Is God an incoherent concept (impossible?)?

[KWED]

How would someone go about proving God is nonexistent logically?

By showing that its nature or attributes are logically not possible. Obvs.

 

[Link]

By showing that its nature or attributes are logically not possible. Obvs.

But for all you know a Greatest being can be defined in a logically consistent manner. So if you attack people's ideas of God, you aren't refuting the possibility, just their ideas about God are incorrect.

 

[KWED]

Well, it can be demonstrated philosophically that God exists.

Wrong!
It has been philosophically argued that god exists, and those arguments have all been shown to be flawed. Not the same thing as "demonstrating".

 

[KWED]

If anyone really needs to, everything is debatable.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts - JP Moynihan

 

[KWED]

But for all you know a Greatest being can be defined in a logically consistent manner.

Possibly, but that is not the case with the gods in question.

So if you attack people's ideas of God, you aren't refuting the possibility, just their ideas about God are incorrect.

All we have are people's ideas of god. If those are incorrect, then god is incorrect.

 

[F1fan]

I am willing to bet that the response will be along the lines of... "God is teaching someone else a lesson/testing them. And the child ends up in heaven anyway. God is most compassionate."

That is typical of a type of response. I doubt the believer actually accepts this as a just process, but they are trapped by relying on religion to cope with trauma while that religion says God did not save their child. It's a huge dilemma with Western religion.

 

[Trailblazer]

All we have are people's ideas of god. If those are incorrect, then god is incorrect.

Conversely, if people's ideas of God are correct then God is correct?

 

[Trailblazer]

The problem you have here is that your version of god is described as "most merciful" and "most just".
"Most" means "highest attainable, unable to be more than".
However, it is patently obvious that Allah is not "as merciful as it is possible to be", nor "as just as it is possible to be".

The problem you have here is: how do you know what God is and isn't?
How do you know that God is not the most merciful and the most just that it is possible to be?

 

[Repox]

But for all you know a Greatest being can be defined in a logically consistent manner. So if you attack people's ideas of God, you aren't refuting the possibility, just their ideas about God are incorrect.

As you have pointed out, defining God is problem. I've had an experience which informs me about God. While sitting in my living room I had a vision of two shiny pearls next to one another. My conclusion is God is a duality. In heaven, there are two Gods in a sphere surrounded by angels. What I know is controversial. It doesn't fit with Christian beliefs. Mostly, the two Gods are not pleased with humans.

 

[Link]

As you have pointed out, defining God is problem. I've had an experience which informs me about God. While sitting in my living room I had a vision of two shiny pearls next to one another. My conclusion is God is a duality. In heaven, there are two Gods in a sphere surrounded by angels. What I know is controversial. It doesn't fit with Christian beliefs. Mostly, the two Gods are not pleased with humans.

That's very flimsy evidence to conclude two gods.

 

[Repox]

That's very flimsy evidence to conclude two gods.

Okay, in what ways must you argue?

That's very flimsy evidence to conclude two gods.

Okay, then, you must ignore much of the Old Testament

That's very flimsy evidence to conclude two gods.

Okay, then you must ignore Old Testament prophets. Most of them had revelations. Oh, yes, if you don't belief in revelations, most of the Bible is phony. Back to my revelation. What is wrong with the image of two pearls represent two Gods in a sphere in heaven? I think the problem is you believe in your Islamic God, which differs from the Christian God. If I'm wrong, explain.

 

[Repox]

Okay, in what ways must you argue?


Duality of God in Old Testament Verses.

