Why is God Unknowable? (experience, theist, agnostic, point of view, verse)

[Jaiket]

A strong agnostic would say that God is inhernetly unknowable, right?

Why?

[Willamena]

That god is unknowable is a belief that can be derived from many ideas. Some offer up lack of verifiable evidence as the basis of their belief. Still others say that spirit is immaterial, and therefore God, as Spirit, is also immaterial.

The wording for my own justification is in flux at the moment, based on new information offered by doppleganger on his blog that must be thought through. I'll let you know when I sort it out.

[PureX]

I think it falls to our definition of what it means to "know" something. If to "know" something means to have direct experience of it, then we can know God. But if to know something means to have direct objective experience of something, then we can't know God because God is not an objective phenomena.

"God" is an idea. Can we "know" an idea, non-objectively? Can we experience an idea, non-objectively? The answer to these questions are different for different people. Some of us believe we can, and some of us don't.

Because these are basically subjective/objective questions, the answers are subjective/objective as well.

[Jaiket]

Originally Posted by PureX

we can't know God because God is not an objective phenomena.

No?

Originally Posted by =Purex

"God" is an idea.

If God is an entity/being, and not simply an idea, then we could know God objectively?

[PureX]

Originally Posted by Jaiket

No?

If God is an entity/being, and not simply an idea, then we could know God objectively?

You're confusing existence with knowledge. All sorts of things may or may not exist. But we can only know them through our experience of them. Does this experience need to be objective experience? Well, that's the question. Now, who has the answer besides each of us answering for ourselves? No one.

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by PureX

You're confusing existence with knowledge. All sorts of things may or may not exist. But we can only know them through our experience of them. Does this experience need to be objective experience? Well, that's the question. Now, who has the answer besides each of us answering for ourselves? No one.

Sounds like you're confusing subjective for relative.

[Guitar's Cry]

I think this is an epistomological problem that goes to whether or not we as individuals can have enough knowledge of the Universe to say one way or the other.

I've heard agnostics who have said that they believe there must be a higher power, but there is simply not enough information to say one way or another what that higher power is. My point of view is that there may be one - I've seen no evidence that there isn't or there is (unless we wish to count the existence of life as such, but that rarely flies). I simply choose to believe in a kind of panentheistic God because it makes sense to me.

[Truls]

God is unknowable just by the definition of himself. An omnipotent being or creator of infinite power. Now why would an omnipotent being reveal himself?

If we're talking about an abrahamic God then he must be omniscient and thus know the results of his actions. Therefore he would know the chaos, violence, and conflict that his book would cause. I don't believe any benevolent God would do that. A truly benevolent God would subtly guide good will and cheer without introducing himself and ruining his goal.

And if it was some kind of evil God then they would not reveal themselves as it would hinder their influence on humanity. So an evil God would work in the shadows to change and guide life.

Thus there is the deist god who I believe is the most likely, but by definition he is a God who wouldn't show himself. Thus he will never be proven.

So no matter how you spin it God wouldn't reveal himself either due to his own character or by definition. A good God wouldn't cause chaos, an evil God would cause more chaos by remaining hidden, and a neutral God would remain neutral.