What is the concept of God philosophically?

[Lacewing]

Re: God of the Bible

A transcendent desert storm god humanistically recast temporarily as a humble man of the people, to show us the way of sacrificial inclusion.

Great description.

[Age]

It is because of posts like the last one, here, why human beings, back in the days when this was being written, never moved forward, and just remained 'stuck' in and with 'their own beliefs'.

[ThinkOfOne]

Who and what the word God has been referring to, since that word's inception, is very, very basic, and very, very easy and simple to comprehend, and understand.

But, for any one with a contrary belief, then obviously while they have and maintain 'that belief' they will just not be able to comprehend and understand, full stop. Let alone comprehend and understand simply and easily.

And, as always, if any one, here, has the courage to challenge me over this, or just has the curiosity and interest to question me over this, then allow 'us' to have a discussion.

Until then, as can be seen, here, 'these posters' will just keep providing their own personal assumptions and beliefs, no matter how Truly False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect they really are. What will also become blatantly obvious is that when they are questioned and/or challenged over their assumptions, beliefs, and claims, here, by me, they on just about all occasions falter and fail completely.

And thus how one knows when it has the actual True, Right, Accurate, and Correct answers, in Life.

Which is why 'I' challenge any of 'you', here, to challenge 'Me', HERE.

Consider yourself challenged.

[Gary Childress]

The belief in demons opposing God is a deviation from monotheism.
For there is nothing that is not subordinate to God.

Demons are what some humans use to explain evil in the world so that they can call God benevolent. Seems to me that if there is a single creator or central supreme being, then it's responsible for everything, good and bad.

I've met Christians who refer to "the enemy". "The enemy" deliberately temps them away from God or brings miserable events into their lives or makes them feel shame. "The enemy" is some sentient agent that arranges traps and all sorts of diabolical ways of making us miserable, according to them. When talking about transcendent, outside-of-this-world stuff, I guess anyone can say pretty much anything they want, since no one can verify it one way or the other.

It is reasonable that if I posit a person Who is the force for Good then I must posit a person who is the force for Evil,

If you say so.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

Re: God of the Bible

A transcendent desert storm god humanistically recast temporarily as a humble man of the people, to show us the way of sacrificial inclusion.

Great description.

Glad you like it!

[Age]

Who and what the word God has been referring to, since that word's inception, is very, very basic, and very, very easy and simple to comprehend, and understand.

But, for any one with a contrary belief, then obviously while they have and maintain 'that belief' they will just not be able to comprehend and understand, full stop. Let alone comprehend and understand simply and easily.

And, as always, if any one, here, has the courage to challenge me over this, or just has the curiosity and interest to question me over this, then allow 'us' to have a discussion.

Until then, as can be seen, here, 'these posters' will just keep providing their own personal assumptions and beliefs, no matter how Truly False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect they really are. What will also become blatantly obvious is that when they are questioned and/or challenged over their assumptions, beliefs, and claims, here, by me, they on just about all occasions falter and fail completely.

And thus how one knows when it has the actual True, Right, Accurate, and Correct answers, in Life.

Which is why 'I' challenge any of 'you', here, to challenge 'Me', HERE.

Consider yourself challenged.

Well I have already expressed who and what the God word refers to, exactly, a few times throughout this forum, so until those definitions are questioned, countered, and/or refuted, then those definitions, literally, remain unchallenged.

[ThinkOfOne]

Who and what the word God has been referring to, since that word's inception, is very, very basic, and very, very easy and simple to comprehend, and understand.

But, for any one with a contrary belief, then obviously while they have and maintain 'that belief' they will just not be able to comprehend and understand, full stop. Let alone comprehend and understand simply and easily.

And, as always, if any one, here, has the courage to challenge me over this, or just has the curiosity and interest to question me over this, then allow 'us' to have a discussion.

Until then, as can be seen, here, 'these posters' will just keep providing their own personal assumptions and beliefs, no matter how Truly False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect they really are. What will also become blatantly obvious is that when they are questioned and/or challenged over their assumptions, beliefs, and claims, here, by me, they on just about all occasions falter and fail completely.

And thus how one knows when it has the actual True, Right, Accurate, and Correct answers, in Life.

Which is why 'I' challenge any of 'you', here, to challenge 'Me', HERE.

Consider yourself challenged.

