God and theists.

[Valyza1]

You can also do the same for real things.   How do you know which category God falls under?

How do you give real things whatever attributes you want?

Tell me how you can give the attribute of flight to a rock on the ground. 

By lying. You both are missing the point. I'm saying that if I'm lying about saying a rock can fly, or that you can drink water out of a computer, it doesn't say anything about whether or not the computer or the rock themselves are real or fantasy.
There's nothing about what the OP wrote which is trying to convince anyone that God exists. It appears just to be saying that IF God exists no one would able to know Him completely.

[Whateverist]

But if God is merely "something" then "God exists" becomes trivially true so long as one paper clip exists.

[brewer]

[edit]

By lying.  You both are missing the point.  I'm saying that if I'm lying about saying a rock can fly, or that you can drink water out of a computer, it doesn't say anything about whether or not the computer or the rock themselves  are real or fantasy.  
There's nothing about what the OP wrote which is trying to convince anyone that God exists.  It appears just to be saying that IF God exists no one would able to know Him completely.

bold mine

Why??? What do you mean by "know him completely"?

No one knows me completely but many know that I exist in reality, and I'm not a god. I would think that a being of this magnitude should be able to demonstrate it's existence. 

This "no one can know completely" sounds like another fantasy attribute. You set up the category of god and reality (How do you know which category God falls under?), get on with it.

Edit: Nobody know's it(god) at all. They only know what people say about it, god is man made.

[Harry Nevis]

duplicate

[Valyza1]

[edit]

By lying.  You both are missing the point.  I'm saying that if I'm lying about saying a rock can fly, or that you can drink water out of a computer, it doesn't say anything about whether or not the computer or the rock themselves  are real or fantasy.  
There's nothing about what the OP wrote which is trying to convince anyone that God exists.  It appears just to be saying that IF God exists no one would able to know Him completely.

bold mine

Why??? What do you mean by "know him completely"?

No one knows me completely but many know that I exist in reality, and I'm not a god. I would think that a being of this magnitude should be able to demonstrate it's existence. 

This "no one can know completely" sounds like another fantasy attribute. You set up the category of god and reality (How do you know which category God falls under?), get on with it.

Edit: Nobody know's it(god) at all. They only know what people say about it, god is man made.

First of all, I'm just interpreting what the OP is talking about it. That doesn't mean I'm claiming it as true.

Second of all, no one in this post is trying to suggest that God actually exists or that anything we're discussing points towards the existence of God.

Thirdly, it may well be that no one can know you completely. From what I can see of what the OP said, he's just saying the same thing would have to be true about God if He existed. I tend to agree with that, since all definitions of God I'm aware of hold that He's omniscient, which means all knowledge is part of God, and since no human being is omniscient, no human being could ever know God completely.

[brewer]

bold mine

Why??? What do you mean by "know him completely"?

No one knows me completely but many know that I exist in reality, and I'm not a god. I would think that a being of this magnitude should be able to demonstrate it's existence. 

This "no one can know completely" sounds like another fantasy attribute. You set up the category of god and reality (How do you know which category God falls under?), get on with it.

Edit: Nobody know's it(god) at all. They only know what people say about it, god is man made.

First of all, I'm just interpreting what the OP is talking about it.  That doesn't mean I'm claiming it as true.

Second of all, no one in this post is trying to suggest that God actually exists or that anything we're discussing points towards the existence of God.  

Thirdly, it may well be that no one can know you completely.  From what I can see of what the OP said, he's just saying the same thing would have to be true about God if He existed.  I tend to agree with that, since all definitions of God I'm aware of hold that He's omniscient, which means all knowledge is part of God, and since no human being is omniscient, no human being could ever know God completely.  

So, we return to what I originally posted: You can give a fantasy what ever descriptions and attributes you want to make it the most appealing.

Still a fantasy.

[Valyza1]

First of all, I'm just interpreting what the OP is talking about it.  That doesn't mean I'm claiming it as true.

Second of all, no one in this post is trying to suggest that God actually exists or that anything we're discussing points towards the existence of God.  

