Reply #131: First, note that infinite is not the same as total. [View All]

[eallen]

If you think it is, consider that every infinite set has a power set that is larger in cardinality.

Second, objections against arguments that take the form "..because x is defined not to be that way" typically miss the point. Theists classically try to define their god so as to make him immune to argument.

The argument I press can be viewed as showing a conflict between omnipotence and omniscience. A god that is omnipotent, your classic god, can -- by definition -- create a second god, who is capable of creating its own universe, who is eternal with respect to all temporal dimensions in that universe, and omnipotent and omniscient except with respect to its parent god, who does not reveal himself. Indeed, the first god could even make the second god so that it believes that it is the only god, and the necessary ground of all being. Omnipotence, remember? The interesting thing is that that belief will not conflict with everything else the second god knows, because anything outside itself and its creation is inaccessible to it. That is the way the first god created the second god. The second god could create a third god, in the same fashion. And the second god cannot truly know such a thing, because in his case, it is false.

Now, the observation is that in every regard, the first god and the second god are isomorphic. Both believe that they are the ultimate god, the one who truly is omniscient and omnipotent. Both know that that is not the case with regard to their children gods, the first with regard to the second, the second with regard to the third. So: is there any way that the first god can really know that he is the ultimate god? No, because if there were, the second god could also.