Umbrella-Model Refuted

-See the page 'False-Knowledge.'
-Also see General PK.
-
-Umbrella-Argument presupposes Theist to be God's TTB. But God has changed our idea of what His religion is before, why not also our perception of what His preferred TTB is?
-
-There is an infinite number of variable Creator TTBs in potential. One of them must always be viable per any actualized reality or OESDE.
-
-There is no real gaurantee that Theist is God's chosen TTB. EVen with Aim of the A-Ideal and all that - other actualized truths could exist that change this utterly and God simply hasn't gotten around to telling us. He follows His own plan.
-
-UA makes sense if we know with certainty that Theist is God's TTB, but we don't.
-
-UA starts to unravel when you contemplate how much of God you know nothing about. I sit not possible something in there may invalidate Theist somehow?
-
-Creator is defined as being about all things, including God. The Divine Aspect is a sub-set of Creator TTB, so if Theist just has to be about God to be right no matter what, than the same is true of Creator.
-
-In fact, the only real difference in Creator and Theist is the number of secondary OORs.
-
-If both Theist and Creator are respectively primarily about God in their own way, does that not show the error of Umbrella-Argument, presupposing God's chosen TTB!?
-
-To word it more simplisticastly, if both Creator and Theist are about God primarily, how do we use UA to tell them apart (or which one is better? We can't!
-
-Theist also presupposes that, while God only needs Himself, for some reason He still wants us to need something else equally. AFter all, anything is possible. Theist won't mesh with that kind of thinking, but Creator will.
-
-Aim of the A-Idea is also on shaky ground itself. It makes sense now, but if you're being honest, that's no real guarantee that some other actualized truth will still change it drastically. After all, if it's not possible for some other truth to do that, OESDE.
-
-Why not just be Creator with a specialty in Divine Aspect? You're primarily about God but still include everything else, as Theist/Adept intended!?
-
-God is a part of existence, so not all of existence can go negative!?
-
-The impetus is not on Creator to disprove UA, but on Theist to defintiively prove it.
-
-The whole point behind UA is that God would protect His chosen TTB against any actualization that makes it go negative. But if all TTBs are primarily about God, or at least Creator and Theist, how does that prove which one He favors? Does it truly prove it conclusively?
-
-
== Extended PK: ==
-The weak point of UA is the presumption of knowing for sure what God wants!
-
=== Can We Truly Know The TTB Of God?: ===
-No, because most of God is unknown.
-PK can only go so far. God has aready corrected me and forced to change my view of Him following my exit from RC. Ergo, He will eventually do it again.
-PK is a general thing and doesn't mean God guards every iota of data about Him. Also, given how obvious it is to us how little we know, taking a wide stance to TTB (ie, Creator) seems more likely to be God's choice for us!
-
=== God Doesn't Have To Tell Us Everything: ===
-If STrict PK is true, God must lead us to exact answers, the fullness of truth, from which nothing is ever added or changed?
-
=== How Can We Know Theist Is Real?: ===
-Ind. shows something Supreme does exist. Whatever that is, that is the object of Theist. Even putting PK aside, Theist is still about trying to learn as much about The Supreme as we can. 
-Besides, Theist is part of the Adept-System, so you still get the benefits of Creator without the issue of Only-Half, in addition to still being Theist!
-
Category:Infinity Theology
Category:Creator
Category:Anchors
Category:Anchor