God(s)

[Eodnhoj7]

Argument:

1. All in All as All

2. the particulate as a general and the general as a particulate,

3. pure being yet intrinsically empty as beyond being,

4. unnecessary necessity existing as necessity veiled within the "no-thingness" of the faculties of reason, intuition and action,

5. uncaused cause,

6. self assuming and assumed as the assumption of assumptions,

7. the curvature of space as an omnipresent contextual loop as infinitely repeated void birthing form in all variety through perpetual generation,

8. stillness in the detachment of extremes embodied within pure focus under meditative discipline

9. The order the good and the chaos of the wicked

10. Spontaneous order

11. Infinite mercy through the ruthlessness of ruthlessness

12. The Good in which no evil is present for all darkness is as light.

13. The freedom of the just and the condemnation of the unjust favoring neither the good nor evil man.

14. Awareness of all thought and its simplicity, underlying all complexity

15. Progressive reciprocation as reciprocal progression

16. That which loves love and hates hatred embodying self sacrifice as its identity

17. The imagination of images, yet no image and without illusion

18. The trifold one expressed fourfold,

19. Both defined and undefined as the assumption of paradox projecting paradox, the measurement of paradoxes yet rational and beyond reason.

20. The underlying variable of all variables

21. Passionless passion, branching which gives perpetual fruits yet holds no fruit.

22. The mythos as the grounds for logic, the archetypal tree of analysis which underlies the mythos.

23. Synthetic in nature expressed by a cross and sphere, yet relative to context as absolute.

Discuss.

[surreptitious57]

An actual God would require a minimum of two characteristics - they must be capable of existence [ so not metaphysical ]
and possess at least one ability that is significantly superior to that of humans or any other member of the animal kingdom

[Eodnhoj7]

An actual God would require a minimum of two characteristics - they must be capable of existence [ so not metaphysical ]
and possess at least one ability that is significantly superior to that of humans or any other member of the animal kingdom

1. The God would have to be both "physical" and "metaphysical", one or the other is a lack of omnipresence.

2. And what would that ability be?

[surreptitious57]

The God would have to be both physical and metaphysical - one or the other is a lack of omnipresence

There is no requirement for God to be metaphysical or omnipresent - that is simply how human beings choose to describe him
God could just be a physical being with superhuman strength and intelligence with zero metaphysical or omipresent capability

[commonsense]

Argument:

1. All in All as All

2. the particulate as a general and the general as a particulate,

3. pure being yet intrinsically empty as beyond being,

4. unnecessary necessity existing as necessity veiled within the "no-thingness" of the faculties of reason, intuition and action,

5. uncaused cause,

6. self assuming and assumed as the assumption of assumptions,

7. the curvature of space as an omnipresent contextual loop as infinitely repeated void birthing form in all variety through perpetual generation,

8. stillness in the detachment of extremes embodied within pure focus under meditative discipline

9. The order the good and the chaos of the wicked

10. Spontaneous order

11. Infinite mercy through the ruthlessness of ruthlessness

12. The Good in which no evil is present for all darkness is as light.

13. The freedom of the just and the condemnation of the unjust favoring neither the good nor evil man.

14. Awareness of all thought and its simplicity, underlying all complexity

15. Progressive reciprocation as reciprocal progression

16. That which loves love and hates hatred embodying self sacrifice as its identity

17. The imagination of images, yet no image and without illusion

18. The trifold one expressed fourfold,

19. Both defined and undefined as the assumption of paradox projecting paradox, the measurement of paradoxes yet rational and beyond reason.

20. The underlying variable of all variables

21. Passionless passion, branching which gives perpetual fruits yet holds no fruit.

22. The mythos as the grounds for logic, the archetypal tree of analysis which underlies the mythos.

23. Synthetic in nature expressed by a cross and sphere, yet relative to context as absolute.

Discuss.

