Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'contingency'.
Found 2 results
Amoli, Ay. Jawadi - A Commentary on Theistic Arguments.pdf Argument from contingency Something that existence and nonexistence are not parts of its essence, and has equidistance towards the two, cannot become existent or nonexistent by virtue of its essence. That is, if not for an external causal efficacy (al-‛illiyya al- fā‛iliyya), which would necessitate either existence or nonexistence for it and characterize it with one of the two qualities, its essence can be neither existent nor nonexistent. Otherwise, it will mean that while a thing is equidistant towards existence and nonexistence, it has existence or nonexistence, and therefore, it is devoid of equidistance towards the two. The concurrence of equidistance and non-equidistance is conjunction of contradictories (ijtemā‛ al-naqīdhain), which is impossible. Can someone explain this to me in a simple way. I don't seem to get it.
I have always realised that for everything there is a cause, and that the cause of all causes, is God. I have also come to the inevitable conclusion that God cannot be bound by time, since that would lead to the infinite regression argument being rightfully applied to God; it is as impossible for God to pass through an infinite span of time as it is for the universe. My question is thus - Is every shape/form necessarily contingent to time? If so that would prove God has no form of any kind, demolishing the credibility of the anthromoporphists.
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.