Do you recognize the paradoxes in the description of your God?

Do you recognize the paradoxes in the description of your God?

Can he possibly be the Omni-everything as described?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=L7jClyinERY&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVZBD-5fLSw

I find it interesting that God is described as unknowable, unfathomable and one who we cannot possibly understand with our lack of intelligence. He also works in mysterious ways.

Does it sound to you like the bibles authors went a bit overboard in their description of a God whom they say cannot be known or fathomed?

If they could not fathom anything of God, why do you think you can?

When you do describe your un-describable God, --- based purely on hearsay and book-says, --- as a Christian, --- do you see that unknowable information that you think you know to be true even though the bible itself says it cannot be, --- as lying?

If not, how do you know you speak the truth?

Regards
DL

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No, my God has no paradoxes. And the Bible (Old Testament) never says that God is unknowable.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

God defined as natural law I would not live with. That would exclude moral law or the moral rules we have invented along with God. think.

God defined as the ideal of all laws I could live with.

As to exactly when the unknowable labels was tacked to God. I don't know.

I do know that the Jews have strived both with and against God.

Regards
DL

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Natural law includes moral law. Please see Wikipedia.

 

If only life were that simple.

Is equality of men and women a good law, ----- and where in natural law do you see the justification or template that tells us that that is what our law should be?

Natural law tells some animals that multiple sex partners are good, not at the same time of course, would you suggest that we should live by that law?

You don't really need to give long answers to those. I just wanted to show that your Wiki definition is not as good as it could be.

Regards
DL

 

Equality of men and women isn't a law, it is simply a falsehood. Men and women are different.

The relevance of animal behavior depends on how closely related they are too us. Nothing in natural law suggests that the same law should apply to all animals.

The basic idea of natural law is moral law derived from nature. However this doesn't mean that it is universal since human nature itself varies. This is my disagreement with Wikipedia.

 

There are always aberrations and exceptions but scholars think that in morals, humans are basically all on the same page when semantics and culture are factored in.

This guy has a lot on the web and I offer one of his shorter talks.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

Regards
DL

 

Your trying to rationalise god, and you cannot explain what god means. No one can explain what god means, so that everyone can understand. There is many different interpretations of what god means, and your rationalisation will not even cover any of them.

Why do science people even bother, you are not that smart, and you will never fathom what the universe is ever, you cannot explain why christmas day exists, and never will.

 

I prefer to expose idiocy than try to explain it.

Regards
DL

 

The definition of God is easy to explain....a divine omnipotent supreme deity/being that was supposed to have created all there is.
We have no evidence of such existance actually.

Scientists are working to understand the Universe and all that it contains...So far it is doing exceptionally well, although we still have a long long way to go to understand all there is to understand....If that is at all possible.
The point is though, they are making a worthwhile attempt and our knowledge is improving.

You should also remember andy, that if it wasn't for science [and evolution] you would still be swinging in the trees.

On Xmas day...It is a day among 365 other days in a year. It only has significance because some bloke born on that day, grew up proclaiming he was the Son of some omnipotent deity, and subsequently has religious significance among most western nations and many others besides, whom needing an explanation as to the wonders around them, accepted this bloke and his omnipotent Father as the origin of all that is.

Science though has pushed back that need in some of us, at least 13.8 billion years to a moment we call the Big Bang.
The evidence for this BB is so overwhelming that those that follow the bloke born on Xmas day, now accept that the BB did actually occur. [The Catholic Church] Unlike science though, in their productive efforts to keep on searching and researching for answers to questions that still exist, the Catholic church proclaim the BB as the work of the bloke they call God.
Although science as yet cannot explain the why or how of the BB, neither is there any evidence at all that the bloke called God was the casue of said BB.

 

Who are you addressing?

 

Pretty much disproven by:

Magical Realist and I have very little in common in our moral beliefs.

 

Paradoxes are a way to approximate 3-D thinking. Logical thinking is 2-D thinking based on cause (x) and effect (y). The paradox attempts to add that extra dimension beyond cause and effect needed to express 3-D (x,y,z). The paradox has two distinct eyes (this or that) thereby giving stereoscopic vision for 3-D.

Let give an example and solution. God is smaller than small yet larger than large. This paradox does not make sense with basic 2-D cause and effect. It needs a 3-D approach as a solution such as holographic slide where no matter how small you cut the slide the entire image appears. Trying to explain how a hologram works is not always easy, with esoteric thought an attempt explain that extra z dimension. It has to do with one light source that splits into two light sources slightly out of phase, creating inference patterns; two eyes.

Ironically, the age of reason slowed the brain down allowing anyone to participate. The old 3-D and esoteric was too fast and most people remained in the dark. By slowing 3-D down to 2-D, there is more ability for all to think.

 

We have no argument as my statement says humans.

The genocidal son murderer you are looking at is not human.

Not to cut Christianity any slack but we have to remember that they are not so immoral as to want to live under their God's law.

Muslims advocate for their version of God's law but the Christians, --- although dumbed down, --- are not that stupid.

Regards
DL

 

Not quite sure if I get this.

Biggest and smallest.

Here and not here.

Not here wins as God is never here. Right?

Regards
DL

 

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

 

Greatest I am,

Caught the first video, and got the gist.
Is this video how you define the character of God?

Is God mentioned as ''Omni-anything'' in the bible? Here are some descriptions from the Bible.
I choose the Bible because that is what that video was pertaining to (that an greek mythology).

Do you understand any of that?
Can you dechipher Omni-anything in there?
Here's some more...

Are these description made by people or are they scriptural.
If the former, so what? If the latter, let's look into it.

Oh! Scratch the above question, you answered it by accuse ''the bible authors'' of going overboard.
In that case can we look into it and see what you mean by ''went overboard''?

I'm not sure if they can not fathom anything of God, but let's see what you have.

I think you have this all wrong.
You're going off on a tangent, or so it seems.

Do you speak the truth?
If you do, then you'll know how it is someone else speaks the truth.
But I'm pretty sure that none of what you posted here is linked to any form of honest, what to speak of truth, but it remains to be seen.

jan.

 

Yes. I arguably do see some Omnis in some of those quotes.

It maters not as I am going with the mainstream dogma and traditions of God as a perfect God.

Regards
DL

 

So you are willfully being ignorant because you want to paint a picture to bolster your argument. Why?

jan.

 

If I was being willfully ignorant I would ignore your stupid remarks altogether.

I need nothing but the facts as written in the myths of the bible to show and have others know and see that the bible's genocidal son murderer is just that.

Regards
DL