Well I have already expressed who and what the God word refers to, exactly, a few times throughout this forum, so until those definitions are questioned, countered, and/or refuted, then those definitions, literally, remain unchallenged.

Why not simply post your definitions here?

[Age]

Consider yourself challenged.

Well I have already expressed who and what the God word refers to, exactly, a few times throughout this forum, so until those definitions are questioned, countered, and/or refuted, then those definitions, literally, remain unchallenged.

Why not simply post your definitions here?

Because no one has asked me to.

In other words absolutely no one, here, has shown any curiosity nor any interest, here.

Which, once again, is why you people, here, are not learning any thing more nor new, here.

Now, if you or anyone else would like me to just simply provide my definitions, here, then just simply show some interest by just simply asking me to.

[Age]

The word God refers to two things.

1. The visible Universe, Itself, which is the Creator of all things.

2. The invisible Mind, Itself, which can also a Creator in and of Itself.

Now, the Mind is also omniscient, while the Universe, Itself, is omnipotent. While both the Mind and the Universe are omnipresent, as there is actually only One Mind, and, One Universe, which both can be said to be infinite and eternal.

Again, and as always, I am absolutely ready, willing, and wanting to be questioned and/or challenged, in part or wholly, over these claims of mine, here, by absolutely any one at all.

[ThinkOfOne]

The word God refers to two things.

1. The visible Universe, Itself, which is the Creator of all things.

2. The invisible Mind, Itself, which can also a Creator in and of Itself.

Now, the Mind is also omniscient, while the Universe, Itself, is omnipotent. While both the Mind and the Universe are omnipresent, as there is actually only One Mind, and, One Universe, which both can be said to be infinite and eternal.

Again, and as always, I am absolutely ready, willing, and wanting to be questioned and/or challenged, in part or wholly, over these claims of mine, here, by absolutely any one at all.

How does a given individual fit into this?

What is required of a given individual? Toward what end?

[Age]

The word God refers to two things.

1. The visible Universe, Itself, which is the Creator of all things.

2. The invisible Mind, Itself, which can also a Creator in and of Itself.

Now, the Mind is also omniscient, while the Universe, Itself, is omnipotent. While both the Mind and the Universe are omnipresent, as there is actually only One Mind, and, One Universe, which both can be said to be infinite and eternal.

Again, and as always, I am absolutely ready, willing, and wanting to be questioned and/or challenged, in part or wholly, over these claims of mine, here, by absolutely any one at all.

How does a given individual fit into this?

I do not know, because I do not know what the words 'given individual' are even referring to, yet.

So, what even is a so-called 'given individual', exactly, anyway?

What is required of a given individual? Toward what end?

Depending on what a 'given individual' is, exactly, will determine if it is required to do any thing or not. But, as far as i am 'currently' aware there is no thing that is actually 'required' to do absolutely any thing at all.

And, 'what end', here, is always 'the, same shared, end' that every human being wants and desires at some point in 'their life'.

[ThinkOfOne]

The word God refers to two things.

1. The visible Universe, Itself, which is the Creator of all things.

2. The invisible Mind, Itself, which can also a Creator in and of Itself.

Now, the Mind is also omniscient, while the Universe, Itself, is omnipotent. While both the Mind and the Universe are omnipresent, as there is actually only One Mind, and, One Universe, which both can be said to be infinite and eternal.

Again, and as always, I am absolutely ready, willing, and wanting to be questioned and/or challenged, in part or wholly, over these claims of mine, here, by absolutely any one at all.

How does a given individual fit into this?

I do not know, because I do not know what the words 'given individual' are even referring to, yet.

So, what even is a so-called 'given individual', exactly, anyway?

What is required of a given individual? Toward what end?

Depending on what a 'given individual' is, exactly, will determine if it is required to do any thing or not. But, as far as i am 'currently' aware there is no thing that is actually 'required' to do absolutely any thing at all.

And, 'what end', here, is always 'the, same shared, end' that every human being wants and desires at some point in 'their life'.

The term "given individual" is commonly used in hypotheticals. You've never come across it before?

The phrase "a given individual" is grammatically correct and commonly used in written English.
It refers to a specific person in a particular context or situation. Example: "A given individual's response to stress may vary depending on their personality and coping mechanisms." In this sentence, "a given individual" refers to any person in general, and the statement is making a generalization about how individuals may react to stress.

From <https://ludwig.guru/s/a+given+individual>

[Age]

How does a given individual fit into this?