Thirdly, it may well be that no one can know you completely.  From what I can see of what the OP said, he's just saying the same thing would have to be true about God if He existed.  I tend to agree with that, since all definitions of God I'm aware of hold that He's omniscient, which means all knowledge is part of God, and since no human being is omniscient, no human being could ever know God completely.  

So, we return to what I originally posted: You can give a fantasy what ever descriptions and attributes you want to make it the most appealing.

Still a fantasy.

With which I agree. I was just making the point, in so many words, that it's irrelevant to the OP.

[vorlon13]

Conceding God has a weakness regarding iron chariots is pretty darn compelling!!

It would be a corollary to the "accountants always rejecting expense account claims that are even numbers" thing.  Admitting a specific fault lends all the rest of it an air of credibility you just can't get any other way.




of course, the iron thing does negate any and all claims regarding being 'all powerful', but presumably the followers are smart enough to never claim something as silly as Inerrancy of Scripture . . .

[WinterHold]

You have a point. Theists often say God is ineffable, and then proceed to eff all about him/her/them/it.

Ineffable is not how I would describe him; I rather suggest following the design and just leave it to that.
Ineffable shows up whenever God is planted into a humanoid form, represented by Reincarnation for example.

Though that there's a definition for dark matter because of its effects that can be seen without any doubt, pours totally as in example for my OP.

Valyza1

God can't be described completely, yes. Human attempts at description are just a way of trying to relate to God in order to exercise faith. That doesn't in and of itself make the attempt a mistake, it just makes the description necessarily inaccurate.

Of course it makes the attempt a mistake.

Building a skyscraper is impossible  if the bases are made out of paper. Air alone would take it down.
Also, imagining the number of lives wasted because of that paper-thin architecture is more evident.

Just like an infested crop. A virus. It infects the minds of many theists like famine.

Seeking him alone is not for me to judge, but writing whole religions describing him as a man, is a house of cards falling.

Brian37

You, "God cannot be discribed"........

BINGO, and that is the core of every God/god/s/deity/ super natural divine entity claim in human history.

People do make those attempts, and have formed all sorts of religions based on those claims. But "God" cannot be described in any pragmatic universal sense that can be neutrally tested and falsified and independently peer reviewed.

The rest of your post is simply another apology that all religions make, you just change the words to point to your pet claim.

Dark matter cannot be described:

The name refers to the fact that it does not emit or interact with electromagnetic radiation, such as light, and is thus invisible to the entire electromagnetic spectrum.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

If he cannot be measured or tested, then a book should be sent from the God, containing his description; or what is enough for us to know anyways.
Here is where I think religion shows itself: yes there are many religions; i.e claims.  So the religions can be tested on the other hand.

mh.brewer

You can give a fantasy what ever descriptions and attributes you want to make it the most appealing.

Still a fantasy.

Why assuming that it's fantasy, when the chapter of the universe is not even finished?

The universe is massive, our telescopes catch only a glimpse; in fact:

NEW YORK — All the stars, planets and galaxies that can be seen today make up just 4 percent of . The other 96 percent is made of stuff astronomers can't see, detect or even comprehend.

http://www.space.com/11642-dark-matter-d...panek.html

4% is not enough to conclude that a claim of a God is a "fantasy".
Rather; judging from the design around us seems like the most logical step. 

vorlon13

yet, an intriguing fantasy when they concede a specific allergy to chariots made of iron

Human imagination turned stone into Gods.
Some even ignored the design at hand and threw a claim that the universe is empty based on the discovery of 4%.

mediocrates

How do you give real things whatever attributes you want?  If I gave my computer the attributes of a glass of water I could drink it; that makes no sense because my computer is not a fantasy (at the moment    )

Ever heard how the North Korean local news describe Kim?
Or how dictators across history glorify themselves?

"History is written by the victors".

mh.brewer

Tell me how you can give the attribute of flight to a rock on the ground. 

No one, at any time, has been able to convince me that god(s) are any part of reality. If you think you have the ability to convince me, go for it fantasy boy.

But Ancient Egyptians appointed mythical superpowers to their kings and queens. 
Muslims today believe that Zam-Zam water is holy.

It's all about lying, believing the lie, and creating a context that turns the lie into a reality.

Brian37

And unfortunately this is where, not just the Christian, but Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists and Sikhs falsely accuse the atheist of hate.

