Evidence God Exists: Part II

[Purple Rabbit]

You made the point in previous posts that God has a nature - a nature in which he cannot act against.
If God is described by his nature, he cannot prescribe things that are against his nature, and thus cannot also BE nature, nor can he be omnipotent, if by definition he cannot act against his own prescribed nature.

If he is bound to a specific set of guidelines, what is your account for that? Do you understand that if someone is constrained to a set of rules of operations, they necessarily couldn't have authored them in the case that a key attribute of that entity is immutability?

An unchanging God couldn't have "made" rules at one point or had another nature.

Good point. And it makes clear that these traditional god attributes can have an incapacitating effect. Humans can improve on themselves, god can't. Humans can change their view on things, god can't. Humans can resent their actions, god can't. And as this infallibility is at the core of what defines us, how can the traditional god claim to have made us into his image, to know us, to be able to fathom human feelings? The traditional god is a contradiction in itself, despite all the theology fallible human beings can come up with.