I do not know, because I do not know what the words 'given individual' are even referring to, yet.

So, what even is a so-called 'given individual', exactly, anyway?

What is required of a given individual? Toward what end?

Depending on what a 'given individual' is, exactly, will determine if it is required to do any thing or not. But, as far as i am 'currently' aware there is no thing that is actually 'required' to do absolutely any thing at all.

And, 'what end', here, is always 'the, same shared, end' that every human being wants and desires at some point in 'their life'.

The term "given individual" is commonly used in hypotheticals. You've never come across it before?

Why are you making a statement or claim, here, but putting a question mark at the end of it?

And, for those who do not already yet know I have actually explained why 'these people', here, continually did this.

The phrase "a given individual" is grammatically correct and commonly used in written English.
It refers to a specific person in a particular context or situation. Example: "A given individual's response to stress may vary depending on their personality and coping mechanisms." In this sentence, "a given individual" refers to any person in general, and the statement is making a generalization about how individuals may react to stress.

From <https://ludwig.guru/s/a+given+individual>

So, to me, and again, I am 'currently' not yet aware that there is actually any 'requirement' for 'any person' to do absolutely any thing at all, here.

Why would you even be curious as to if there is or not, from 'my perspective'?

And, as I have also already mentioned, 'what end', is just the exact same 'shared end', which all people want and desire, at some point in 'their lives'.

But, I am not sure how 'any of this' relates to 'the concept' of God, which I have provided, here, in order to be questioned and/or challenged over.

[Belinda]

Demons are what some humans use to explain evil in the world so that they can call God benevolent. Seems to me that if there is a single creator or central supreme being, then it's responsible for everything, good and bad.

I've met Christians who refer to "the enemy". "The enemy" deliberately temps them away from God or brings miserable events into their lives or makes them feel shame. "The enemy" is some sentient agent that arranges traps and all sorts of diabolical ways of making us miserable, according to them. When talking about transcendent, outside-of-this-world stuff, I guess anyone can say pretty much anything they want, since no one can verify it one way or the other.

It is reasonable that if I posit a person Who is the force for Good then I must posit a person who is the force for Evil,

If you say so.

Personification causes the idea of a Devil who is a person. If God is understood as the idea of Good (i.e. the Platonic Form of good) , then evil is not a person but is the relative absence of good.

[ThinkOfOne]

I do not know, because I do not know what the words 'given individual' are even referring to, yet.

So, what even is a so-called 'given individual', exactly, anyway?


Depending on what a 'given individual' is, exactly, will determine if it is required to do any thing or not. But, as far as i am 'currently' aware there is no thing that is actually 'required' to do absolutely any thing at all.

And, 'what end', here, is always 'the, same shared, end' that every human being wants and desires at some point in 'their life'.

The term "given individual" is commonly used in hypotheticals. You've never come across it before?

Why are you making a statement or claim, here, but putting a question mark at the end of it?

And, for those who do not already yet know I have actually explained why 'these people', here, continually did this.

The phrase "a given individual" is grammatically correct and commonly used in written English.
It refers to a specific person in a particular context or situation. Example: "A given individual's response to stress may vary depending on their personality and coping mechanisms." In this sentence, "a given individual" refers to any person in general, and the statement is making a generalization about how individuals may react to stress.

From <https://ludwig.guru/s/a+given+individual>

So, to me, and again, I am 'currently' not yet aware that there is actually any 'requirement' for 'any person' to do absolutely any thing at all, here.

Why would you even be curious as to if there is or not, from 'my perspective'?

And, as I have also already mentioned, 'what end', is just the exact same 'shared end', which all people want and desire, at some point in 'their lives'.

But, I am not sure how 'any of this' relates to 'the concept' of God, which I have provided, here, in order to be questioned and/or challenged over.

The question mark at the end is to denote a "statement question". You've never come across this before?

Questions: statement questions (you’re over 18?)

Grammar > Words, sentences and clauses > Questions > Questions: statement questions (you’re over 18?)
from English Grammar Today
We can use statements (declaratives) to ask yes-no questions. In writing we know they are questions because they have question marks. In speaking we know they are questions because of the context, and often because of their intonation:

From <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/gra ... re-over-18>

Just trying to get a better understanding of what you have in mind and why it might be significant. You aren't making it easy, by picking at nits.

My asking you questions doesn't seem to be progressing very well. Why don't you expand on what you've written thus far and explain its significance?