True to form, you see nothing but limitations.
... limitation
... limitation
...limitation
.....limitation
....limitation
... limitation
... limitation
...limitation
.....limitation
....limitation
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Intelligent Design is not creationism
- Thread starter Teleologist
- Start date
"What's the harm in admitting that a conceptualization of god has limits? How is that disparaging?"
If God did have limits, then there would be no harm in admitting that.
However, God has no limits, as God is beyond limits by definition.
"For instance, in relation to omnipotence, wouldn't stand to reason that God is the most powerful entity in existence?"
Nothing more powerful, nothing possibly more powerful.
I would also suggest that God is not actually "in existence."
God is existence itself. Nothing to be "in" or "out" of.
Or in relation to omniscience, God would know all that can be known.
Nothing is or can be unknowable to God, by definition.
"Clearly, there is no conceptualization of God where God can do any and everything."
I don't think you have done enough research to support the claim above that there is no conception of God where God can do any and everything.
When the conception of God is that God is everything and that everything is within God, then doing any and everything is not a problem.
Limited material beings don't exist at different places at the same time. They are spot existence by nature. One spot, standing in relation to other spots. They are limited to time and space.
God is not limited by time and space. Were time and space to end, God would not end, by definition.
God is at all places at all times, or no particular place at no particular time. Existing at all places at all times is the nature of God.
Being omnipresent, God does all things at all places all the time.
It is a pretty easy concept to grasp if someone lets go of the limits of material logic, removes the concepts of time and space from the equation...but an impossible situation to conceptually grasp if someone demands that God must conform to and be limited by relativistic material logic based thinking.
If God did have limits, then there would be no harm in admitting that.
However, God has no limits, as God is beyond limits by definition.
"For instance, in relation to omnipotence, wouldn't stand to reason that God is the most powerful entity in existence?"
Nothing more powerful, nothing possibly more powerful.
I would also suggest that God is not actually "in existence."
God is existence itself. Nothing to be "in" or "out" of.
Or in relation to omniscience, God would know all that can be known.
Nothing is or can be unknowable to God, by definition.
"Clearly, there is no conceptualization of God where God can do any and everything."
I don't think you have done enough research to support the claim above that there is no conception of God where God can do any and everything.
When the conception of God is that God is everything and that everything is within God, then doing any and everything is not a problem.
Limited material beings don't exist at different places at the same time. They are spot existence by nature. One spot, standing in relation to other spots. They are limited to time and space.
God is not limited by time and space. Were time and space to end, God would not end, by definition.
God is at all places at all times, or no particular place at no particular time. Existing at all places at all times is the nature of God.
Being omnipresent, God does all things at all places all the time.
It is a pretty easy concept to grasp if someone lets go of the limits of material logic, removes the concepts of time and space from the equation...but an impossible situation to conceptually grasp if someone demands that God must conform to and be limited by relativistic material logic based thinking.
Quote from DerekD:
What's the harm in admitting that a conceptualization of god has limits? How is that disparaging?
If your conceptualization is that God is the highest of the high, wouldn't it stand to reason that God can do all POSSIBLE things?
For instance, in relation to omnipotence, wouldn't stand to reason that God is the most powerful entity in existence? Clearly, there is no conceptualization of God where God can do any and everything. But at the same time, there is no known conceptualization where anything is more powerful than god.
Or in relation to omniscience, God would know all that can be known.
If God can't do something, it's a limit. Big deal. Most modern conceptualizations of God are still more powerful than anything created. And isn't that what counts?
Ztroll:
>God is beyond limits by definition.
Again, you've simply decided this yourself -- It's not a commonly accepted definition. I can say "all cows by definition are blue" -- doesn't make it true.
Definitions are important precisely because they assign *common* meaning to words. You're definition is so narrow as to be laughable -- you would be hard pressed to find a single additional soul who would claim that their god doesn't "want us to do the right thing", or their god doesn't "want all of us in heaven" or their god doesn't "want as to follow him".
The god that is essentially *universally* defined and reflected, has wants ... many of them.
JB
>God is beyond limits by definition.
Again, you've simply decided this yourself -- It's not a commonly accepted definition. I can say "all cows by definition are blue" -- doesn't make it true.
Definitions are important precisely because they assign *common* meaning to words. You're definition is so narrow as to be laughable -- you would be hard pressed to find a single additional soul who would claim that their god doesn't "want us to do the right thing", or their god doesn't "want all of us in heaven" or their god doesn't "want as to follow him".
