What does God want from you?

[muhammad_isa]

..If God is "Unknowable" as you have been protesting to the other Poster and how we got started .. that means you can't know anything about this God..

No .. it doesn't mean that .. it means that our knowledge is incomplete.

In the same way, "Omnipotent" means that G-d is able to do all things .. things that we cannot do.
It doesn't mean that G-d does the logically impossible. That is just a mockery.

Incidentally, miracles are not logically impossible .. we only see them as physically impossible.

You certainly do not know if this God is a He or a She..

G-d is neither male or female .. it is G-d who created His creatures in pairs.
G-d is not a person .. G-d encompasses all.

 

[Sargonski]

No .. it doesn't mean that .. it means that our knowledge is incomplete.

In the same way, "Omnipotent" means that G-d is able to do all things .. things that we cannot do.
It doesn't mean that G-d does the logically impossible. That is just a mockery.

Incidentally, miracles are not logically impossible .. we only see them as physically impossible.


G-d is neither male or female .. it is G-d who created His creatures in pairs.
G-d is not a person .. G-d encompasses all.

Who told you miracles are logically impossible .. wasn't me ?

Unknowable does not mean knowledge incomplete .. which inferrs that there is some knowlege that has been completed. Unknowable means you can't know anything .. ZERO .. a complete lack of knowledge .. not incomplete knowledge .. so big fail on that account and also conflating with omnipotent which has nothing to do with the former other than the fact that you have absolutely no idea whether or not God is omnipotent.

nor do you know what God encompasses .. nor whether God is Male or Female or other if God is unknowable. And well .. when it comes down to brass taxes .. you do not have the faintest idea whether any of the characteristics you have attributed to God are true or not .. even if God is knowable .. which is what I have previously claimed.

 

[blü 2]

Who told you miracles are logically impossible .. wasn't me ?

Miracles are simply magic performed by a god.

(However we don't have a definition of "God" appropriate to a real being, such that if we found a suspect we could tell if it were God or not, hence to speak of a real god is to speak meaninglessly.)

And magic is the alteration of reality independently of the rules of reality.

The number of authenticated instances of magic remains firmly at zero.

My money's on the number of authenticated instances of magic remaining firmly at zero.

But possible? Impossible? Depends how reasonably you apply such terms. After all, it's possible that the universe sprang into being last Thursday, completely and perfectly formed as our 14 bn yo universe, since the proposition is unfalsiable.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Miracles are simply magic performed by a god.

(However we don't have a definition of "God" appropriate to a real being, such that if we found a suspect we could tell if it were God or not, hence to speak of a real god is to speak meaninglessly.)

And magic is the alteration of reality independently of the rules of reality.

The number of authenticated instances of magic remains firmly at zero.

My money's on the number of authenticated instances of magic remaining firmly at zero.

But possible? Impossible? Depends how reasonably you apply such terms. After all, it's possible that the universe sprang into being last Thursday, completely and perfectly formed as our 14 bn yo universe, since the proposition is unfalsiable.

If we think, as theoretical physicists do, in terms of probability, we may define a miracle as a probability so remote it's close to zero.

A probability, perhaps, as astronomically remote as the Penrose Number, the 10^10^123 which Roger Penrose https://epaper.kek.jp/e06/PAPERS/THESPA01.PDF estimates to be the likelihood of the universe being configured as it is, with the capacity to sustain life.

 

[Sargonski]

Miracles are simply magic performed by a god.

(However we don't have a definition of "God" appropriate to a real being, such that if we found a suspect we could tell if it were God or not, hence to speak of a real god is to speak meaninglessly.)

And magic is the alteration of reality independently of the rules of reality.

The number of authenticated instances of magic remains firmly at zero.

My money's on the number of authenticated instances of magic remaining firmly at zero.

But possible? Impossible? Depends how reasonably you apply such terms. After all, it's possible that the universe sprang into being last Thursday, completely and perfectly formed as our 14 bn yo universe, since the proposition is unfalsiable.

Miracles are simply miraculous events unable to be performed by humans .. and such events are not logically impossible ... certainly not for a God.