The “Ark of the Covenant” is a symbol of God’s duality. The two cherubims on the top of the Ark represent the two Gods in a sphere. Apparently, the two Gods spoke to Moses through the Ark, as referenced in Numbers (7:89) when Moses went into the tent to speak to the Lord. “Then he heard the Voice speaking unto him from above the ark-cover that was upon the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim; and He spoke unto him.” The O.T. Lord may have communicated his duality to his chosen people, but nowhere in the Old Testament do we find them acknowledging the true meaning of the “Ark of the Covenant.” Jews regarded it as a holy relic, not a symbol of God’s duality. Instead, they applied other meanings: a symbol of worship for the presence of God, recognition of angels’ adoration of God, or a storage place for the Ten Commandments. Apparently, I am the only person on planet earth who proposes “God to be duality.”


It is difficult to imagine God giving his chosen people the “Ark of the Covenant” without telling them the meaning of the two cherubims on the top of the Ark.

I propose God spoke of Himself as a duality, but they ignored it, or rejected the interpretation. It is reasonable to assume what Moses heard between the two cherubim were two Gods speaking to him. It may have been similar to the two Gods in a sphere in heaven communicating with angels. However, according to Old Testament verses, there is no indication God’s chosen people believed the Ark was a symbol of God’s duality. I propose the Lord God told them the true meaning, but they refused to believe it.

In addition, we have, "When God spoke from between the Cherubs, there was a glowing cloud visible there" (Ex. 40:35); So, not only did God speak between the two Cherubs, he manifested his presence in a "glowing cloud” through the Ark of the Covenant. Even when God was in the world as Jesus, his followers refused to accept his duality. Instead, they declared him to be “the son of God” sent into the world to sacrifice for salvation of humankind. Again, humans prefer pagan gods rather than the real Lord God of the Old Testament. It caused a divide between Jesus and his chosen people.

Jews rejected Jesus as their Lord God and therefore further isolating the Lord God from his chosen people, which facilitated “son of God” myths. Jews, instead of including Jesus in stories about their Lord God, who was Jesus, excluded him from Jewish writings. However, knowing the history of Jewish persecution, it may have not been much different. It is a complicated story, but I believe Satan has fermented hatred for Jews, or Antisemitism since the beginning when God selected Abraham, and subsequently, others, to become his chosen people.

God’s Duality in Ezekiel’s Visions.

In Ezekiel’s description of living creatures (cherubim), with mention of “a wheel intersecting a wheel,” there is a reference to “God’s duality” The living creatures are angels of God. It is difficult to explain the symbolic meaning other than “duality of God.” Nevertheless, Ezekiel made no such association. Regarding a reason for OT authors not acknowledging God’s duality, perhaps, it was too unconventional. Whatever the reasons, apparently, humans have a difficult time conceiving God as a duality.

“As I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the ground beside each creature with its four faces. This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like chrysolite, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel.” (Ezekiel 1:15-16).

“I looked, and I saw beside the cherubim four wheels sparkled like chrysolite. As for their appearance, the four of them looked alike; each was like a wheel intersecting a wheel. As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the cherubim faced; the wheels did not turn about as the cherubim went.” (Ezekiel 10:9-11).

“When the cherubim moved, the wheels beside them moved; and when the cherubim spread their wings to rise from the ground, the wheels did not leave their side.” (Ezekiel 10:16)

“Then, the glory of the Lord departed from over the threshold of the temple and stopped above the cherubim. While I watched, the cherubim spread their wings and rose from the ground, and as they went, the wheels went with them. They stopped at the entrance to the east gate of the Lord’s house, and the glory of the God of Israel was above them.” (Ezekiel 10:18-19).

Interpretation: For a literal interpretation, it can’t get any better! I propose the “wheel intersecting a wheel” is a symbol of God’s duality. Each wheel being equal, and both wheels intersecting, it represents the spirit of the two Gods within each cherub (angel). Their bodies, full of eyes, represents complete awareness of angels for the spirit of the two Gods. However, there are no verses suggesting the intersecting wheels are symbols for God’s duality. Again, it is difficult to believe God hiding his duality from his chosen people. Again, freewill plays an important part in interpretation. One has an opportunity to accept or reject ideas related to God’s duality, or, regardless of truthfulness, to concoct pleasing stories, or stories to satisfy oneself.

