Questions for God

[Trailblazer]

Sorry, the God of Abraham created everything. And if God is supposedly interventionist and loving, well it isn’t apparent. None of what believers claim about the God of Abraham is consistent with observations and reality.

Regarding the alleged loving God you are preaching to the choir.
None of what believers claim about the God of Abraham is consistent with observations and reality.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't have that desire, nor to millions of other people who have no gods in their lives.

Nor do some people who do have a God in their life. I don't have that desire.

 

[F1fan]

I don’t think that is accurate. Everyone worships/loves and/or gives priority to someone or something in their life, even if it is themselves.

Well that is a broad definition that cheapens your worship of God. Was that your intention, to illustrate to us that your worship of God is little more than obsession and stalking?

I believe God created humanity with the innate desire to worship.

Reason, facts, and the sciences offer a more plausible explanation, and doesn’t have the burden of making an implausible assumption of a God existing. There are many explanations why humans invented religion and God for social reasons. The superficial claims by believers tend to be irrational and baseless.

We are created to be in a loving relationship with our Creator and worship Him. When that is not the case…a person worships elsewhere.

This is yet another baseless claim. Haven’t you learned by now that you need evidence and reasoning to submit claims?

 

[Trailblazer]

Yet your conception of God is vastly different than the others, which just makes it alll that much more absurd.

Being different does not make a God conception absurd. What is absurd is how the Bible and other scriptures depict God.
God would be rolling over in His grave if He knew what people had written about Him.

Thank God that Baha'u'llah came to straighten that all out.

 

[setarcos]

My question assumes a god, specifically the bible god, since I know omniscience is claimed as one of [his] attributes.

I presumed as much.

Either there IS a way for God to make certain there's nothing [he] doesn't know [he] doesn't know, so that the claim of omniscience is not invalidated on that ground, OR there is no way to make certain there's nothing God doesn't know [he] doesn't know, end of story.

This seems logical to me. However this proposition only inherently proposes a precedent problem which must be answered first in order to determine the case of whether or not the proposition vitiates anything.
And that question is how we can determine with certainty whether or not there IS a way God knows he knows all there is to know, OR lacking our ability to determine that, is there a way we can determine definitively that such a proposition can be shown to be inherently contradictory?
If we cannot determine an answer to one or the other of those questions then your proposition is meaningless as concerns the Christian God.
End of that story. That would only lead us back to the indeterminate question of whether or not the Christian God does or does not exist as defined.

As I said, my argument on this occasion is about the possibility of omniscience, not the existence of God.

Again that is what I presumed and had told another poster which had assumed we or I at least was talking about a proven to exist God.

Let's save that one someone's future 'God is omnipotent' thread.

On the contrary...understanding that Gods attributes cannot create contradiction in reality is essential in understanding how the Christian Gods attributes are defined. Contradiction does not just involve omnipotence it is inherently important to all of Gods attributes.
Examples which create contradiction and are consequently impossible in reality:
Omnipotence; God cannot create a being greater than or equal to itself in any realistic capacity and God cannot create a rock it cannot "lift".
Omnipresence; God cannot create a "place" it is not ever present.
Omniscience; God cannot not know all there is to know about reality.
If any of those statements can be proven false then contradiction occurs and that God cannot be a realistic God.

Yes, contradiction is a statement about statements, not about objects.

So the question is, "Is your statement realistic or merely a meaningless statement?"

As Descartes might have said, my sense of self is the basis of my claim to exist. That this is correct is an assumption, but one with an enormously consistent body of evidence to back it.

Yes, Descartes sense of self might be said to be "self evident". It proves itself to itself with itself as proof. But can we extend that proof to something beyond itself? For instance, what evidence within that enormous and consistent body of evidence actually backs up the fact that it is the I that Descartes claims he perceives exists is the same I that others perceive interacting in reality? Does Descartes "I" really exist as we think he thinks it does?
So can you tell me by what mechanism we can determine that what is self evident to God and claimed by God is only misperception by God or us for that matter?

such that if we found a suspect, we could determine whether it was God or not.

WE cannot determine such things on our own. Our finite nature renders such things beyond our abilities.
It is theorized that God allows for a reasonable faith to handle such matters.
It is the Christian theory that when God so deems it time all will know the truly existent God without resort to faith.