The god that is essentially *universally* defined and reflected, has wants ... many of them.
JB
Your life may be based on the commonly accepted, which I suspect it is...I am not interested in what commoners think.
I see you are falling into the same old trap, which is typical of Judeo Christian thought by imposing upon God the qualities of man. You project onto God human attributes, human qualities, human wants and needs...which I supposed may in part or whole be due to the programming of your youth by the holy rollers around you.
When there is talk of God, you generally bring up Christian concepts, which is what must be in your mind.
As I have stated, I am not Christian. I understand the Christian concepts, and I don't reject them or evaluate them as true or false.
I simply am not interested in them.
People who were not raised with the Judeo Christian conditioning often find it very easy to have concepts of God which are beyond the limits of human nature, not limited in any manner by human nature.
God has an unlimited nature, man has a limited nature.
God is complete, man is incomplete.
Man has wants and desires, God has no wants and is eternally free from desire.
God is eternally contented and without want or desire, man is endlessly discontented and filled with desire.
God is flawless, man is flawed.
When a human being wants something, and doesn't get the want fulfilled, what results is dissatisfaction and disappointment, in a word...unhappiness. Wants come from a discontentment and lead to desires. Why do desires arise? Because there is something missing.
When a human gets their wants met, what follows? Complete and unending contentment? Nope. What follows is a desire for more, and wants and desires arise from every desired fulfilled and unfulfilled.
This is human nature, the human experience. The cycle begins with a desire for unending permanent ever increasing happiness.
This innate unspecified wanting nature of man matures to a specific desire, which is formed by way of an intended goal in an effort to get that happiness.
Then further effort is made to fulfill that desire/want.
The want if not fulfilled leads to anger and frustration. The desire if fulfilled leads to a desire for more, because whatever is obtained is limited in nature, so the happiness and contentment is therefore limited.
God by definition is unlimited unending bliss and happiness. Unhappiness is not in the the nature of God.
Just as there is no power or force of darkness that can obscure light, there can only be an absence of light. Light exists, darkness is just the non existence of light.
God is unending light, unending happiness, no wants to fulfill. Wants are arise on the field of incompleteness, and as God is complete by definition, wants do not arise.
God radiates unlimited happiness, those who seek that unlimited happiness seek God.
Those who are interested in an unending and unlimited cycle of desire, fulfillment of desire which beings limited happiness and limited contentment which then gives rise to unhappiness and discontentment when the limited happiness and limited contentment fade, which gives rise to more desires and cycle goes on forever.
It is a common nature of all of mankind to seek unending happiness, it is however uncommon for someone to truly conclude that what they seek is not in this world and seek God's happiness and love exclusively...
I see you are falling into the same old trap, which is typical of Judeo Christian thought by imposing upon God the qualities of man. You project onto God human attributes, human qualities, human wants and needs...which I supposed may in part or whole be due to the programming of your youth by the holy rollers around you.
When there is talk of God, you generally bring up Christian concepts, which is what must be in your mind.
As I have stated, I am not Christian. I understand the Christian concepts, and I don't reject them or evaluate them as true or false.
I simply am not interested in them.
People who were not raised with the Judeo Christian conditioning often find it very easy to have concepts of God which are beyond the limits of human nature, not limited in any manner by human nature.
God has an unlimited nature, man has a limited nature.
God is complete, man is incomplete.
Man has wants and desires, God has no wants and is eternally free from desire.
God is eternally contented and without want or desire, man is endlessly discontented and filled with desire.
God is flawless, man is flawed.
When a human being wants something, and doesn't get the want fulfilled, what results is dissatisfaction and disappointment, in a word...unhappiness. Wants come from a discontentment and lead to desires. Why do desires arise? Because there is something missing.
When a human gets their wants met, what follows? Complete and unending contentment? Nope. What follows is a desire for more, and wants and desires arise from every desired fulfilled and unfulfilled.
This is human nature, the human experience. The cycle begins with a desire for unending permanent ever increasing happiness.
This innate unspecified wanting nature of man matures to a specific desire, which is formed by way of an intended goal in an effort to get that happiness.
Then further effort is made to fulfill that desire/want.
The want if not fulfilled leads to anger and frustration. The desire if fulfilled leads to a desire for more, because whatever is obtained is limited in nature, so the happiness and contentment is therefore limited.
God by definition is unlimited unending bliss and happiness. Unhappiness is not in the the nature of God.