Now what a God is .. in this case .. is a being capable of the miraculous. When beings from the sky came to earth "as ancient alien theorists suggest" they were able to perform miraculous deeds. While these beings were not Gods by today's standard .. to the people of the day these events were indeed miraculous - and performed by Gods.

 

[Trailblazer]

Now as proof that you have no understanding of the cut and paste definition you don't understand and have not thought about.

I have a complete understanding of the definition I presented.

I already refuted this definition .. "Showed it was horrible and dumb" in a previous post.

You refuted nothing.

 

[Trailblazer]

If God is "Unknowable" as you purport .. this means you can't know anything about God .. Yet .. the definition you provided purports to know a whole lot of intimate details about God.

The Essence of God is unknowable but some of the attributes of God are knowable because they are revealed by and reflected in the Messengers of God.

God in the Baháʼí Faith

God communicates his will and purpose to humanity through intermediaries, known as Manifestations of God, who are the prophets and messengers that have founded religions from prehistoric times up to the present day.[5]

While God's essence is inaccessible, a subordinate form of knowledge is available by way of mediation by divine messengers, known as Manifestations of God.

Knowledge of God

The Baháʼí teachings state that God is too great for humans to create an accurate conception of. In the Baháʼí understanding, the attributes attributed to God, such as All-Powerful and All-Loving are derived from limited human experiences of power and love. Baháʼu'lláh taught that the knowledge of God is limited to those attributes and qualities which are perceptible to us, and thus direct knowledge of God is not possible. Furthermore, Baháʼu'lláh states that knowledge of the attributes of God is revealed to humanity through his messengers.[12]

From: God in the Baháʼí Faith

 

[Sargonski]

I have a complete understanding of the definition I presented.

You refuted nothing.

Prior to my question you had little understanding of your own definition for God.. you then cut and past from a religious website .. some nonsensical made up gibberish that I refuted .. prior to you posting the ridiculously flawed and irrational definition you posted.

Internal contradiction is refutation .. and your definition contradicts itself.. You can't claim God is "Unknowable" then claim to know a bunch of things about God. Your ridiculous backtrack .. now trying to claim "Only God's essense is unknowable" is even more ridiculous .. as you do not know squat about what is knowable about God .. and what is not ..


You do not know if God is a He or a She ... so this definition claiming God is a He is a rambling falsehood .. confirmed by your own definition in another contradiction

Your defacto claim that God has a Penis .. and you know this for sure .. is self delusional nonsense. Tell us more details .. how long did these messengers tell us was the size of the Holy Johnson ? That some messenger claimed "God is Omnipotent" .. preposterous nonsense .. as some other messenger claimed something else. ..

and Just to be clear .. I agree with the premise that we can know things about God .. just you have absolutely no idea how that might happen .. certainly not through completely illogical definitions .. that said they do get the Logos concept correct so not saying your definition was a complete failure in all ways .... despite being horrible and dumb.

and who are these messengers .... may we have the name of the messenger who confirmed for us that God is "All Knowing" - the fact that you don't know a third or fourth refutation by now .... in this definition you presented but do not understand.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..you do not have the faintest idea whether any of the characteristics you have attributed to God are true or not ..

Of course I do!
..yet nobody can be certain that they are right .. or that they are even sane.

 

[muhammad_isa]

The Essence of God is unknowable but some of the attributes of God are knowable because they are revealed by and reflected in the Messengers of God..

100% correct

 

[Trailblazer]

Prior to my question you had little understanding of your own definition for God.. you then cut and past from a religious website .. some nonsensical made up gibberish that I refuted .. prior to you posting the ridiculously flawed and irrational definition you posted.

You don't know what my understanding of God is. You just arrogantly assume you do as if you know what is in my head - you don't.

Prior to your question I had an understanding of my definition for God- as much as anyone can ever know about God, which is very little.
I have been posting that definition on this forum for over five years. That definition is derived from my religious scriptures, I didn't make it up.

 

[Trailblazer]

You do not know if God is a He or a She ... so this definition claiming God is a He is a rambling falsehood .. confirmed by your own definition in another contradiction

I know that God is not a he or a she. God has no gender since God is not a human being.

Such conception of the Divine Being, as the Supreme and ever present Reality in the world, is not anthropomorphic, for it transcends all human limitations and forms...
God in the Baháʼí Faith

Your defacto claim that God has a Penis .. and you know this for sure .. is self delusional nonsense.

