In finite states where space, time and matter has been shown to have a beginning is it possible that the law of causality only applies within the bounds of finity and that which caused the effect of such a state is itself unbounded by space and time therefore cannot be said to be an effect but as the uncaused cause more adequately defined as the willing of the intent of infinite intelligence?
Does this make any sense to anyone at all? Or have I finally flipped out with too much thinking?
2006-09-16 14:40:50 · 5 answers · asked by messenger 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
yes I know that finite things have a beginning. The question has to do with our understanding of the characteristics of non-finite (infinite) attributes.
2006-09-16 14:53:35 · update #1
does the laws of finite states apply in the same way to infinite states, since time and space would be nonexistent. Would causality apply there?
2006-09-16 14:56:25 · update #2
As we exist in a finite universe, reason dictates that the sum of all possibilities is infinite.
As we observe our universe flowing from order to disorder, laws of causality imply that something external to the finite initiated the process, and being from the infinite drawing finite order implies again willful intelligence. Infinite intelligence is not implied in your supposition, only intelligence, but it does remain as a possibility within the infinite realm external of the finite universe.
The only way of ascertaining infinite intelligence would be by direct revelation.
As we, too, are finite, we would be incapable of containing the knowledge of that which bounds the infinite.
2006-09-16 17:17:47 · answer #1 · answered by claypigeon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Infinite regression, you know. Occam's Razor slices and dices your infinitely intelligent uncaused cause into sushi... or crab bait. Take your pick... according to your intent.
2006-09-16 21:49:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anything that is not infinite, has a beginning, and there had to be created. Everything created has to have a reason to be created. What is the reason humans were created?
2006-09-16 21:44:19 · answer #3 · answered by Casey M 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
there's nothing intelligible about what you are asking.
why don't you have a debate with one of those yogis who think in a loop---everything is right and wrong at the same time because no one really exists. or something in that nature.
yes, you are thinking way too much about your inconsequential existence.
2006-09-16 22:05:01 · answer #4 · answered by Dalma S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your syntax is bad and makes it difficult to make out exactly what you are asking...
2006-09-16 21:52:28 · answer #5 · answered by rideon75 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