universe was supposedly created not out of anything) that depends on him that is not him.
 
So if you believe in an infinite God you must identify him with what he makes.
 
So God would be both stupid and intelligent for the creation is stupid and intelligent. That makes no sense.
 
Pretend that God is not all things. If he has one attribute then he is an it. What is the attribute?

It is not intelligence for stupidity exists.

It is not love for non-love exists.

It is not justice for injustice exists.

It is not design for some designs are perfect and others are not.

Some would say that God is act. But then it just acts blindly and does not know what it is doing. One might as well believe in Atheism for all things would have been put into order by mere chance. If God is act then he is also potential act. There are many things he has not made yet. He cannot be actual act and potential act at the one time.

No matter what quality we can name it is the same. Moreover, each quality consists of different qualities, which we see as different aspects of it. For example, love consists of prudence and humility which are separate attributes. Intelligence consists of the attribute of being aware that 2+2=4 and that 3+3=6. Again, these are two separate attributes. There is no single attribute, no attribute composed of one attribute only, so the single force theory is valueless.

If it created then it is the power to create and nothing else. And it is the power to create itself only and it cannot create anything else. It cannot have any other attribute. But it needs more than one attribute to do that. Its power causes the calculator to work so it must be intelligent.

If it did not create but merely transformed itself then we meet the contradiction of a partless being with no intelligence becoming human intelligence.

If the spirit had the power to love or whatever it would have the power to order things in accordance with its attribute as well. Things like love and justice are a form of order. It cannot exist for it has two powers, the power to love and the power to create love or something to be loved.

Is the spirit evolution, the power to make things improve? No for things frequently devolve. Moreover it will have two attributes slowness and the power to design. This would make suffering a stepping-stone to something better. When we deny free will we dare not say that suffering has value because it would be allowing all possible evils. If we are programmed to do evil when it is beneficial then it is evil to stop evil.

Objection, “There is a spiritual force that facilitates evolution. It is the power to evolve things. The power need not know anything. The law that 1=1 is impersonal. An impersonal law of evolution could organise all things like 1=1 has done. Here, this single principle is the cause or basis of every other rule and principle. For example, 10+10 cannot be 20 if 1 is not equal to 1. Even if nobody discovers mathematical truth it is still there. Electricity does many wonderful things and it is only an impersonal force. A single uncreated and unmade spiritual infinite principle has made what exists possible.”

The law that 1=1 does not cause things to be as they are, creation is just expressed through that law. The law only says that it must be this way and the law would still be true if nothing existed. Even if nothing existed 1=1 would still be true for one nothing would still be one nothing. The law is not a power. It is an abstract. It is a concept. The spirit would need to be more than just 1=1 for it would need to be 1+1=2 and so on forever as well but it cannot be so the spirit does not exist. Electricity is not a spirit and therefore it cannot prove that a spirit with one attribute can do a lot. Electricity has lots of attributes. It can flash, it can make things move etc.
 
The evolution force would need to be an intelligence. The argument wants to say it is mere evolution and doesn’t have any other powers.

When a law that is self-existent and cannot not exist and therefore had no designer can be so complex in its results then why can’t all things have been designed without an intelligence?

God would not really be a God if he has only one attribute. He would not be worth worshipping. And he could not create. There is a contradiction between God creating matter or even making matter from himself.

University Press, Oxford, 2008).
 
If God is his properties, it follows that to say "There is no God" is contradictory and makes no sense. It is like saying that you drank non-existent tea. Swinburne denies this for he says that There is no God is coherent and does not involve self-contradiction (page 15, ibid). If God exists and is his properties then to deny his existence is illogical. We might suppose that its logical to think there is no God but the problem is with our perception of logic. We are not reasoning correctly. We fail to see that it is logical to believe in God and illogical and self-contradictory to deny his existence. Swinburne says we can understand that it makes sense to believe that there is no God. But that is assuming we really understand. We can think we understand things when we actually do not. We think we understand the finest grain of sand but when we examine ourselves we see that we do not. We understand things about it but that is all.
 