I never said that God has a penis. Quote me saying that or admit you made a straw man. I would never say such a ridiculous thing.
Only men have a Penis. God is not a man, therefore God has no penis.

 

[Trailblazer]

and who are these messengers ....

The primary Messengers of God are as follows: Abraham, Krishna, Moses, Noah, Zoroaster, Buddha, Christ, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha’u’llah.

may we have the name of the messenger who confirmed for us that God is "All Knowing"

The Bab and Baha'u'llah revealed that God is All-Knowing.

 

[blü 2]

Miracles are simply miraculous events unable to be performed by humans .. and such events are not logically impossible ... certainly not for a God.

Except that there's no definition appropriate to a real god, nor can that be corrected by looking in reality for one, since no one knows what to look for. Which affirms that gods are a category of fictitious beings.

Now what a God is .. in this case .. is a being capable of the miraculous.

From the same stable as Superman, or Casper the Friendly Ghost, or Gandalf.

 

[Sargonski]

You don't know what my understanding of God is. You just arrogantly assume you do as if you know what is in my head - you don't.

Prior to your question I had an understanding of my definition for God- as much as anyone can ever know about God, which is very little.
I have been posting that definition on this forum for over five years. That definition is derived from my religious scriptures, I didn't make it up.

I didn't say you made up the definition ... it is lack of thinking that is the problem with your definition .. not the fantasy which came later. That when asked for a definition of God - in context with the conversation .. rather than think about what characteristics there are for God .. you came up with 'Unknowable' .. to which I responded that I disagreed .. that we can know --- not stating how .. but stating I am open to such possibility.. telling you .. that you can not make such claim without defining what God is .. predicting that your definition would be horrible and dumb .. that prediction coming true in spades.

You responded with a canned net definition .. which as predicted contradicted the meaning of how you were using the term "Unknowable" -- that we can not know things about God.

@Bird123 imagines he knows God's actions and studies them. He imagines he understands what God is doing with this world.
Nobody can study God's actions because nobody can ever know anything about God's actions. God is a complete mystery.
Mature contemplation confesses to the helplessness to fathom the mystery of the Living God.

Now remember .. I disagreed with your claim that we can never know anything about God .. you went on protesting "NO NO NO" and I said you can not make such claim without definition of God .. when which you gave .. completly contradicted your claim "God is a Complete Mystery" is "Unknowable" "Can never know anything about Gods Actions"

I told you you didn't understand your definition .. which trots out all kinds of things supposedly known about God. by not understanding both the contradiction of yourself .. and the contradiction in your definition .. trying to backtrack later and move the goal posts claiming "Unknowable" means only with respect to God's Essence .. when above you claim unknowable also with respect to his actions.

and second - the claim "Unknowable" only with respect to Essense .. is preposterous false nonsence anyway in an attempt to resolve the obvious contradiction but failing miserably .. as your definition stated no such thing .. and you have no scripture that claims this .. here we enter the land of self delusion

and here we have a case not only of not understanding .. but not disingenuous obvlivion .. pretending not to understand the numerous contradictions. "Nobody can ever know anything about God's Actions" "A complete Mystery" -- contradicts the unknowable God.

Is God's gender a complete mystery ? Guess not according to your definition .. God is a He .. then contradicts itself on that.


And so on.

 

[Sargonski]

Except that there's no definition appropriate to a real god, nor can that be corrected by looking in reality for one, since no one knows what to look for. Which affirms that gods are a category of fictitious beings.


From the same stable as Superman, or Casper the Friendly Ghost, or Gandalf.

That is non sequitur fallacy .. A does not follow from B That you have not found a definition appropriate to a "Real God" (which you havn't defined) does not affirm that God's are fictitious .. nor relate at all to Superman nor Santa.

I gave you a definition of a "Real God" --- capable of performing miraculous deeds. Now we can tune this up and clarify a bit further on the type of miraculous deeds required. .. but, to the Cave-Man .. the Ancient Aliens were real Gods --- and were certainly real Gods on the basis of being able to perform miraculous deeds.