Just as there is no power or force of darkness that can obscure light, there can only be an absence of light. Light exists, darkness is just the non existence of light.
God is unending light, unending happiness, no wants to fulfill. Wants are arise on the field of incompleteness, and as God is complete by definition, wants do not arise.
God radiates unlimited happiness, those who seek that unlimited happiness seek God.
Those who are interested in an unending and unlimited cycle of desire, fulfillment of desire which beings limited happiness and limited contentment which then gives rise to unhappiness and discontentment when the limited happiness and limited contentment fade, which gives rise to more desires and cycle goes on forever.
It is a common nature of all of mankind to seek unending happiness, it is however uncommon for someone to truly conclude that what they seek is not in this world and seek God's happiness and love exclusively...
Quote from Turok:
Ztroll:
>God is beyond limits by definition.
Again, you've simply decided this yourself -- It's not a commonly accepted definition. I can say "all cows by definition are blue" -- doesn't make it true.
Definitions are important precisely because they assign *common* meaning to words. You're definition is so narrow as to be laughable -- you would be hard pressed to find a single additional soul who would claim that their god doesn't "want us to do the right thing", or their god doesn't "want all of us in heaven" or their god doesn't "want as to follow him".
The god that is essentially *universally* defined and reflected, has wants ... many of them.
JB
True to form, you show nothing but limited contradictory confused thinking.Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
"What's the harm in admitting that a conceptualization of god has limits? How is that disparaging?"
If God did have limits, then there would be no harm in admitting that.
However, God has no limits, as God is beyond limits by definition.
"For instance, in relation to omnipotence, wouldn't stand to reason that God is the most powerful entity in existence?"
Nothing more powerful, nothing possibly more powerful.
I would also suggest that God is not actually "in existence."
God is existence itself. Nothing to be "in" or "out" of.
Or in relation to omniscience, God would know all that can be known.
Nothing is or can be unknowable to God, by definition.
"Clearly, there is no conceptualization of God where God can do any and everything."
I don't think you have done enough research to support the claim above that there is no conception of God where God can do any and everything.
When the conception of God is that God is everything and that everything is within God, then doing any and everything is not a problem.
Limited material beings don't exist at different places at the same time. They are spot existence by nature. One spot, standing in relation to other spots. They are limited to time and space.
God is not limited by time and space. Were time and space to end, God would not end, by definition.
God is at all places at all times, or no particular place at no particular time. Existing at all places at all times is the nature of God.
Being omnipresent, God does all things at all places all the time.
It is a pretty easy concept to grasp if someone lets go of the limits of material logic, removes the concepts of time and space from the equation...but an impossible situation to conceptually grasp if someone demands that God must conform to and be limited by relativistic material logic based thinking.
Naturally so, as you define how your limited God is unlimited.
God is not limited by definition.
There is no contradiction in God, there is only contradiction seen by a limited being who is bound by relativistic logic.
There is no contradiction in God, there is only contradiction seen by a limited being who is bound by relativistic logic.
Quote from stu:
True to form, you show nothing but limited contradictory confused thinking.
Naturally so, as you define how your limited God is unlimited.
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
Your life may be based on the commonly accepted, which I suspect it is...I am not interested in what commoners think.
LOL.
I see you are falling into the same old trap, which is typical of Judeo Christian thought by imposing upon God the qualities of man. You project onto God human attributes, human qualities, human wants and needs...which I supposed may in part or whole be due to the programming of your youth by the holy rollers around you.
Almost invariably every religion that has ever existed does this.
If they didn't, they'd have no frame of reference to even begin to understand their god(s). The God you go on about (assert) is incomprehensible to even yourself as is evident by your own admission of the lack of proper wording to describe it due to the limits of language and the rational material mind.
Yet you believe in something you can't even begin to comprehend nor properly conceptualize. So you practically believe in nothing but your supposed need to feel superior to all schools of religious thought.
zTroll:
>Your life may be based on the commonly accepted,
>which I suspect it is...I am not interested in what
>commoners think.
This is the joke of your thinking as it pertains to definitions ...
If not for the commonly accepted, we could not be having this conversation. The very fact that we are conversing is proof that you *rely on the commonly accepted" in the language arena.
JB
>Your life may be based on the commonly accepted,
>which I suspect it is...I am not interested in what
>commoners think.
This is the joke of your thinking as it pertains to definitions ...
If not for the commonly accepted, we could not be having this conversation. The very fact that we are conversing is proof that you *rely on the commonly accepted" in the language arena.
JB