24. Discussion as discourse and discourse as knowledge.

25. Sense is knowledge and knowledge is nonsense.

26. Argument as agreement and agreement as knowledge.

27. Blindness is vision and knowledge is visible.

28. Visible is physical yet metaphysical.

29. Knowledge is visible, invisible is metaphysical.

30. Taste and smell can be visible and metaphysical, sound is neither metaphorical and elusive.

31. If knowledge is Truth then knowledgeable is true.

33. If knowledge is Truth then knowledge is all wrong.

34. If knowledge can be planted in a person’s mind then it will need no seeds to grow.

35. If a mind could be mined, the seeds of knowledge will be visible even in the darkness.

36. Knowledge is peace, knowledge is force.

37. Knowledge is love, love is all you need.

38. Knowing the Light is to have darkness.

39. The knowable cannot be known without knowledge of the knowledgeable.

40. A known light can see the invisible darkness.

41. Whatsoever shall be knowledge shall be known to the most knowledgeable.

47. In the rubric of whatsoever there can be no visible invisibility or any senseless nonsense.

Thoughts?

[Eodnhoj7]

Argument:

1. All in All as All

2. the particulate as a general and the general as a particulate,

3. pure being yet intrinsically empty as beyond being,

4. unnecessary necessity existing as necessity veiled within the "no-thingness" of the faculties of reason, intuition and action,

5. uncaused cause,

6. self assuming and assumed as the assumption of assumptions,

7. the curvature of space as an omnipresent contextual loop as infinitely repeated void birthing form in all variety through perpetual generation,

8. stillness in the detachment of extremes embodied within pure focus under meditative discipline

9. The order the good and the chaos of the wicked

10. Spontaneous order

11. Infinite mercy through the ruthlessness of ruthlessness

12. The Good in which no evil is present for all darkness is as light.

13. The freedom of the just and the condemnation of the unjust favoring neither the good nor evil man.

14. Awareness of all thought and its simplicity, underlying all complexity

15. Progressive reciprocation as reciprocal progression

16. That which loves love and hates hatred embodying self sacrifice as its identity

17. The imagination of images, yet no image and without illusion

18. The trifold one expressed fourfold,

19. Both defined and undefined as the assumption of paradox projecting paradox, the measurement of paradoxes yet rational and beyond reason.

20. The underlying variable of all variables

21. Passionless passion, branching which gives perpetual fruits yet holds no fruit.

22. The mythos as the grounds for logic, the archetypal tree of analysis which underlies the mythos.

23. Synthetic in nature expressed by a cross and sphere, yet relative to context as absolute.

Discuss.

24. Discussion as discourse and discourse as knowledge.

25. Sense is knowledge and knowledge is nonsense.

26. Argument as agreement and agreement as knowledge.

27. Blindness is vision and knowledge is visible.

28. Visible is physical yet metaphysical.

29. Knowledge is visible, invisible is metaphysical.

30. Taste and smell can be visible and metaphysical, sound is neither metaphorical and elusive.

31. If knowledge is Truth then knowledgeable is true.

33. If knowledge is Truth then knowledge is all wrong.

34. If knowledge can be planted in a person’s mind then it will need no seeds to grow.

35. If a mind could be mined, the seeds of knowledge will be visible even in the darkness.

36. Knowledge is peace, knowledge is force.

37. Knowledge is love, love is all you need.

38. Knowing the Light is to have darkness.

39. The knowable cannot be known without knowledge of the knowledgeable.

40. A known light can see the invisible darkness.

41. Whatsoever shall be knowledge shall be known to the most knowledgeable.

47. In the rubric of whatsoever there can be no visible invisibility or any senseless nonsense.

Thoughts?

Yeah, the key premise is empiricism...but there is not empirical proof empiricism alone works.

Second to sense something is the ability to assume it. For example to see is to be imprinted with an image/light waves, this is assumptive by nature.

To be imprinted some sense of formlessness is required. Sand must have no form to be imprinted by an object. If assuming is required, but assuming is formless, and what you deem as true is that which cam be sensed...how can you assume anything? How can you observe a sensory pattern?

[jayjacobus]

God is defined by people and the definition goes from 0 to extremely complex.

