• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

If a god is truly beyond our understanding

Rolling_Stone

Well-Known Member
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.

Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?
One question: If God is infinite, where is the separation? Ever hear the poet's words, "Different in degree, but not in kind"? Ever consider the difference between "primary" and "secondary" causes? Or the concept of God's self-realization expanding in time and space towards itself in eternity and infinity?

There are many, many avenues logic can take toward a conceptual frame, but the knowingness of God necessarily transcends any frame.
 

Super Universe

Defender of God
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.

Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?

God's existence is not beyond human comprehension. We can comprehend quite a bit, however, His full existence (everything that is possible to know about Him) is quite beyond us.
 

science_is_my_god

Philosophical Monist
One question: If God is infinite, where is the separation? Ever hear the poet's words, "Different in degree, but not in kind"? Ever consider the difference between "primary" and "secondary" causes? Or the concept of God's self-realization expanding in time and space towards itself in eternity and infinity?

There are many, many avenues logic can take toward a conceptual frame, but the knowingness of God necessarily transcends any frame.

This is my entire point!!! Even if I were to go against my logic and reasoning, and assume a god exists, why should I even try to understand anything about him? Why should I adhere to religious beliefs? Shouldn't I just take the neutral agnostic stance?
 

Rolling_Stone

Well-Known Member
This is my entire point!!! Even if I were to go against my logic and reasoning, and assume a god exists, why should I even try to understand anything about him? Why should I adhere to religious beliefs? Shouldn't I just take the neutral agnostic stance?
Okay. Now I see what you're getting at. Sorry.

Belifs of any kind are merely the conceptual frame we use to relate to our life-experience. Some people experience it from within and reach outward; others simply experience it as "out there." Accordingly, they come to different conclusions and use different conceptual frames.

But there's also this: Infinity implies unity but it does not exclude diversity, even a diversity of multiple absolutes within the Undivided Whole. For example, if God is, is infinite, eternal, and is unchangeable, it follows that at least two internal relationships within his Undivided Self have always been: unconscious matter-energy and purposive energy or “spirit.” These phases of the One may be construed as Absolute in their own domains but not independent of the Original Self. Matter would be the source of human existence and spirit the cause of human existence. The Original Self would be primary cause and source of all things, but human beings emerge from a distinct secondary source (matter) and hopefully integrate with elements of a distinct secondary cause (spirit).


I understand this may all be nonsense to you. That's fine. But it gives me an internally consistent conceptual frame.
 

.lava

Veteran Member
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.

Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?

hi,

i think one of the source of problem is trying to understand God as an deity, an existence. concepts we use are like fruits of our perception, out of reality we are in. if something exists here that means it has a beginning and an end. in between two points it exists. God does not have beginning and end, that is beyond our understanding because we do not have any example for it in our reality.

each person has a limit of understanding. reaching that limit is knowing God. i am not there yet. you're not either. at that edge of our understandings, we'd be satisfied by what we've been showed. like a bottle full of water. completed. but still, even that perfection of individual (including Prophet's) could not explain how God is without end and beginning. which i think therefor God only could be admired after certain point, instead of knowing and understanding.



:)



 

emiliano

Well-Known Member
PROSLOGION
Chapter 3: That God Cannot be Thought Not to Exist
In fact, it so undoubtedly exists that it cannot be thought of as not existing. For one can think there exists something that cannot be thought of as not existing, and that would be greater than something which can be thought of as not existing. For if that greater than which cannot be thought can be thought of as not existing, then that greater than which cannot be thought is not that greater than which cannot be thought, which does not make sense. Thus that than which nothing can be thought so undoubtedly exists that it cannot even be thought of as not existing.
And you, Lord God, are this being. You exist so undoubtedly, my Lord God, that you cannot even be thought of as not existing. And deservedly, for if some mind could think of something greater than you, that creature would rise above the creator and could pass judgment on the creator, which is absurd. And indeed whatever exists except you alone can be thought of as not existing. You alone of all things most truly exists and thus enjoy existence to the fullest degree of all things, because nothing else exists so undoubtedly, and thus everything else enjoys being in a lesser degree. Why therefore did the fool say in his heart "there is no God," since it is so evident to any rational mind that you above all things exist? Why indeed, except precisely because he is stupid and foolish?
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/anselm.html
 

Ashley-Yin

Im a happy little Lesbian
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.

Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?

heres a thought on the bible(gods word) its either beyond our understanding there for so is god or it is mostly contradiction
in actuality the whole christian faith anyway disproves its self in my mind because no one has been able to explain away the contradictions.

and to make clear i believe in all gods but as other worldly(like the animal world) we are not the exactly the same but we can understand them.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.

Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?

Some people -- certain mystics -- claim to have experienced god, albeit not comprehended god.
 

Jeremy Mason

Well-Known Member
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.

Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?

I think God created us to understand Him. Love is what He wants from us, especially to Him and others. It's this understanding of what he want from us that should unite us with Him and foster healthy relationships with all of his creation.
 

Alex_G

Enlightner of the Senses
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.

Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?

To imagine/visualise or understand a supreme all powerfull deity is impossible by humans. Thats why we have crude descriptions such as 'all powerfull'. As we have evolved on this earth, and gained attributes that are usefull for us to survive in this finite, definite world, we have trouble grasping consepts involving extremes, such as the very large, the very small, and long time periods. But there is a destinction, cognitivly speaking between grasping and understanding somthing and being aware of it via a label. One may be able to logically deal with the term 'partical accelerator', without actually understanding it. This may even be a evolutionary development to make our existence easier, and more usefull. Its within our logical thinking to analyse God as a label, and weigh up probablilities the best we can. But to actually comprehend what God would be isnt possible. It is similar to the difficulties we have in grasping dimentions exceeding our 3d world.
 

emiliano

Well-Known Member
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.
Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot.
You will find an answer to this by responding to the question” Why Am I searching?” I think that your failure in this endeavour is due to the fact that you want to find a negative answer “there is no God” because there is there is one.
I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct".
Perhaps you should tell us how you do it, is your intent and pre-disposition to find that there is no God? If so You will be guiding your mind in that direction, believer in God will tell that they found Him in this way or the other way, they start indented in finding a revelation that will assure their faith.
And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension.
When a believer seek revelation from God he doe it in a reverent way, as the request of a lesser being to a superior, one with a limited intellect asking one with an infinite intellect, if God will that you can know Him He will reveal Himself to you.
That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefore created my understanding, and put himself above it, that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.
If you accept this you must also accept that He created you with a purpose, and that He is absolutely sovereign to do with you as He pleases, what if God doesn’t want you, that you are not one of His, that He knows that you will never believe, His omniscient, you know?
Do you think that God owes you anything because He created you?
 

McBell

Unbound
In the garden, Satan deceived Adam and Eve using the lie that if they disobeyed God they would be like Him.
I disagree.
It was not a lie.
Once they knew right from wrong, they did become more like god.
Unless of course your argument is that God does not know right from wrong....

Now if you were to say that Satan misled them...
That I can agree with.
 

Bishadi

Active Member
Just keep your integrity straight at all times;

All words are created by man/women.

Man/women 'created' the terminal you type into as man created the interpretation that each culture brings to the table of knowledge.

Yet natural truth’s are absolute where man can fib by the use of words.

As evolution exists, the easiest to see is in recognizing knowledge evolves.

That pinnacle of man’s evolution is to comprehend ‘its’ existence or for mass to know how it exists within the collective existence of all mass, all energy, all time: God if you wish. As even to think isolated is in itself ignorant.

Each life that experiences choice can contribute ‘its’ energy to support, create and begin a life, thereby living within the choice well beyond the period of knowing it.
 

idea

Question Everything
I often use logic and reasoning to try to grasp the notion of a "god", and although I have tried many times before to accept a god's existence, I cannot. I argue to theists my logic, my reasoning, even my "gut instinct". And yet, many times I hear the arguements that a god's existence is beyond human comprehension. That I cannot use my logic to logically analize my logic, because it could be flawed. And quite frankly, I agree. However, if such an arguement is used, a god could NOT possibly want our belief in his existence. Why? Because if he created the universe, and therefor created my understanding, and put himself above it,that either means he created my understanding by accident, or that he intended me to disbelieve in him.
Does anyone agree/disagree? Does anyone have thoughts on this?

Dear Science - God is not found through natural means, He is not found through science. Being able to find Him through natural means would take away our agency. Therefore, natural things by natural means, spiritual things by spiritual means.

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. - 1 Cor 2:14

He did not create your understanding - if He created everything, everything would be perfect - well not quite perfect - there would be no free will... (it is God's will not free will if it is created) link

in any event, we do have free will - proof of who we are and who God is - He allows us to keep our agency in choosing to follow Him or not. It is a personal choice you have to make - not something you force yourself to believe through seeing (see to believe) or logical deduction - it is belief through choice... After the choice comes the evidence / logic – evidence / logic would force you to believe… if you do not choose to believe He will respect your agency not to believe and will not force His existence on you. That is how it works. It is your choice.
 

idea

Question Everything
I disagree.
It was not a lie.
Once they knew right from wrong, they did become more like god.
Unless of course your argument is that God does not know right from wrong....