God’s duality found in Revelation.

Except for Revelation, the New Testament is mostly in error because Jesus wasn’t the son of God, he was God. Revelation was given to John by God, but John interpreted God to be Jesus, the son of God. Therefore, you find scriptural falsifications in Revelation. However, based on the storyline about the life of Jesus, the essence of God’s story is preserved in Chapter 11 about the “two witnesses.” It is the same old problem; humans prefer pagan gods to the Old Testament Lord. Revelation 11 is a story about God when he was in the world as Jesus. The “two witnesses” are symbols of God’s duality. Christian scholars have proposed the two witnesses to be prophets of the Old Testament. For them, there are three primary theories about the identity of the two witnesses in Revelation: (1) Moses and Elijah, (2) Enoch and Elijah, and (3) two unknown believers whom God calls to be his witnesses in the end times. My interpretation of the two witnesses being God contradicts Christian interpretation, but it is a good storyline for the plight of God’s chosen people in a pagan world. The “lamb of God” in Revelation is a symbol for God’s chosen people (Jews). Much of Revelation is about the persecution of Jews. The first beast of Revelation is Christianity, the second beast is Islam, and these two beasts have, and will continue, to persecute Jews. If I had to select a religion compatible with my beliefs it would be Judaism. However, insofar as Judaism has become diversified, I am hard pressed to state how my revelations support any particular Jewish faction or set of religious beliefs.

The two Gods came into the world as Jesus, and, after their death, which is described in Revelation 11 about the “two witnesses,” they ascended back into heaven. Although “Jesus movement leaders” got it wrong by claiming Jesus was the son of God, there are NT verses which have duality meanings. Rather than making mention of two persons in one, gospel authors wrote about Jesus, the son, and their father, the Lord God. Again, making references to a human family with a father and a son. What happened to daughters? It would have been better if Jesus movement leaders had declared Jesus to be twins, instead of making father and son comments. However, we shouldn’t forget Jesus followers’ strong affinity to the Old Testament Lord God. So, Jesus followers would naturally assume, as they did, the son of God had a father, which was the Lord God from Jewish tradition.

I propose to analyze the “two witnesses” mentioned in Revelations 11 according to three assumptions.

1. Jesus was God. God is two persons in one, equally powerful and holy.
2. Revelation is both past and future.
3. John, the author, believed, as did others, Jesus was the son of God, not God. Moreover, none of the Jesus movement followers believed God was a duality. Thus, we would expect John's beliefs to influence his narrative. Even so, Revelation 11 about the two witnesses, may be interpreted as a story about a man with a dual identity (two witnesses).

 

[Repox]

That's very flimsy evidence to conclude two gods.

Duality in Old Testament Verses.

The “Ark of the Covenant” is a symbol of God’s duality. The two cherubims on the top of the Ark represent the two Gods in a sphere. Apparently, the two Gods spoke to Moses through the Ark, as referenced in Numbers (7:89) when Moses went into the tent to speak to the Lord. “Then he heard the Voice speaking unto him from above the ark-cover that was upon the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim; and He spoke unto him.” The O.T. Lord may have communicated his duality to his chosen people, but nowhere in the Old Testament do we find them acknowledging the true meaning of the “Ark of the Covenant.” Jews regarded it as a holy relic, not a symbol of God’s duality. Instead, they applied other meanings: a symbol of worship for the presence of God, recognition of angels’ adoration of God, or a storage place for the Ten Commandments.

 

[Link]

God is Fullest Amount in Life, Power, Glory, Light, and Honor, there can't be repeated or two. He is such that everything stems from him and is dependent on him.

 

[Repox]

God is Fullest Amount in Life, Power, Glory, Light, and Honor, there can't be repeated or two. He is such that everything stems from him and is dependent on him.

