I realize this debate is a couple of days old, but I was gone when it cropped up and I want in on the fun.

> I'm not talking about proof. We can't even prove God exists to begin with. I'm talking about reasonable grounds for belief. I know it can't be proved that God can break logical principles, but I'm looking at whether there's a *plausible* philosophical argument that he should be able to. I don't think there is one. I'm even giving the Bible the benefit of the doubt -- that it's completely true. I still see nothing from the Bible that would even hint at the necessity of God being able to do logically impossible actions, and no philosophical approach to take either.

You're assuming that logic is a concept that applies outside the human frame of reference. At least, I think you are. Here's the way I look at it: God, in creating man (and most likely this universe), set up a certain number of principles which apply infallibly within the universe, but are insufficient to measure the realities outside of it-- such as God himself, and most likely the angelic beings. Time and space are the most obvious ones, and a lot of people's objections to God can be explained (though not necessarily to their satisfaction) by recognizing that the laws of time and space that we're used to simply don't apply. To that category I add also logic and reason. *Why* God should have chosen to make our universe subject to a set of laws that don't fit the outside reality, I don't know. Though I have a few vague ideas.

This, to me, is a point a lot of the Christians in my particular circle miss. A lot of people set up reason as the be-all and end-all of wisdom. While it is certainly a very powerful tool for understanding the universe, I think it can't be the only tool used or relied upon. I would say that emotion and imagination are aspects of our understanding that cover some areas unreachable by logic. They've been severely put down since the Enlightenment, except when they've been elevated and idolized in insipid, saccharine versions of themselves (aka "your imagination can take you wonderful places!" or "just do what you feel!") But that's a whole other diatribe.

Back to the point: a side effect of creating a world in which reality is bound by certain rules that don't apply externally, is that the creations get a bit confused when it comes to certain aspects of the creator. But on the whole, I find it reassuring that I don't understand God. If I did, then it would be much more likely that he was simply a human construction.

Of course, all this about "higher reality" seems like a bit of a cop-out. And perhaps it is. But it's a cop-out I'm willing to stand by, because it resonates very strongly with my non-logical faculties.

Lire"I'm really kind of an existentialist at heart, believe it or not"lyn