In each person's mind the definitions are not fixed but changeable. The source of definitions come from texts or come from reasoning. But there is not one single definition or even agreed on premises. But the logic depends on many conflicting premises and selective logic

God as an experience is from individuals with many different perceptions or no perceptions at all. The definitions are presumptive, not so much assumptions. The definitions of God are speculative.

People, who claim to have experienced God, are interpreting mental phenomenon that, in their minds, exceed human thought. Yet, the spiritual experiences have something in common: they have had a profound effect on the person and they are extraordinary perceptions/ happenings.

One cannot find God in tests or logic. One must be open to the possibility of extraordinary thinking and never fully comprehend where that thinking comes from. Faith comes from within and develops over time. For some people, God is the instigator of development. For other people, their own creativity is the instigator.

I hope that my faith continues to grow and so I am not troubled by my uncertainties which, at this moment, are not crucial.


.

[Eodnhoj7]

God is defined by people and the definition goes from 0 to extremely complex.

In each person's mind the definitions are not fixed but changeable. The source of definitions come from texts or come from reasoning. But there is not one single definition or even agreed on premises. But the logic depends on many conflicting premises and selective logic

God as an experience is from individuals with many different perceptions or no perceptions at all. The definitions are presumptive, not so much assumptions. The definitions of God are speculative.

People, who claim to have experienced God, are interpreting mental phenomenon that, in their minds, exceed human thought. Yet, the spiritual experiences have something in common: they have had a profound effect on the person and they are extraordinary perceptions/ happenings.

One cannot find God in tests or logic. One must be open to the possibility of extraordinary thinking and never fully comprehend where that thinking comes from. Faith comes from within and develops over time. For some people, God is the instigator of development. For other people, their own creativity is the instigator.

I hope that my faith continues to grow and so I am not troubled by my uncertainties which, at this moment, are not crucial.


.

Of God is defined by people, and these people are variations of God, then is God defining himself through people and people through God?

Is definition of the various sorts of identity divine reason?

[Impenitent]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Br2_qukNKs

The Godz of Rock and Roll Machine...

-Imp

[Dontaskme]

Being aware of being aware is what God is.

God is an immanent transcendant God.
.

[jayjacobus]

God is defined by people and the definition goes from 0 to extremely complex.

In each person's mind the definitions are not fixed but changeable. The source of definitions come from texts or come from reasoning. But there is not one single definition or even agreed on premises. But the logic depends on many conflicting premises and selective logic

God as an experience is from individuals with many different perceptions or no perceptions at all. The definitions are presumptive, not so much assumptions. The definitions of God are speculative.

People, who claim to have experienced God, are interpreting mental phenomenon that, in their minds, exceed human thought. Yet, the spiritual experiences have something in common: they have had a profound effect on the person and they are extraordinary perceptions/ happenings.

One cannot find God in tests or logic. One must be open to the possibility of extraordinary thinking and never fully comprehend where that thinking comes from. Faith comes from within and develops over time. For some people, God is the instigator of development. For other people, their own creativity is the instigator.

I hope that my faith continues to grow and so I am not troubled by my uncertainties which, at this moment, are not crucial.


.

Of God is defined by people, and these people are variations of God, then is God defining himself through people and people through God?

Is definition of the various sorts of identity divine reason?

We don't know but we do know that all thoughts of God comes from human reasoning along with subjective experiences. Ancient humans had a far different perspective of God. God was the best science at one time. Now God is less scientific and more subjective.

If I eliminate my subjectivity, I am faced with a dilemma: I have had experiences but the source of the experience could be within or not within.

[commonsense]

If god is defined by people, by their thoughts and experiences, then what more is there to say?

[attofishpi]

If god is defined by people, by their thoughts and experiences, then what more is there to say?

That atheists are deluded?

[commonsense]

If god is defined by people, by their thoughts and experiences, then what more is there to say?

That atheists are deluded?

Experiences vary.

[Eodnhoj7]

If god is defined by people, by their thoughts and experiences, then what more is there to say?

Of God is defined by people, and people are images (variations) of God, then people defining God is God defining himself within time and space.