The problem with God being a being without parts or a simple being leads to the absurdity that God has several attributes and they are all one essence (page 6, Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine, Part 2) or all the same thing so they are not several but one. They are only several in our thinking but not in reality. This denies that obvious fact that being fair is not the same as being powerful. That is one example. We have two choices. If we say God has only one attribute then he is not really a God and you may as well be atheist for you cannot relate to such an entity. If God has many then he is not a spirit. The absurdity of a God being pure spirit is recognised by many philosophers (page 90, Taking Leave of God). The idea of spirit is bad enough but the idea of God being literally something abstract - something that is just a concept and not a real thing like love – is utter insanity. The miracles of the Catholic Church are claimed to verify just that kind of a God. If they do that then they have to be from an evil force for the force has to be anti-rational and if it is anti-rational it has no business giving miracles as signs.
 
Believers say that we see God differently from what he is because for us his mercy is not his knowledge and his knowledge is not his creative power whereas in fact they are one in God. Frederick Copleston said that our knowledge of God then is inadequate and hazy but is not false (History of Philosophy, Vol 2, pages 360-361). The problem is when the God theory cannot be understood how we can know if it is false or not? Anything we think we know about God we do not know it at all for we don’t know if he is even coherent. It is like saying that seeing a nebulous black shape which is a man is the same as knowing that a man is there and what he looks like and what he is wearing.
 
The danger with the idea of spirit is that we think of God as a gas that is not made up of atoms or parts. But then this gas would just consist of one part. It is its part. This part does not consist of any other parts. Do you see the implication of all that? A God without parts is no more existing than a square circle. He is a something that is a nothing. The idea that nothing consists of two or more nothings would make more sense than that for something can never be nothing to any degree. Christianity degrades children by playing conjuring tricks with words. The idol worshipper adores a god of wood or stone or so the Christian says. They bemoan how demeaning that is. But how much more is it demeaning to adore nothing and call it God? At least the idol worshipper adores something real. And he adores something that is more understandable than a being that is supposed to be pure spirit. Christianity demeans all whom it gets to adore its God. To the mind of a child, God is just like pretending the naked emperor is wearing clothes as in the children's tale The Emperor's New Clothes. It's pretending that something that cannot be seen or examined or verified by the senses is real. The God concept is disrespectful and therefore an abuse of the mind of a child.
 
The notion of God being simple is applying reason in matters we know nothing about. We don't even know if spirit makes sense. Metaphysics concerning God is sheer speculation. And it is also incoherent.
 
God cannot be simple or God cannot exist.
 