Nor does there appear to be a coherent definition of "godness", the quality a real god would have and a real superscientist who could create universes, raise the dead &c would lack.

The quality would be the ability to create out of nothing while itself not being created.
Any being not "God" with the above qualities would be limited to manipulation of existent things whose own creation from nothing originates from God. No matter how capable we theoretically make such a super scientist they would still be limited in some capacity lest we're simply talking about the same being but just changed the name from God to super scientist.

Further, God never appears, says or does.

You mean to you, on demand, or perhaps in a manner that someone can prove that he did?
Its not logical to say God never...when one cannot prove that. As a matter of fact its more logical to go with what may be considered interpretable evidence versus no evidence at all. There's no evidence that God never... but there is plenty of interpretive evidence that God has.
That's not proof that God indeed did but its still a step above God never...

The evidence thus points very strongly to God (like supernatural beings generally) existing only as a concept, thing imagined, thing acculturated into, an individual brain. That's to say, gods exist only as ideas.

Evidence doesn't point. Human beings who interpret point.
Some find evidences pointing to God. Some take those same evidences and point elsewhere.
The only certain thing here is a lack of proof is no proof of a lack.

Omniscience is asserted as a quality of our target God; now let someone on God's behalf explain how God knows there's nothing [he] doesn't known ]he] doesn't know.

That's a fair request. But its a request that may never be substantially capable of being answered. Which wouldn't leave us with a positive conclusion of contradiction unless we can show that God couldn't know all there is to know of reality.
If we can't prove why God couldn't know everything in reality then I suspect ANY answer given would remain questionable unless that particular answer can itself be proven false. This could lead into a meaningless question and answer cycle. Questions all the way down I suppose....like the turtles joke.
For instance, I might say God knows there's nothing unknown to itself because it is self evident to God in his omniscience. Now, unless you can prove how such a thing cannot be self evident then you cannot prove this answer to not be the answer to your question.
Or I might say, if God is omnipresent then there can be no possible piece of information about reality that is not present to God. Thus nothing to not know about reality for God to not know it doesn't know.
You either accept as foundational that God knows all there is to know about reality which renders the above sentence true. Or you don't and believe that its foundational to reality that no being can know all there is to know about reality rendering the above sentence false but also your question irrelevant since you've began with the answer as foundational.
Now I'm gonna get into off the top of my head very rudimentary propositions here to consider for the sake of argument.
How about a temporal argument...
Suppose we just ask "How does God know?" Well, how does any sentient being know?
1) It would have to be aware.
2) It would have to perceive.
A being has to be capable of being aware in order to perceive anything.
Now lets ask if God can be aware that there is more to perceive that hasn't been perceived yet?
Again we can only answer this in comparison to the only other proven self aware abstract thinking being we know...ourselves.
We know we don't know everything because we can perceive our evolving knowledge. That is we are self aware of the ever filling temporal "vacuum" of what was once unknown becoming known. A result of our self evident finiteness and temporal transition in reality. We have to transition, as finite temporal beings, through time in order to go from less knowledge to more knowledge which is limited to our respective past and present.
Our existence is such that we are consistently aware of this ever present and transforming shadow in our perception.
This "shadow" in our knowledge is perceived as existent and transforming since it conforms to temporal transition through reality.
I propose that God perceives no temporal "vacuum" within itself which is the transition of the unknown into the known. There is no temporal transition experienced by God because God isn't a temporally confined being. Since God is not transitioning through temporality God perceives past, present, and future and the knowledge contained within them simultaneously. Since all knowledge is perceived by God simultaneously there can be no transition from not knowing into knowing thus allowing God to know that there can be nothing it does not know.
or how about...
IF Reality consists of the set {R} containing the only two elements {G} (God) and {c} (what {G} created) with {c} comprised the elements {i} (information) THEN God would have a 1 to 1 knowledge relationship with all there is to know of the set {R} and know that it knows.

Omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, being eternal, infinite, "self-creating" (&c), are all imaginary qualities, and thus are from the same department that brings you gods in the first place.