You are deciding what God is without firsthand knowledge, as if it were a good idea for God to be a singularity. I didn't suggest or say the two Gods repeat themselves, which would infer complete equality. I said there are two Gods in a sphere in heaven interacting.

Before the two Gods created angels, they were their own companions interacting with each other in heaven. It is difficult to imagine one God alone in heaven before angels. How would the one God know the meaning of companionship if it hadn't experienced it? Oh, I got it. The one God was alone and needed companionship. Well, if that is true, then God is imperfect! I thought God is perfect. If God isn't perfect, then, how did an imperfect God create angels, or anything? How did an imperfect God create a perfect heaven? Oh, I get it. Everything, including heaven, is imperfect. What a mess!

The essence of two Gods in a sphere is without human understanding. Without words or language, the two Gods exist together. We may apply words from all known languages to describe how two Gods would or wouldn't interact, but we can never know because we don't have their understanding. In short, in the supernatural world, the power of human words is limited.

In heaven, angels are mesmerized by the two Gods interacting with them. One God reacts in such and such a way, and an angel responds, then the other God responds to their interaction. And so it goes forever! Words are inadequate to describe heaven.

Then, there is the issue of duality in nature, which I posted about on the forum.

Why wouldn't God's creation reflect God's nature (duality)?

Duality is found everywhere in nature!

I'm enjoying our discussion. I admit it is a tough nut to crack. I'm convinced however, God is a duality. My vision about the two pearls was extremely revealing about God's duality. The two shiny pearls were of equal size, but they were also independent of other, but never alone. It must be the most puzzling mystery ever known to man.

Knowing God is a duality may partly explain the NT gospels. Unable to comprehend two entities in the one body of Jesus, NT gospel authors contrived Jesus, "son of God" stories. Then, instead of duality of God, we have father and son, or some variation thereof.

 

[Link]

God's Oneness is such that he misses nothing and all depend on him, that means there can't be two, or his amount would be divided and less than absolute amount possible which is such that all life stems from him and doesn't increase in amount of life, power, honor, etc.

 

[Repox]

God's Oneness is such that he misses nothing and all depend on him, that means there can't be two, or his amount would be divided and less than absolute amount possible which is such that all life stems from him and doesn't increase in amount of life, power, honor, etc.

Why can't two Gods in a sphere know everything and miss nothing? Your reluctance speaks volumes for others who also reject the idea. Humans don't like a God that doesn't conform to human criteria, which partly explains the abundance of pagan gods in our world.

I have accepted the fact that you'll never get it. Mostly, your problem is based on your insistence on defining a duality with human perception. Humans can never and will never understand the two Gods in sphere. It is a divine mystery. It's not that important, each person has their own life and freewill to determine their destiny. I've had revelations which put me on a different path. I think God revealed himself as a duality to his chosen people and gave them the Ark of The Covenant as a symbol of his duality, but to no avail. Nothing changes, humans continue to insist of human definitions for God and everything connected. Mostly, the problem for humans is they refuse to obey God's commandments. It has been that way since God decided to intervene in human affairs (Bible).

Here is an interesting idea for you to consider. Assuming there are angels in heaven in the presence of God, what would it be like. So, we have a single God interacting with angels, or just there to observe. I suppose a single face or personality of God would suffice. There are all of those verbs and adjectives to describe what angels observe. However, by assuming there are two Gods in a sphere interacting with angels, it is far more exciting and fruitful for interacting sequences. I am, however, as all people do, applying words to heavenly incidents, which doesn't capture what really happens in heaven. So, no one really knows about heaven unless they've been there, then, if they're there, they can't come back, unless it's a special event.

In short, I think my duality God is far more exciting than your boring monolithic God. Regardless, one of us must have it right. Your ideas are based on religious literature, my ideas, based on revelations, are critical of religious literation.

