@John 6IX Breezy
Thank you for defining what these terms mean to you. It adds some clarity to where you're coming from and where we diverge. It's an odd point I get to when I try to hammer down my thoughts and whether I agree or disagree on "God is not omni- ; he's just the most powerful because that's what we can comprehend." I'm not going to argue for God to do the impossible like making a square circle(what?).
I guess this is the contradiction that I fully acknowledge within my processes and I don't expect it's a knot anyone can untie or correct because it keeps looping around for me.
• I define God as a creator being with a mastery and control over reality and matter to the point where everything could be stopped or changed by its will.
• I will not accept a lesser definition of God because of the higher status inherent in "God". If it's not powerful enough to do the omni- stuff(knowing my thoughts, knowing my future, able to heal or undo me at a wave) then it's just a tiger. A tiger with fangs that seem impossible or super powered but still beholden to the same laws of reality that I am. An alien that created Adam in a test tube and dropped his essence here is not a God. A being that can read my mind or see my future but cannot bend reality is not God.
• Such a powerful being is the only thing worthy of worship. And the Bible outlines several points where worship(even an acknowledgement of his existence through prayer or faith) is commanded of me, humanity.
• I need proof. Physical, tangible, reproducable, witnessed proof.
• There is a personalized element to proving its existence. If I can touch it, it loses the awe it once contained. And the demand of worship while also bowing to my need for proof clashes. It is a submissive gesture to placate me with an illustration. I lose a few notches of respect for something so powerful lowering themselves to entertain my, admitted, fickle needs.
• If it remains unproven because I am small and my tiny brain demands things I don't even want, then I assume worship, even passive acknowledgement of its existence is not important to it and thus not required of me.
• If it is so large and awesome that it doesn't even acknowledge me and I can't comprehend it, then what does faith or belief matter?
See? I get contact and it negates God and I see it only as a petty being that NEEDS me for some reason. Who's master of who, here? But without it, I'm not going to be gaslit by its messengers(priests, preachers, missionaries, etc.) into putting time and energy into a one-sided relationship where half the time it lets me suffer for my own good. What worth is a friend in God, really? But if nothing is proven then nothing can be demanded of me; sorry, God's just not trying hard enough.
It loops.
Thank you for defining what these terms mean to you. It adds some clarity to where you're coming from and where we diverge. It's an odd point I get to when I try to hammer down my thoughts and whether I agree or disagree on "God is not omni- ; he's just the most powerful because that's what we can comprehend." I'm not going to argue for God to do the impossible like making a square circle(what?).
I guess this is the contradiction that I fully acknowledge within my processes and I don't expect it's a knot anyone can untie or correct because it keeps looping around for me.
• I define God as a creator being with a mastery and control over reality and matter to the point where everything could be stopped or changed by its will.
• I will not accept a lesser definition of God because of the higher status inherent in "God". If it's not powerful enough to do the omni- stuff(knowing my thoughts, knowing my future, able to heal or undo me at a wave) then it's just a tiger. A tiger with fangs that seem impossible or super powered but still beholden to the same laws of reality that I am. An alien that created Adam in a test tube and dropped his essence here is not a God. A being that can read my mind or see my future but cannot bend reality is not God.
• Such a powerful being is the only thing worthy of worship. And the Bible outlines several points where worship(even an acknowledgement of his existence through prayer or faith) is commanded of me, humanity.
• I need proof. Physical, tangible, reproducable, witnessed proof.
• There is a personalized element to proving its existence. If I can touch it, it loses the awe it once contained. And the demand of worship while also bowing to my need for proof clashes. It is a submissive gesture to placate me with an illustration. I lose a few notches of respect for something so powerful lowering themselves to entertain my, admitted, fickle needs.
• If it remains unproven because I am small and my tiny brain demands things I don't even want, then I assume worship, even passive acknowledgement of its existence is not important to it and thus not required of me.
• If it is so large and awesome that it doesn't even acknowledge me and I can't comprehend it, then what does faith or belief matter?
See? I get contact and it negates God and I see it only as a petty being that NEEDS me for some reason. Who's master of who, here? But without it, I'm not going to be gaslit by its messengers(priests, preachers, missionaries, etc.) into putting time and energy into a one-sided relationship where half the time it lets me suffer for my own good. What worth is a friend in God, really? But if nothing is proven then nothing can be demanded of me; sorry, God's just not trying hard enough.
It loops.