Your merely claiming something here. What has that to do with proving or even adding to the discussions progression towards a solution to your question?
Aren't anti-theists fond of pointing out how using claims as if they are proven conclusions is illogical?
Those words are labels applied to things which may have real consequences in reality. For instance we can mathematically prove that there are real infinities in reality with real consequences in how reality presents itself.

My question, if it can't be coherently and satisfactorily answered, simply underlines that view.

Coherently perhaps. Satisfactorily? I doubt it. And because of the latter, even if we have the former, it won't get us any closer to the absolute truth.

 

[InChrist]

Disagree. I love and have priorities, but I don't worship. Worshiping is a state of mind, one of self-abnegation (groveling) not found in love.

I don't have that desire, nor to millions of other people who have no gods in their lives. I would suggest that you wouldn't, either, had you been left to your own devices. It's not a natural state of mind in my opinion. It has to be taught and learned.

I don’t know where you get the idea of groveling, but that is not a biblical concept, nor what I believe the Creator God desires.



No longer do I call you servants, for a servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you. John 15:15

We love Him because He first loved us.
1 John 4:19

 

[InChrist]

Being different does not make a God conception absurd. What is absurd is how the Bible and other scriptures depict God.
God would be rolling over in His grave if He knew what people had written about Him.

Thank God that Baha'u'llah came to straighten that all out.

That’s quite funny…”God would be rolling over in His grave”.

 

[Trailblazer]

That’s quite funny…”God would be rolling over in His grave”.

It was intended to be funny, since God was never in a grave.

 

[InChrist]

Reason, facts, and the sciences offer a more plausible explanation, and doesn’t have the burden of making an implausible assumption of a God existing. There are many explanations why humans invented religion and God for social reasons.

If there is only the material world and that is all humans knew, how did anyone invent or come up with the idea of God in the first place? Can a person even think or fantasize about something that doesn’t exist in the physical world?

 

[Bthoth]

If there is only the material world and that is all humans knew, how did anyone invent or come up with the idea of God in the first place? Can a person even think or fantasize about something that doesn’t exist in the physical world?

Sure, look up how many gods that mankind has created. Look at how many images, how many stories and even how many miracles each have been said to do.

 

[InChrist]

Sure, look up how many gods that mankind has created. Look at how many images, how many stories and even how many miracles each have been said to do.

I realize there are many god stories. I am asking how did humans conceive of the thought or idea of God/gods to begin with, if there are none in existence?


If it’s true that humans can only know about that which exists in the physical realm and if animals don’t have gods, why should humans have ever developed such a fantasy? If a human is a stimulus-response mechanism, that can only know of that which stimulates him, how did any human “create” God?

 

[Trailblazer]

If it’s true that humans can only know about that which exists in the physical realm and if animals don’t have gods, why should humans have ever developed such a fantasy?

Humans know about God because God has always sent Messengers to the physical realm, ever since humans came into existence.

 

[Bthoth]

I realize there are many god stories. I am asking how did humans conceive of the thought or idea of God/gods to begin with, if there are none in existence?

Everyone one of them. The lightning and thunder were once thought to be by god. If you are schooled can you share the basics of what causes lightning and thunder? Which god?

.

If it’s true that humans can only know about that which exists in the physical realm and if animals don’t have gods, why should humans have ever developed such a fantasy?

Great point. No gods existed in any writing, statues, churches or in utterance, until man made them.

If a human is a stimulus-response mechanism, that can only know of that which stimulates him, how did any human “create” God?

Awe, you are confused about 'stimulus-response mechanism'...... that is based on strictly instinctive reactions. Conscious life can create from scratch.

 

[Bthoth]

Humans know about God because God has always sent Messengers to the physical realm, ever since humans came into existence.

Hello.

But how many claim to be messengers from god?

Was Nostradamus from god? Einstein? Newton? Darwin? Salk?

Is trump, from god? Obama, putin....

The measure of who, or what came from god, is very suspect.

Visions are not because of god, but an event experienced by a life within the body of existence.

 

[InChrist]

Everyone one of them. The lightning and thunder were once thought to be by god. If you are schooled can you share the basics of what causes lightning and thunder? Which god?

