Quote:
|
Originally Posted by <<>> 1. Assume god is everything. Assume also that nature is everything.
2. Everything is existance, not an entity.
__________________________________________________ ___________
3. God is nature.
4. God is not an entity.
3. God is existance.
4. God exists.
__________________________________________________ ___________
5. If god exists it is not existance for existance is the set for all that exists and therefore if god exists it is contained in existence but not equal to it.
6. If god is not existence, god is not nature, and god is not everything.
As people might have a conception that everything is an entity, and that this entity is god, here I give an extension to the argument:
1. God is everything and is an entity as everything is an entity.
2. If everything is an entity the it is not god for god is everything by being the set of all things, and not a thing itself.
3. Therefore, god doesn't exist or isn't everything.
In both cases I use the idea that a set that is itself considred a member (an entity, an element) cannot be such set if the sets contains all things (like 'existence', 'everything'...). |
how is the set of all things not a thing itself? Are you saying that everything is not contained in existence, and existence is not contained in everything ? Can't a set be a member and still contain all things if the only thing it is a member of is itself and nothing else?