Then, there is the issue of eternity. Based on logic and the definition of eternity, God would precede all angels in heaven. So, we have one God alone in heaven. Wouldn't it get boring or monotonous. How does one God stay happy? I got it, the one God spins around and around to keep stimulated, the one God just stares off into heaven, or spins around in heaven. Oh, yes, the one God never gets lonely because it has never known companionship. So, why would the one God create angels if it has no reference for companionship?

Now, let's assume there are two Gods in sphere in heaven. Before they created angels, they were perfect companions in heaven. Then, they decided to create angels to share their holy interactions. So, they created thirteen angels and enjoyed interacting with them in a worship circle. Satan is the thirteenth angel. Then, Satan distracted the other angels away from God, and attacked them. Subsequently, God expelled Satan from heaven, creating the universe, and tossed Satan inside. I know these events occurred because I've had revelations about them. Therefore, I've a different perspective than you or most other believers.

Hey, I've got an interesting idea. The two Gods in heaven are happy, but in the world, they are miserable, they keep getting attacked by pagan worshipers because they refuse to change or conform to pagan ways.

Have a nice day.

 

[wellwisher]

May God forgive me, but I've decided for the sake of intellectual discussion and augmenting level of debate, to play devil's advocate.

Warning: I know how to refute the arguments I'm about to make.


1. God as one ultimate being is impossible, because you have to choose between traits (compassion vs justice), and you can't maximize in any.

2. Greatness has to be earned and gained, while by definition, God is eternal, and hence can't earn praise, honor, greatness but would have always had it. This shows by paradox God is impossible.

3. Virtues and morality is often situational and context related, courage and bravery doesn't make sense for eternal all powerful Deit(y)(ies), and so most virtues can't stem from God's application of them, and God by definition has to have all virtues or would not be God.

One analogous way to look at the concept of God is to picture an alien from another galaxy who is a million years ahead of humans in terms of evolution and technology. This is way short of God, but it can get the point across. We would have no clue of their capacities, as lifeforms.Their technology would totally baffle human science. To prevent the earthlings from freaking out and constantly being afraid and defensive, they may need to dumb down, in form and capacity so humans feel more comfortable. But their true essence would still be hard to understand by those who can accept them as they are.

Obviously this alien being would not have the technology to create a new universe. This alien being would himself be many steps away and would see God as far beyond themselves, as humans see the alien. It is not that God is unknowable but rather we can only know what were are allowed to see and what we are able to understand.

 

[Repox]

One analogous way to look at the concept of God is to picture an alien from another galaxy who is a million years ahead of humans in terms of evolution and technology. This is way short of God, but it can get the point across. We would have no clue of their capacities, as lifeforms.Their technology would totally baffle human science. To prevent the earthlings from freaking out and constantly being afraid and defensive, they may need to dumb down, in form and capacity so humans feel more comfortable. But their true essence would still be hard to understand by those who can accept them as they are.

Obviously this alien being would not have the technology to create a new universe. This alien being would himself be many steps away and would see God as far beyond themselves, as humans see the alien. It is not that God is unknowable but rather we can only know what were are allowed to see and what we are able to understand.

I like your analogy; it gets to the heart of the matter. It is a no win contest. I have religious ideas from revelations, others may agree or not, but, when my ideas conflict, I have little or no defense. In particular, my idea of God's duality isn't found in religious literature. I have an argument for God's duality, but it can be disputed, as shown. Yes, the idea of one God is far more appealing, but it may not be correct. I claim there is one God, but its split into two parts. In heaven there are two Gods in a sphere. No matter how you spin it, it is difficult to comprehend. Human logic shouldn't be a prerequisite for understanding God. Why would the creator of everything be subject to human understanding?

 

[ppp]

But for all you know a Greatest being can be defined in a logically consistent manner. So if you attack people's ideas of God, you aren't refuting the possibility, just their ideas about God are incorrect.

Suppose that you can define a god in a logically consistent manner...then what? Merely defining it is not sufficient to conclude that the defined thing exists.