Karma reasons for concrete message



    Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +858/-1

Our Scripture passage for today is Exodus 33:20-23:

"But,” he said, “you cannot see my face[1]; for man shall not see me and live.” And the Lord said, “Behold, there is a place by me where you shall stand upon the rock; and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand[2] until I have passed by; then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back[3]; but my face shall not be seen.”

--Revised Standard Edition (emphasis added)
 1. Onnnnne component part!
 2. Twoooo component parts!
 3. Threeee component parts!  Ah-ah-ah-ah-aaaaah!

This passage clearly portrays Yahweh as being composed of component parts.  He is not irreducibly simple.  It doesn't matter if a theologian wants to argue that "face," "hand" and "back" don't mean the same thing for Yahweh that they do for a human.  The incontestable statement of this passage is that different parts of Yahweh have different effects.  His "face" kills on sight, like a Gorgon, or perhaps something out of the Cthulhu Mythos.  His "hand" can be used to shield against this effect.  His "back" does not kill on sight, but may be viewed with apparent safety. 

Of course it could be implied that a "face" would have substructures analogous to eyes, nose, etc. (unless Yahweh is Slenderman), that a "hand" implies at least one other "hand," and at least two or more digits or tendrils on each, that a "back" implies a "front," an outside that can be seen implies an inside, and so on, but it's not necessary to make those arguments.  We have here an indisputable statement that Yahweh is composed of multiple component parts.  These parts must be arranged in a certain way, with a certain set of interactions and integrations between them in order that, together, they can constitute a Yahweh.  Theologians are brilliant with their silly-putty logic, but given the claims of "orthodoxy" by the various Christian sects, it seems very likely that one could not rearrange Yahweh's parts, or take away one or more of them, or add other parts, and have the entity still be Yahweh. 

In this thread, Olivianus has rejected the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity, presumably having some different doctrine of his own to explain and describe the whole "Father, Son, Holy Ghost" thing.  If the Catholics are right, then Olivianus is a heretic, not a Christian.  If Olivianus is right, then the Catholics (and most mainstream Protestants who accept the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds) are heretics.  For most of Christian history, a person's eternal salvation could depend on getting the right answers on the structure and composition of Yahweh.  It follows then, that any significant rearrangement or addition/subtraction of parts would make the resulting god[4] "not-Yahweh," not the One True GodTM.

So, it has now been shown that Yahweh has to be one particular arrangement of some specific number of component parts, or he is not Yahweh.  From this, it follows that "Number" is ontologically prior to "Yahweh."  Therefore, "Yahweh" cannot "account" for the existence of numbers.  Instead, numbers, such as the number of his component parts, must exist before he can.

For bonus points, I could also point out that in order for Yahweh's component parts to add up to a Yahweh, there would need to be generalized operating principles that describe the interaction and integration of said component parts, and that the Yahweh-parts must behave in accordance with these principles; otherwise they could add up to an Isis or a Shoggoth or something else.  In other words, before Yahweh can exist as Yahweh, there has to be some form of physics that applies to his component parts, to him, and to whatever dimension or realm he dwells in.  In the passage above, Yahweh can be seen, which means he gives off and/or reflects light.  For a human to see his "face" is fatal, and he cannot just will it to be otherwise.  This means he is subject to the generalized operating principles that govern his nature.

Therefore, Yahweh is not prior to, and cannot "account" for, the generalized operating principles[5] of Universe.[6]  Since we have Existence (Yahweh's component parts must exist before they can be integrated into a Yahweh), physics, and number all ontologically prior to Yahweh, we have the whole basis of science without any need, or even any basis logically, to appeal to Yahweh to "account" for them as a First Cause/Prime Mover/Ground of Being.  Any arguments pointing toward some sort of irreducibly simple First Cause/Prime Mover/Ground of Being as metaphysically "Necessary" for the existence of Existence, or Number, or Generalized Operating Principles do not point to Yahweh, but rather toward something else.

Edit: spelling
 4. Assuming the result was a god, rather than a quivering messy puddle of spirit-goo.
 5. A more accurate term than "'laws' of physics."
 6. When I use the term "Universe," capital-U, I am speaking of the sum of everything that exists, including any deities, supernatural realms and whatnot that might be postulated to exist.  In this kind of context, I use "Cosmos" to refer to that which originated from (our) Big Bang.
Changed Change Reason Date
Quesi well damn January 16, 2013, 07:40:40 PM
Graybeard last 2 paragraphs - very good. January 18, 2013, 08:16:43 AM
median A magnificent demonstration of reasoning! 5 stars (*****) October 18, 2013, 12:58:42 PM