Now if you were to say that Satan misled them...
That I can agree with.

I agree - the fall was necessary for our progression strange as it sounds. There is a reason behind everything. Not knowing evil meant not knowing good. Good and evil are relative terms, they do not exist without eachother.

link

In contrast to most readers of the Bible, we believe that Adam and Eve both should be commended for what they did to bring about the Fall. We understand that without the Fall none of us could have come to the earth and the whole plan of salvation would have been frustrated (see 2 Ne. 2:25). Adam said: “Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God” (Moses 5:10). Eve likewise rejoiced: “Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient” (Moses 5:11).
The Lord gave Adam and Eve four commandments in the Garden of Eden. They were to multiply and replenish the earth (see Gen. 1:28; Moses 2:28; Abr. 4:28). They were to govern the earth wisely (have dominion over it) (see Moses 2:28; Abr. 4:26). They were not to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and if they did they would experience serious consequences (see Gen. 2:17; Moses 3:17; Abr. 5:13). And they were to remain with each other (see Gen. 2:24; Moses 3:24; Abr. 5:18). In the case of two of these commandments—to multiply and replenish the earth and to refrain from partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil—Adam and Eve had to choose which they were to obey. Procreation was not possible for them in their immortal state (see 2 Ne. 2:22–25), yet Heavenly Father would not rob them of their agency by making the choice for them. President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: “The Lord said to Adam that if he wished to remain as he was in the garden, then he was not to eat the fruit, but if he desired to eat it and partake of death he was at liberty to do so.” 19 In essence the Lord told Adam that there were two directions to go, each with its unique consequences—and that Adam was to choose which one.

From President Brigham Young we learn: “Some may regret that our first parents sinned. This is nonsense. If we had been there, and they had not sinned, we should have sinned. I will not blame Adam or Eve. Why? Because it was necessary that sin should enter into the world; no man could ever understand the principle of exaltation without its opposite; no one could ever receive an exaltation without being acquainted with its opposite. How did Adam and Eve sin? Did they come out in direct opposition to God and to his government? No. But they transgressed a command of the Lord, and through that transgression sin came into the world. The Lord knew they would do this, and he had designed that they should. Then came the curse upon the fruit, upon the vegetables, and upon our mother earth; and it came upon the creeping things, upon the grain in the field, the fish in the sea, and upon all things pertaining to this earth, through man’s transgression.” 20

The Prophet Joseph Smith referred to their choice to eat of the fruit as a “transgression,” not a sin (A of F 1:2). Similarly, Elder Bruce R. McConkie of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles explained: “It is proper and according to the scriptural pattern to speak of the transgression of Adam, but not the sin of Adam. (D. & C. 20:20; 29:40 [D&C 20:20; D&C 29:40]; Job 31:33; Rom. 5:14; 1 Tim. 2:14; Alma 12:31; Second Article of Faith.) Lehi says, for instance, ‘If Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen.’ Then he explains that while in their state of innocence in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve ‘knew no sin.’ (2 Ne. 2:22–23.) Knowledge of good and evil is an essential element in the commission of sin, and our first parents did not have this knowledge until after they had partaken of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.” 21

Thus, by being required to leave the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve caused the great plan of happiness to go forward. Mortality came to all living things; procreation began the process of bringing us, the sons and daughters of God, to earth as Adam and Eve’s posterity. We who have come here or will yet come agreed to the conditions of mortality in order to participate in the plan, and we counted as a great blessing the opportunity to live in this imperfect world (see Job 38:4–7). While those who do not understand the plan may feel that all of us are stained with sin when we are born, we know that this is erroneous thinking. Elder Joseph Fielding Smith of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles wrote: “Adam’s transgression was banishment from the presence of God and bringing the physical death into the world. The majority in the religious world maintain that every child born into this world is tainted with ‘original sin,’ or partakes of Adam’s transgression in his birth. The second Article of Faith contradicts this foolish and erroneous doctrine.” 22
 

McBell

Unbound
Seems to me you will be hard pressed to show that the whole adam and eve story (if it is meant to be taken literal like many believe) was not God purposely setting man up to fail.
 

idea

Question Everything
Seems to me you will be hard pressed to show that the whole adam and eve story (if it is meant to be taken literal like many believe) was not God purposely setting man up to fail.

God knows everything and does everything with a purpose in mind. He was not setting them up to fail, He was setting them up to learn through experience - it was the only way to learn, He provided them with the opportunity to progress and not just stagnantly sit around...

No pain, no gain.
 
Top