Einstein performed a miraculous deed telling us about Relativity .. must been from the Gods ... but lets think "Bigger" .. and define "God-Like Powers" as the ability through force of will (as opposed to technology) to manipulate matter and energy .. outside of one's own Body.

Do note -- and ponder the fact - that you are capable of this on an internal basis. .. have the ability to manifest a thought into physical reality .. a critical step towards God-hood

What you don't have -- is the ability to make a chair move through force of Will .. and that .. according to my definition of "Real God" is what separates the humans from the divine.

Notice also that these are powers likely beyond that of the Ancient Aliens -- having anthropomorphic Characteristics.

and last --Do not dare gainsay my definition of "Real God" ---- without providing a definition of your own Har har har.

 

[Sargonski]

I know that God is not a he or a she. God has no gender since God is not a human being.

Such conception of the Divine Being, as the Supreme and ever present Reality in the world, is not anthropomorphic, for it transcends all human limitations and forms...
God in the Baháʼí Faith

I never said that God has a penis. Quote me saying that or admit you made a straw man. I would never say such a ridiculous thing.
Only men have a Penis. God is not a man, therefore God has no penis.

You did .. say God has a Penis ??? You said God is a He .. when you posted your definition of God .. which claimed God was a He.

I told you -- how many times now --- "horrible definition"

I agree with your genderless God Claim .. unfortunately your definition contradicts both you .. and itself ... using the Pronoun He in one place .. and rambling on about not anthropomorphic in other places.

The Un-Created Ahura Mazda for example .. an interesting idea of God .. not so much the "Personal God" of Your definition though .. which is another contradiction .. "Personal God" / Not Anthropomorphic .. with the most petty and nasty of human Characteristics like that God YHWH.

I give a definition for a God to blue in post 956 - completely different than yours ..

 

[Trailblazer]

You did .. say God has a Penis ??? You said God is a He .. when you posted your definition of God .. which claimed God was a He.

One reason I refer to God as a He is because God is referred to as 'the Father' in the Bible.
The other reason I use He and Him to refer to God is out of respect, since I am not going to refer to God as an 'it.'
That does not mean I believe that God is a man who has a penis. Any such belief would be sheer blasphemy.

To say that God is a personal Reality does not mean that He has a physical form, or does in any way resemble a human being. To entertain such belief would be sheer blasphemy.[15][16]

God in the Baháʼí Faith

 

[blü 2]

That is non sequitur fallacy .. A does not follow from B That you have not found a definition appropriate to a "Real God" (which you havn't defined) does not affirm that God's are fictitious .. nor relate at all to Superman nor Santa.

A "real god" is a god who exists in the world external to the self ─ that is, independently of any ideas / concepts / imaginings an individual might have. A real god would have a description appropriate to a real entity accordingly. We could perceive it with our senses, aided if required by suitable instruments.

But alas there's none.

I gave you a definition of a "Real God" --- capable of performing miraculous deeds.

No, that's an imaginary god. First we need the real god, THEN we can look at the miracles. Otherwise we're just wandering through our own imaginary lands.

Now we can tune this up and clarify a bit further on the type of miraculous deeds required. .. but, to the Cave-Man .. the Ancient Aliens were real Gods --- and were certainly real Gods on the basis of being able to perform miraculous deeds.

What ancient aliens were these? Not von Däniken's, surely?

However, yes, as Arthur C Clarke said, to a sufficiently primitive technology, a very advanced technology would likely appear to be magical and its wielders gods.

Einstein performed a miraculous deed telling us about Relativity

Only a metaphorical miracle ─ a superb piece of scientific insight (about reality).
.

.. must been from the Gods ... but lets think "Bigger" .. and define "God-Like Powers" as the ability through force of will (as opposed to technology) to manipulate matter and energy .. outside of one's own Body.

Are you suggesting psi powers? Because they're in no better state than supernatural powers when it comes to being real.

 

[Trailblazer]

A "real god" is a god who exists in the world external to the self ─ that is, independently of any ideas / concepts / imaginings an individual might have. A real god would have a description appropriate to a real entity accordingly. We could perceive it with our senses, aided if required by suitable instruments.

You are correct. A real god would have a description appropriate to a real entity. I have provided that description time and again.
A real god is not a material entity so we could never perceive a real god with our senses, aided if required by suitable instruments.