I was hoping the more philosophically inclined could help me with what I consider a pretty good argument for the non-existence, in fact impossibility, of the Judeo-Christian concept of God. Here it is:
The reason it is important to understand God as a monistic being is that a dualistic version of God is not actually possible. If God exists, He has to be monistic in nature. And this is critical information when it comes to believing in God. For if one doesn’t believe in God the way God is, they will eventually come to disbelieve in their false notion.
The human mind is designed to seek out the truth and reject falsehood. If a dualistic God is not actually possible, then one must compartmentalize that belief apart from their reason, and when they do, that compartmentalized belief will become subservient to all other beliefs. They will end up saying they believe in God and then living as if He doesn’t exist.
Here is the problem with a dualistic notion of God (Which, by the way is the Judeo-Christian concept of God). If before anything else existed there was only God, and if God created the universe apart from himself and out of nothing (dualism), then the space between God and His creation represents an absurd state. It is neither the only thing that exists (i.e., God), nor is it the created thing that exists (i.e., the universe). It is an independent state, a medium that is not created by God and is neither God nor that which God created.
If the space is considered part of God, then there is no separation between God and the universe, which results in monism. If the non-God space is part of the universe, then again, there is no separation between God and the universe and the result is monism.
Therefore, any theistic idea that does not consider God monistic in His nature is an absurd idea. By “absurd” I’m not trying to cast an aspersion on any religious person’s thinking; I’m referring to the concept of absurdity in philosophy which means an idea that is necessarily impossible.
If there is a medium in which God exists and then He creates His universe in that medium, and now they both exist in that medium, then there would have to be an explanation for the medium and for God. There would have to be a cause of God and of the medium he exists in.
The only way one gets free from the need for a cause of existence (contingency) is to be the one and only uncaused thing that existed before anything else. There can only be one uncaused ultimate thing. There can’t be two. The very fact that two things exist means that one thing isn’t the other, which means both are limited entities (because if nothing else, they are not each other).
If they are limited, it means they are derivative. That is they are in part like something that is not limited, and when we encounter something that is derivative, we call it contingent. Anything that is contingent cannot be God, which means we have to look beyond that contingent thing to find the ultimate thing.
And that’s the problem with a dualistic God. There is God; there is the universe, and there is that space in-between that is not God and not the universe; there is that medium. And that is why the traditional dualistic notions of God are absurd. Only a monistic nature is possible. In short, if there is anything that is not God, then God cannot be God, some other being must be God. When it comes to the Judeo-Christian concept of God, the space between God and the universe represents something that is not God and is not the universe, and yet presumably does not make God contingent. This is an absurdity.