Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What would you have liked?
Why would God be held to any human-derived "ism?"
That's not even coherent. That would imply that God is abstract, and so automatically has a characteristic.
Because God is consistent. Ergo, he is logical. Ergo, logical statements can be applied to him. "All causes precede their effects" is one such statement.
Characteristic, though, is defined by what can be observed from the outside. Since none of us stand outside God far enough to do that, we can't say whether God "has" characteristics.
It doesn't stand to reason at all; The most elementary arguments can still cover infinite arrays of numbers. More advanced proofs cover infinite arrays of infinities.
'K. God's larger than infinity. God goes beyond our logic.
You contradict yourself.
God can't be both? God is omnipresent and omnipotent, after all...
Yes, but then he is neither. Anything follows from a contradiction.
I have yet to see a definition of free will that makes sense to me.
Neither have I. So far no one who professes it has been able to coherently explain just what they're professing. As an example, simply look at the contortions sojourner here has been putting himself through.
Gotta agree.
There is nothing less abstract than being --it's about as concrete as you can get.
If you are a being, then you're obviously real. But that's not what God is; God is (apparently) Being itself. That's an incredibly abstract thing.There is nothing less abstract than being --it's about as concrete as you can get.
Things are. Being is not a thing. You've reversed the order of existence.
Sooo abstract as to be meaningless.
So abstract as to be ineffable and unable for humans to fully comprehend.