The atheist is not saying hate all religious people. Most atheists I would consider sane, only say that to mean "you got sold it and you merely like it".

Evolution produces good people and bad people as individuals WORLDWIDE. Atheists simply don't think good and bad are a battle between a divine super hero vs a super natural ground troll.

We do say we hate the logic, but no, atheists don't hate every single religious person, their logic, sure, but not every single theist as an individual.

Religions vary; and here's where the person's logic comes in to validate the religion of choice.
It's all about hating the logic; not the human.

Valyza1

By lying. You both are missing the point. I'm saying that if I'm lying about saying a rock can fly, or that you can drink water out of a computer, it doesn't say anything about whether or not the computer or the rock themselves are real or fantasy. 

There's nothing about what the OP wrote which is trying to convince anyone that God exists. It appears just to be saying that IF God exists no one would able to know Him completely.

Lying is one of the earliest skills we ever learn. Each person has level of cunning dictated by their intelligence and experience in life; in the domain of a liar even rocks fly.

The contradiction is in choosing an affiliation or not even choosing, if one is a theist then the atheist is a liar; if one is an atheist then the theist is a liar; subconsciously or consciously.

To me it's a paradox; unless a frame of two sides was presented.

mh.brewer

bold mine

Why??? What do you mean by "know him completely"?

No one knows me completely but many know that I exist in reality, and I'm not a god. I would think that a being of this magnitude should be able to demonstrate it's existence. 

This "no one can know completely" sounds like another fantasy attribute. You set up the category of god and reality (How do you know which category God falls under?), get on with it.

Edit: Nobody know's it(god) at all. They only know what people say about it, god is man made.

The human mind has proved capacity of a Million GBs :

The human brain consists of about one billion neurons. Each neuron forms about 1,000 connections to other neurons, amounting to more than a trillion connections. If each neuron could only help store a single memory, running out of space would be a problem. You might have only a few gigabytes of storage space, similar to the space in an iPod or a USB flash drive. Yet neurons combine so that each one helps with many memories at a time, exponentially increasing the brain’s memory storage capacity to something closer to around 2.5 petabytes (or a million gigabytes). For comparison, if your brain worked like a digital video recorder in a television, 2.5 petabytes would be enough to hold three million hours of TV shows. You would have to leave the TV running continuously for more than 300 years to use up all that storage.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...-capacity/

God is bigger than that number.
In other words; our minds would melt if we even just saw him; understanding what he is fully is out of the scale of this life.

[Harry Nevis]

You have a point. Theists often say God is ineffable, and then proceed to eff all about him/her/them/it.

Ineffable is not how I would describe him; I rather suggest following the design and just leave it to that.
Ineffable shows up whenever God is planted into a humanoid form, represented by Reincarnation for example.

Though that there's a definition for dark matter because of its effects that can be seen without any doubt, pours totally as in example for my OP.

Valyza1

God can't be described completely, yes. Human attempts at description are just a way of trying to relate to God in order to exercise faith. That doesn't in and of itself make the attempt a mistake, it just makes the description necessarily inaccurate.

Of course it makes the attempt a mistake.

Building a skyscraper is impossible  if the bases are made out of paper. Air alone would take it down.
Also, imagining the number of lives wasted because of that paper-thin architecture is more evident.

Just like an infested crop. A virus. It infects the minds of many theists like famine.

Seeking him alone is not for me to judge, but writing whole religions describing him as a man, is a house of cards falling.

Brian37

You, "God cannot be discribed"........

BINGO, and that is the core of every God/god/s/deity/ super natural divine entity claim in human history.

People do make those attempts, and have formed all sorts of religions based on those claims. But "God" cannot be described in any pragmatic universal sense that can be neutrally tested and falsified and independently peer reviewed.

The rest of your post is simply another apology that all religions make, you just change the words to point to your pet claim.

Dark matter cannot be described:

The name refers to the fact that it does not emit or interact with electromagnetic radiation, such as light, and is thus invisible to the entire electromagnetic spectrum.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

If he cannot be measured or tested, then a book should be sent from the God, containing his description; or what is enough for us to know anyways.
Here is where I think religion shows itself: yes there are many religions; i.e claims.  So the religions can be tested on the other hand.

mh.brewer

You can give a fantasy what ever descriptions and attributes you want to make it the most appealing.