Great point. No gods existed in any writing, statues, churches or in utterance, until man made them.

Awe, you are confused about 'stimulus-response mechanism'...... that is based on strictly instinctive reactions. Conscious life can create from scratch.

Can a person visualize a new prime color for the rainbow? I don’t think so.
How is it that anyone could even conceive of anything that doesn’t exist and that he hasn’t experienced? Yet, you are saying people created the idea of God without any stimulus or experience. Where did that idea come from?

 

[Trailblazer]

But how many claim to be messengers from god?

No, a man is not a Messenger of God just because He claims to be one. They have to meet certain criteria, and of course they have to be sent by God.
There is no list of all the people who were Messengers, but we know who the primary ones were - Abraham, Krishna, Moses, Noah, Zoroaster, Buddha, Christ, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha’u’llah.

Was Nostradamus from god? Einstein? Newton? Darwin? Salk?

No, they were not Messengers of God and I don't think they ever claimed to be.

 

[blü 2]

And that question is how we can determine with certainty whether or not there IS a way God knows he knows all there is to know, OR lacking our ability to determine that, is there a way we can determine definitively that such a proposition can be shown to be inherently contradictory?

Not my problem. My argument instead is that if God or [his] supporters can't provide such a method then [his] supporters' claims that [he]'s omniscient are unsustainable.

If we cannot determine an answer to one or the other of those questions then your proposition is meaningless as concerns the Christian God.

Given that the God of the bible is real ie has objective existence and is not simply a concept or thing imagined, those who make the claim of omniscience carry the can when it comes to establishing that the omniscience thing is anything more than mere assertion.

End of that story. That would only lead us back to the indeterminate question of whether or not the Christian God does or does not exist as defined.

No, the reality of the bible God is a given for purposes of this particular question.

On the contrary...understanding that Gods attributes cannot create contradiction in reality is essential in understanding how the Christian Gods attributes are defined.

Not in this case. Either there's a credible method by which God can establish that there's nothing [he] doesn't know [he] doesn't know, or the claim that [he]'s omniscient is unsustainable.

So the question is, "Is your statement realistic or merely a meaningless statement?"

My statement doesn't have to be realistic. Instead it assumes the reality of God and proceeds on the basis of that assumption. Of course it does NOT assume that God is omniscient. Instead it asks, given that God is real, how can the omniscience claim be sustained.

 

[F1fan]

If there is only the material world and that is all humans knew, how did anyone invent or come up with the idea of God in the first place?

The same way all fiction is created. Do you reall think ancient people all over they world thousands of years ago had some remarkable ability to sense Gods that we have lost today? No, they lacked knowledge, yet wanted answers. As knowledge progressed answers became more materialistic and reliable. Even governments became secular since there was no actual God at the basis for civic authority.

Can a person even think or fantasize about something that doesn’t exist in the physical world?

Hobbits. Unicorns. Godzilla. The Boogeman. Zeus.

 

[InChrist]

The same way all fiction is created. Do you reall think ancient people all over they world thousands of years ago had some remarkable ability to sense Gods that we have lost today? No, they lacked knowledge, yet wanted answers. As knowledge progressed answers became more materialistic and reliable. Even governments became secular since there was no actual God at the basis for civic authority.

Hobbits. Unicorns. Godzilla. The Boogeman. Zeus.

Fictional stories or characters are created based on things people are already familiar with in the physical world, they are just tweaked or exaggerated. But if a Creator God type character is non-existent and not a part of any ancient person’s experience, how would the concept of God/gods with supernatural powers ever come to mind, be invented, or even be seen as providing answers, as you imply?

 

[ppp]

Fictional stories or characters are created based on things people are already familiar with in the physical world, they are just tweaked or exaggerated. But if a Creator God type character is non-existent and not a part of any ancient person’s experience, how would the concept of God/gods with supernatural powers ever come to mind, be invented, or even be seen as providing answers, as you imply?

Your god store is the product of a series of big fish bragging contests. My god is big that your god. Knows more than our god. Can do more than your god. The inevitable end point is, My god is knows everything, can do anything and is everywhere.

Bleh. Your god is the product of human pride and one-upsmanship. And beer. Your god is definitely the product of beer.