(June 29, 2016 at 2:06 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:(June 29, 2016 at 11:02 am)Ayen Wrote: Just a roundabout way of saying he's incomprehensible.
Try going to the people you love deeply and see how each reacts when you tell him or her how you define them. Usually people don't like being put in a box. Think for a moment how unreasonable it is to demand definition of the infinite I AM that encompasses who He is in His infinite fullness when you cannot even do that for finite human beings.
You will always notice that proofs of existence generally follow the negative way. Conceptions of divine attributes are formed by reflecting on what God is not. But yes, God is incomprehensible but that does not mean we cannot know some things about Him. Ultimately the relationship between God and an individual is personal not purely intellectual.
My guess is that most skeptics want believers to present them with a box to define God so they can argue about the box and avoid trying to actually reflect on what God might be.
I didn't see anything in that post that prove my interpretation of the aforementioned post wrong. There's nothing insulting about summarizing what's being said so others can understand it.
The definition of 'incomprehensible' means exactly that you cannot know some things about him, or anything. That's why it's brought up in almost every single conversation on the matter.
Skeptics want evidence because if you remove the need for evidence anything can be true.