Can Christians account for God?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iISuppJE0LE&feature=related

This video asks 4 questions;

1) Why does God exist?

2) Why does God have the traits He has?

3) Why is God's will effective?

4) Why does God have to act consistently with His nature?

In this note I will attempt to respond to these questions. Lets start with the first one. Why does God exist?

Late in the video youtube user Venaloid states that in every worldview there are certain things which can't be explained. I disagree, I don't think thats the issue here. There are things which are self-evident or self explanatory. Take logic for example; logic cannot be rejected for to reject it you must use it. You cannot say the law of non-contradiction is false because if you say things can contradict each other than logic itself can be true and false at the same time, and thus the statement logic is true, would be meaningless. Interestingly we can still ask why is logic true? When stated this way logic does seem unexplainable. Why can't things contradict? I think the reason this question sounds so perplexing is because the question itself beggs the question. This is because the answer to the question is within the question, logic simply has to be true, there is no way around it. So why does God exist? If God is the greatest possible being, then like logic it would be impossible for God not to exist. And so again the answer is simply it is logically impossible for God not to exist.

Question two; Why does God have the traits He has?

First lets define what a trait is. Traits or attributes of a being are what defines that being. A chair for example has the attribute of being meant for sitting. If an object isn't meant for sitting, it isn't a chair. You could ask why are chairs meant for sitting? But the question is unanswerable, because the answer is within the question. Chairs simply are meant for sitting. Its how they are defined. This rule even applies for concepts of beings which do not exist. Unicorns for example, have horns. If a being doesn't have a horn it isn't a unicorn. But if we ask why does a unicorn have a horn? Well the question seems a bit silly, part or what makes a unicorn a unicorn is a horn. But one could say, we created and defined chairs and unicorns, but if God exists then He is the only self-existent being. So how can God be defined into traits? Well there are many objects we didn't create that we ascribe traits to, our planet for example, has continents, is habitable, and is one of 8 planets in our solar system. Note that we define things from our perspective. So when we "define" God we are describing God in terms we can understand. Perhaps Gods attributes go much deeper than our understanding can go. But thats another issue. The point I want to stress is that God's attributes are not arbitrary. God did not choose to be all powerful, He did not choose to be the greatest possible being. One might object and say, but could God's attributes be different? Well think about it, if attributes are what define something and God exists necessarily, then His attributes must be necessarily so. So asking why they are the way they are is a bit like asking, why is logic the way it is?

Question 3; Why is God's will effective?

This question perplexes me. Perhaps I can put it in a format that is easier to understand; Why is it that whatever God wills must happen? Why is it that when God wills a planet to form that it does form? Well first of all I think its important to distinguish what God wants to happen to what He wills to happen. What God wants to happen would be His goals for what He creates. What God wills to happen would be what He creates. You might say, how could there be a difference? Everything that God wants to happen, happens. Well not necessarily. Take for example God's desire that everyone freely choose to be in relationship with Him? Can God guarentee that that desire will become reality? Well it seems quite possible that it is logically impossible for God to actualize a world in which every human being freely chooses Him. Whereas an example of God's willing something to happen would be Him creating a planet. But more to the point why is it that when God wants to create something, that that something must happen? Yet again the answer seems to me to be within the question itself. The fact that God can do anything logically possible is part of what makes God, God. A more interesting question in my opinion would be to ask, why can't God do something against His will? Well this seems to me to be logically impossible. Because to will to do something is to make an effort to do it. But how can you make an effort against making an effort? So to do something against your will would require that you in fact will to go against your own will. Again take note, it is logically impossible for a being to go against their own will because of the definition of what it means to have a will to do something.

Question 4; Why does God have to act consistently with His nature?

This seems to me to be the most silly question of all. Its like asking why do I have to act consistently with my nature? The answer is simple. Because my nature is what makes me, me. Even if it were possible for me to do something against my nature, such as to change my memories or my perception, I would no longer be me. Similarly if God made Himself ignorant, then He would no longer be God. To put this concept into a clearer perspective imagine if a chair ceased to be made for sitting? Would it still be a chair? No. So in attempting to act against our own nature we would have to change our nature, and thus make our actions consistent with our nature. So it is logically impossible for God to do something against His own nature, especially when part of His nature is to be unchanging and unchangeable.

Final thoughts; The reason this youtube user asked these four question was in response to arguments such as the moral argument, which argues that atheists cannot account for why there is objective morality. Venaloid argues that the Christian can't account for God, so Christianity doesn't really answer this question either, it just pushes it back one step. As I have shown this is not the case. Morality is not self-explanatory, there is no logically necessary reason for why morality is the way it is, unless it is rooted in God's essense, or perhaps it exists as the form of the good as Plato thought (but there are many issues with this view).

I do, however, think that logic is self explanatory, so I don't think the theist can say the atheist is being inconsistent when they use logic. But that is all I have to say about this video, if anyone has questions, or disagree's with my analysis, please post a comment and I'll try my best to respond.