Did God self distruct?

[Surfer]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandeism

2001 Scott Adams published God's Debris: A Thought Experiment, in
which Adams explicitly set down his own variation of pandeism, a
radical form of kenosis. Adams surmised that an omnipotent God
annihilated himself in the Big Bang, because God would already know
everything possible except his own lack of existence, and would have
to end that existence in order to complete his knowledge. Adams asks
about God, "would his omnipotence include knowing what happens after
he loses his omnipotence, or would his knowledge of the future end at
that point?"[26] He proceeds from this question to the following
analysis:

A God who knew the answer to that question would indeed know
everything and have everything. For that reason he would be
unmotivated to do anything or create anything. There would be no
purpose to act in any way whatsoever. But a God who had one nagging
question—what happens if I cease to exist?—might be motivated to find
the answer in order to complete his knowledge. ... The fact that we
exist is proof that God is motivated to act in some way. And since
only the challenge of self-destruction could interest an omnipotent
God, it stands to reason that we... are God's debris.[27]

[Evolved Monkey]

On Feb 23, 5:49 pm, Surfer <n...@spam.please.net> wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandeism
>
> 2001 Scott Adams published God's Debris: A Thought Experiment, in
> which Adams explicitly set down his own variation of pandeism, a
> radical form of kenosis. Adams surmised that an omnipotent God
> annihilated himself in the Big Bang, because God would already know
> everything possible except his own lack of existence, and would have
> to end that existence in order to complete his knowledge. Adams asks
> about God, "would his omnipotence include knowing what happens after
> he loses his omnipotence, or would his knowledge of the future end at
> that point?"[26] He proceeds from this question to the following
> analysis:
>
> A God who knew the answer to that question would indeed know
> everything and have everything. For that reason he would be
> unmotivated to do anything or create anything. There would be no
> purpose to act in any way whatsoever. But a God who had one nagging

> question--what happens if I cease to exist?--might be motivated to find

> the answer in order to complete his knowledge. ... The fact that we
> exist is proof that God is motivated to act in some way. And since
> only the challenge of self-destruction could interest an omnipotent
> God, it stands to reason that we... are God's debris.[27]

True, but to a point--Adams paints God as self destructing--but
pandeists in general see God in more of a transformative process, i.e.
God is never really "destroyed" but only ceases to be God in order to
become the Universe (and answer the question that motivated the
transformation), but almost inevitably to return to being God in a
familiar God sense at some later point....

[Edward A. Weissbard]

Very interesting idea, this thought never crossed my mind. I don't know
if we humans can grasp the entirety and depth of who this "God" really
is or isn't

Thanks for the illumination!

--
Edward A. Weissbard
edwar...@gmail.com

[Knuje]

On Jun 15, 11:37 pm, "Edward A. Weissbard" <edward.e...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Evolved Monkey wrote:
> > On Feb 23, 5:49 pm, Surfer <n...@spam.please.net> wrote:
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandeism
>
> >> 2001 Scott Adams published God's Debris: A Thought Experiment, in

> >> which Adams explicitly set down his own variation ofpandeism, a

> edward.e...@gmail.com

Thanks as well for your interest in Pandeism -- it most certainly is a
fascinating theory!!