|
Read my post again. "This is a disproof of any god who has both of the following qualities: (1) he is the creator of everything else that exists, and (2) he knows this." That is the conclusion, stated up front, not the beginning of the argument itself.
The next paragraph: "Begin, by considering a god with the power to create universes and other creative beings." This is the beginning of the argument. Note that there is no assumption here that this god himself is uncreated, or that he knows this. In fact, what is shown next is that he cannot know this.
It's quite common in philosophy and logic, almost de rigueur, to state the conclusion before beginning the proof of it. I'm sorry that that confused you.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