Still a fantasy.

Why assuming that it's fantasy, when the chapter of the universe is not even finished?

The universe is massive, our telescopes catch only a glimpse; in fact:

NEW YORK — All the stars, planets and galaxies that can be seen today make up just 4 percent of . The other 96 percent is made of stuff astronomers can't see, detect or even comprehend.

http://www.space.com/11642-dark-matter-d...panek.html

4% is not enough to conclude that a claim of a God is a "fantasy".
Rather; judging from the design around us seems like the most logical step. 

vorlon13

yet, an intriguing fantasy when they concede a specific allergy to chariots made of iron

Human imagination turned stone into Gods.
Some even ignored the design at hand and threw a claim that the universe is empty based on the discovery of 4%.

mediocrates

How do you give real things whatever attributes you want?  If I gave my computer the attributes of a glass of water I could drink it; that makes no sense because my computer is not a fantasy (at the moment    )

Ever heard how the North Korean local news describe Kim?
Or how dictators across history glorify themselves?

"History is written by the victors".

mh.brewer

Tell me how you can give the attribute of flight to a rock on the ground. 

No one, at any time, has been able to convince me that god(s) are any part of reality. If you think you have the ability to convince me, go for it fantasy boy.

But Ancient Egyptians appointed mythical superpowers to their kings and queens. 
Muslims today believe that Zam-Zam water is holy.

It's all about lying, believing the lie, and creating a context that turns the lie into a reality.

Brian37

And unfortunately this is where, not just the Christian, but Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists and Sikhs falsely accuse the atheist of hate.

The atheist is not saying hate all religious people. Most atheists I would consider sane, only say that to mean "you got sold it and you merely like it".

Evolution produces good people and bad people as individuals WORLDWIDE. Atheists simply don't think good and bad are a battle between a divine super hero vs a super natural ground troll.

We do say we hate the logic, but no, atheists don't hate every single religious person, their logic, sure, but not every single theist as an individual.

Religions vary; and here's where the person's logic comes in to validate the religion of choice.
It's all about hating the logic; not the human.

Valyza1

By lying. You both are missing the point. I'm saying that if I'm lying about saying a rock can fly, or that you can drink water out of a computer, it doesn't say anything about whether or not the computer or the rock themselves are real or fantasy. 

There's nothing about what the OP wrote which is trying to convince anyone that God exists. It appears just to be saying that IF God exists no one would able to know Him completely.

Lying is one of the earliest skills we ever learn. Each person has level of cunning dictated by their intelligence and experience in life; in the domain of a liar even rocks fly.

The contradiction is in choosing an affiliation or not even choosing, if one is a theist then the atheist is a liar; if one is an atheist then the theist is a liar; subconsciously or consciously.

To me it's a paradox; unless a frame of two sides was presented.

mh.brewer

bold mine

Why??? What do you mean by "know him completely"?

No one knows me completely but many know that I exist in reality, and I'm not a god. I would think that a being of this magnitude should be able to demonstrate it's existence. 

This "no one can know completely" sounds like another fantasy attribute. You set up the category of god and reality (How do you know which category God falls under?), get on with it.

Edit: Nobody know's it(god) at all. They only know what people say about it, god is man made.

The human mind has proved capacity of a Million GBs :

The human brain consists of about one billion neurons. Each neuron forms about 1,000 connections to other neurons, amounting to more than a trillion connections. If each neuron could only help store a single memory, running out of space would be a problem. You might have only a few gigabytes of storage space, similar to the space in an iPod or a USB flash drive. Yet neurons combine so that each one helps with many memories at a time, exponentially increasing the brain’s memory storage capacity to something closer to around 2.5 petabytes (or a million gigabytes). For comparison, if your brain worked like a digital video recorder in a television, 2.5 petabytes would be enough to hold three million hours of TV shows. You would have to leave the TV running continuously for more than 300 years to use up all that storage.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...-capacity/

God is bigger than that number.
In other words; our minds would melt if we even just saw him; understanding what he is fully is out of the scale of this life.

Jeez, what drivel.