I don't believe in God personally but for the sake of discussion, I will concede that he does exist for the simple fact how can there be any kind of in-depth discussion on God if we are still arguing weather God exists or not.
quote:If we cannot comprehend God in his visible works, how then in his inconceivable thoughts, that call the works into being? If we cannot understand him in his objective creatures, how then in his substantive moods and phases of creation?
As humans,we like to understand things. We feel the need to put them into some type of category, to name them. This has been a good thing for our species in many circumstances but in the case of God the ability to define or even name him is an impossibility. Yet that does not mean that it is not worth the attempt to gain some understanding of what God is, only that we must understand before we begin that defining something limits that something, and describing something often gets confused with defining something. You try to define your love of someone by describing why you love them. You attempt to define the sky by describing its properties,etc. So based on this,can you define God? Some if most would say that God is good, merciful, just, loving, and all powerful. All of these are words to describe him. It doesn't make them untrue, it simply avoided the bigger challenge, and that is defining him.
I agree,no one can truly describe God or explain what god is. I often hear many different adjectives that describe God but nothing truly says what God is. If you say that God is a spirit,that doesn't tell me what God is but rather it tells me what God isn't.
quote:Until we've established that he actually exists, why would we want to have an "in-depth discussion" of God?
This is just as impossible as my question.Which is why I conceded this fact for the sake of discussion in order to have one, instead of remonstrating a point that will never be settled.
quote:The greatest fault with religion/theology is that it doesn't even bother to establish the existence of the thing it claims to study, it just skips ahead to presuming the qualities of that entity. I think the conversation should remain at the level of "does God exist or not" until that issue is settled. And if it's settled on the side of "no, he doesn't" then I don't see what further conversation is to be had, aside from "if God doesn't exist, why is the deluded belief in him so widespread?"
I agree,I don't believe in God for the reason you stated,my question was mainly for those that do believe in God. And for Atheist,the question will always remain at the level of "Does God Exist" but you have those that believe he does exist and IMO some concessions have to be made if you want to have a discussion past that point.
The same question can be put to us,those that don't believe. How can we prove he "doesn't exist?
quote:Why? His name is "God",
How can you name something that doesn't exist?
quote:and he could be defined as "the mythical being who is the focus of several of the world's religions and suggested to be the creator of all things." There's absolutely nothing mysterious about God. It's a perfectly simple concept. The sense of "mystery" is really nothing more than the mental tension created by fervent belief in an obvious falsity.
I understand and agree,but you haven't defined him,you've just told me what he wasn't.
quote:Which god are you referring to? There must be thousands of them.
I assume that you are trying to define the one God of the Abrahimic religions. In which case there are probably as many definitions as there are believers.
The only definition that I seem able to accept is that God = the universe and all that it contains. I find this definition useful when reading the bible. It completely does away with all the hoobity-how. Not much use for anything else really.
Yes,this is the God I'm referring to, and I'm not trying to define him,I'm asking those that believe in him can he be defined. And your definition has just given him a limitation. I assume you are talking about the "known" universe,what about what is beyond that?
quote: Can we define God? I supose you will admit that it is equivalent to say Can we know God? If we accept that God exists, we sure will admit that the universe is His creation. Therefore, the progress in the knowledge of the creation, should enhance the progress in the knowledge of the Creator. So, in a way our knowledge of God should also evolve, and in fact I think it evolves, (for those that accept its existence, of course). Nevertheless, I think that we should admit that our reason may be not "equipped” to fully understand God.
I agree,we are dealing with two concepts,God and Man. Two words that describe two different concepts, God is a divine concept with endless descriptions upon it's superiority in all aspects while man is a much less concept with endless descriptions upon his need and inferiority. The human mind can never begin to understand what is God, instead it translates certain situations, experiences and information tailored and reviled by God to enable humans to deal with the concept of God and how to interact with him. In other words, only God knows himself and only God can describe himself.
quote:Attempting to define God, or even describe God, is what's called "idolatry" in the Bible. If God is as great as He (supposedly) is, any attempt to define or describe Him diminishes Him.
It's like using one word to define another - e.g. "dog" = "animal". You lose a lot of the original meaning. It takes a big description to define a small thing, so no human definition of God (if there was a God) could ever be be big enough.
I like this answer. It has bee said that if any one person could describe GOD this person would not be able to put it in words as he is beyond description.
And you don't see where you have limited God by saying that he is a big as the universe? Lets go with you and say that yes,he is as big as the universe,still isn't that placing a limitation on how big he is?
No,it was a genuine conceived and asked question. If anything,this question is more academic than anything else. Each side is dead set to believe how they always have. And you are correct with the formal part of your post.
I like to describe Him as everything that ever was, is, or will ever be.
It is a fact such an entity must exist.
It makes no difference what existence is it is everything that ever was, is, or ever will be.
The universe exists, we exist therefore existence had to exist.
There is no mechanism for existence to begin to exist.
I call that existence God.
Hello ICANT,and to you and everybody else,thank you for responding to my post.
Yes,that is how the Bible says God described himself. But that's ambiguity,and tautology because it tells us nothing. At least it tell me nothing.
quote: I like to describe Him as everything that ever was, is, or will ever be.
Do you believe in "Free Will"? This has to be the ultimate religious dilemma. A God knowing all vs free will,and the dilemma is this: If God knows all then there is only one set of events that can occur. Therefore, there can be no free will because no matter what man chooses, the decision will be the one that God has foreseen,don't you agree?
"I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both you and your seed may live:"
Now does it make sense for God to tell Israel to "choose" if there is no free will? And since this implies free will God can't be all knowing.
BTW,you have manage to not limit God in defining him. It's like infinity,it's a quantity without bounds.