WORKS CONSULTED
A HISTORY OF GOD, Karen Armstrong, Mandarin, London, 1994
A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOL 6, PART II, KANT, Frederick Copleston SJ, Doubleday/Image, New York, 1964
A PATH FROM ROME, Anthony Kenny Sidgwick & Jackson, London, 1985
A SHATTERED VISAGE THE REAL FACE OF ATHEISM, Ravi Zacharias, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Tennessee, 1990
A SUMMARY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, Louis Berkhof, The Banner of Truth Trust, London, 1971
AN INTELLIGENT PERSONS GUIDE TO CATHOLICISM, Alban McCoy, Continuum, London and New York, 1997 AN INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS, John Hospers, Routledge, London, 1992
APOLOGETICS AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Part 1, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, MH Gill, & Son, Dublin, 1954
APOLOGETICS FOR THE PULPIT, Aloysius Roche, Burns Oates & Washbourne LTD, London, 1950
AQUINAS, FC Copleston, Penguin Books, London, 1991 
ARGUING WITH GOD, Hugh Sylvester, IVP, London, 1971
ASKING THEM QUESTIONS, Various, Oxford University Press, London, 1936
BELIEVING IN GOD, PJ McGrath, Wolfhound Press, Dublin, 1995
BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL, Friedrich Nietzsche, Penguin, London, 1990
CITY OF GOD, St Augustine, Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1986
CONTROVERSY: THE HUMANIST CHRISTIAN ENCOUNTER, Hector Hawton, Pemberton Books, London, 1971
CRITIQUES OF GOD, Edited by Peter A Angeles, Prometheus Books, New York, 1995
DIALOGUES CONCERNING NATURAL RELIGION, David Hume, William Blackwood and Sons, Edinburgh and London, 1907
DOES GOD EXIST? Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1982
DOES GOD EXIST? Herbert W Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1972
DOING AWAY WITH GOD? Russell Stannard, Marshall Pickering, London, 1993
EVIL AND THE GOD OF LOVE, John Hicks, Fontana, 1977
GOD A GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED Keith Ward, OneWorld, Oxford, 2003
GOD AND EVIL, Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
GOD AND PHILOSOPHY, Antony Flew, Hutchinson, London, 1966
GOD AND THE HUMAN CONDITION, F J Sheed, Sheed & Ward, London 1967
GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS, Paul Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1990
GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING, Philip St Romain, Liguori Publications, Illinois, 1986
GOD THE PROBLEM, Gordon D Kaufman, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1973
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOL 2, Frederick Copleston SJ Westminster, Maryland, Newman, 1962
HONEST TO GOD, John AT Robinson, SCM Press, London, 1963
HUMAN NATURE DID GOD CREATE IT? Herbert W Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1976
IN DEFENCE OF THE FAITH, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene Oregon, 1996
IN SEARCH OF CERTAINTY, John Guest Regal Books, Ventura, California, 1983
JESUS HYPOTHESES, V. Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977
NEW CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
ON THE TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH, BOOK ONE, GOD, St Thomas Aquinas, Image Doubleday and Co, New York, 1961
OXFORD DICTIONARY OF PHILOSOPHY, Simon Blackburn, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996
PHILOSOPHY AND THE CHRISTIAN FAITH, Colin Brown, IVP, London, 1973
Philosophy of Religion for A Level, Anne Jordan, Neil Lockyer and Edwin Tate, Nelson Throne Ltd, Cheltenham, 2004
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 2, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1940
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 3, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1942
REASON AND RELIGION, Anthony Kenny, Basil Blackwell Ltd, Oxford, 1987
SALVIFICI DOLORIS, Pope John Paul II, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
SEX AND MARRIAGE – A CATHOLIC PERSPECTIVE, John M Hamrogue CSSR, Liguori, Illinois, 1987
TAKING LEAVE OF GOD, Don Cupitt, SCM Press, London, 1980
THE CASE AGAINST GOD, Gerald Priestland, Collins, Fount Paperbacks, London, 1984
THE CONCEPT OF GOD, Ronald H Nash, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1983
THE HONEST TO GOD DEBATE Edited by David L Edwards, Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1963
THE KINDNESS OF GOD, EJ Cuskelly MSC, Mercier Press, Cork, 1965
THE PROBLEM OF PAIN, CS Lewis, Fontana, London, 1972
THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING, Alan Hayward, Christadelphian ALS, Birmingham, undated
THE PUZZLE OF GOD, Peter Vardy, Collins, London, 1990
THE REALITY OF GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF EVIL, Brian Davies, Continuum, London-New York, 2006
THE RECONSTRUCTION OF BELIEF, Charles Gore DD, John Murray, London, 1930
THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905
UNBLIND FAITH, Michael J Langford, SCM, London, 1982
WHAT IS FAITH? Anthony Kenny, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1992
WHY DOES GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? LG Sargent, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham, undated
WHY DOES GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? Misc, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1985
WHY DOES GOD? Domenico Grasso, St Paul, Bucks, 1970
WHY WOULD A GOOD GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1990