Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This definition of God creates the philosophical problem that a universe with God and one without God are the same, other than the words used to describe it. Deism and panentheism assert that there is a God distinct from, or which extends beyond (either in time or in space or in some other way) the universe.
Definition 1: An object is God-like if, and only if, has all positive properties. Axiom 3: The property of being God-like is itself a positive property. Theorem 2: It is possible that there exists a God-like object (in at least one possible world, there exists a God-like object ).
Descartes attempts to prove God's existence by arguing that there "must be some one thing that is supremely good, through which all good things have their goodness". [28] Spinoza's argument differs in that he does not move straight from the conceivability of the greatest being to the existence of God, but rather uses a deductive argument from ...
For the God who created and upholds the universe was not created – he is eternal. He was not 'made' and therefore subject to the laws that science discovered; it was he who made the universe with its laws. Indeed, that fact constitutes the fundamental distinction between God and the universe. The universe came to be, God did not.
[237] 39% have a belief in a god, 6% have belief in a god sometimes, 30% do not believe in a god but believe in a higher power, 13% do not know if there is a god, and 12% do not believe in a god. [237] 49% believe in the efficacy of prayer, 90% strongly agree or somewhat agree with approving degrees in Ayurvedic medicine. Furthermore, the term ...
Deism (/ ˈ d iː ɪ z əm / DEE-iz-əm [1] [2] or / ˈ d eɪ. ɪ z əm / DAY-iz-əm; derived from the Latin term deus, meaning "god") [3] [4] is the philosophical position and rationalistic theology [5] that generally rejects revelation as a source of divine knowledge and asserts that empirical reason and observation of the natural world are exclusively logical, reliable, and sufficient to ...
In that vein, he says that science practices methodological naturalism, although it does not rule out the supernatural (i.e. metaphysical naturalism or physicalism), science does restrict itself to testing that which can actually be tested – namely effects in the natural world (be their cause natural or supernatural). [1]
A common response from philosophers is that the paradox assumes a wrong definition of omnipotence. Omnipotence, they say, does not mean that God can do anything at all but, rather, that he can do anything that is logically possible; he cannot, for instance, make a square circle. Likewise, God cannot make a being greater than himself, because he ...