Caleb wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:24 amHello - I found this site by searching for a verifiable source for the so-called Riddle of Epicurus.
I did indeed find a mathematical / logical attempt at a solution to the conundrum in your forum.
I found the original argument and follow up comments to be at best amusing and at worst a complete waste of brainpower.
I would simply add an extension to the riddle.
If god will not, cannot and quite plainly does not, what is the point in a god who quite plainly has no effect on our lives?
Yes, Greta, and even though you mislabeled me as a “Pantheist,” when in truth I’m a “Panentheist,” you did fairly well in explaining my “seeds” moniker.Greta wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:01 amIt depends on how "God/a god" is defined. In Seeds's case, the interventionist God is replaced by the pantheist "essence God". His handle is "Seeds" for a reason, always keen to highlight the fundamental patterns from which things emerge. He posits as "God" the very sense of being in much the same way as theoretical physicists work backwards to the posited beginning of the universe and come up with a seemingly mythical entity, the singularity, the seed.
So cheers to you for the effort.
However, I think that my wild and crazy “flagship” illustration says it best...
Not an infinity (what does that even mean, Greta?).
No, I work backwards in the hope of finding a philosophically decipherable nexus, or reason, or logical mode and means from-which/through-which the reality we are presently experiencing sprang-forth.
All of which has led me to the “seed” metaphor.
Again, what is this “infinity” you speak of?
(Your post was directed at Caleb, but I have a feeling that Caleb is just a “hit-and-run” thread starter who has no intention of participating in the discussion.)