roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

The assertion that a consideration of the natural revelation
leads, if to any God, to the existence of a God who is but finite,
has proceeded upon four similar but distinguishable grounds:
the first is that the cause need be no more than finite, since the
effect to be accounted for is itself finite---a finite universe does
not require explanation by positing the existence of an absolutely
infinite being; the second ground is that any argument to
a first cause, being based on experience, can do no more than
refund or exchange the qualities of experience itself---and if
this is the case, we may as well rest content with the selfsufficiency
of the world whole; the third ground is that the
cause thus found is necessarily related to the world as to an effect
and is therefore, by virtue of this relation, not an infinite or
necessary being; the final ground for asserting that experience
yields only a finite god is that the existence of an infinite and
necessary being is incompatible either with the required goodness
of such a being or with the presence in the world of ultimate
and irreducible evils. This last ground of objection, since
it emanates primarily from the naturalistic camp of philosophers,
will be considered in connection with the refutation of
naturalistic objections in Chapter IV of this present section. We
proceed immediately therefore to the consideration of the first
three grounds of objection as outlined above.
First Ground of Finitude in God:
the Finiteness of the Effect to Be Explained
Statement of the argument.---Even if a causal argument for the
existence of God is valid, the god concluded is no more than
finite, for the world itself, if the causal argument is applicable,
is a finite effect. This point has been urged by numerous
classes of thinkers: Carnell (Footnote 1: E. J. Carnell, An Introduction
to Christian Apologetics, pp. 129, 131.), Clark (Foot-