cogito ergo

cogito ergo ____

Does it follow that I am necessary to answer the question? (cogito ergo sum) Not at all. What seems necessary to us may not be necessary to God. We are all creations out of his choosing, and therefore dependent upon him in all things.

But the statement cannot remain empty. If it does, then what remains is as irrational as any other incomplete (incoherent) sentence. Some would suggest that Christian apologetics can be boiled down to simplistic matters, that God can be replaced by the flying spagetti monster, and that that monster is the source (the completion of the sentence) for these thoughts. (I think therefore the flying spagetti monser exists.) The source might be the universal consciousness of The Matrix, or of pantheism and monism. Any greater being might provide this emptiness so that "sum" does not complete the sentence, but instead leaves it as unknowable. At that point, any one answer is as good as any other. That is the essence of irrationality, for that seems to be its definition.