God: Knowable or not Knowable?

But not for the reasons you've posted.The reason God is not Knowable is because we cannot tell if we're being deceived or not in some way. This is the same with all relationships.The way we can tell we're not being deceived in some way in our mundane relationships is that our relationship-target also has relationships with others. We can observe how those others are treated and gain insight as to how likely it is that our relationship-target is deceiving everyone they interact with.We cannot do this with God since we have no way of identifying that the same being is communicating with all the others. Therefore there is no basis to identify the personal communication. There isn't even any basis to identify if that personal communication isn't simply our own imagination.Doesn't mean it can't exist. Just that we can't know. Or at least, can't know in any way even close to how well we can know our mundane relationships.So, although I agree with you, I think your reasoning has a minor flaw: To empathise with God doesn't require us to see the world the way God does, it only requires us to be able to imagine seeing the world the way God would. No, humans increasing to a Godly understanding (enough for empathy, anyway) doesn't mean they can now supernaturally manipulate the world. They only need to increase their understanding to a level at which they can imagine what it would be like if they could supernaturally manipulate the world.Empathy doesn't mean "you can do whatever the other being can". It simply means "you can imagine what the other being is going through".As long as we can increase our imaginations enough, we can empathize with any being. Placing a limit on our abilities to empathize is the same as placing a limit on our imaginations.Although I'm not convinced our imaginations are limit-less. I do have confidence that they are not limited to thinking about supernaturally manipulating the world. Or, at least, mine isn't.

I think this statement is misleading. Parity is only needed for the relationship to be equal. As long as it is simply a relationship (not specifically an equal one), no parity is required at all. Yes. But what's wrong with a limited relationship? The relationship (as far as the dog's concerned) is as full as any other relationship that dog has. It's the human-side that's being limited.If we extend this dog-human analogy to where it's talking about a human-God relationship. We see that the human-side of this relationship is as full as any other human relationship. It is only God's side of the relationship that is limited. This is only true if the "greater" being in the relationship has no desire to be in the relationship.However, if the greater-being does have a desire to be in the relationship, then the possibility of communion becomes just the opposite, increasingly likely.The whole point of some religions is that they say God does want the relationship (regardless of how limited it is on his side). I'm not sure how they know that, but certain religions say they do. If God does want the relationship, the human side certainly can be just as fulfilling as any other human relationship. In fact, this relationship could very well be the best-possible relationship any human could ever have.Personally, I think the fact that we can't know we're even talking with God at all destroys this arguement before it gets off the ground. But, given that God exists and that God desires a relationship with humans... this would then become a convincing arguement that the human-God relationship would be the best kind of relationship a human could have.

We don't have to wonder, we know.The dog-human relationship was just an analogy for the human-God relationship. And we are humans. We can answer that question for ourselves.I still don't see the point of worrying about whether or not we can have a meaningful relationship with God, though. Two more important questions seem to have priority. Does God even exist? and Does God even communicate with us? Neither of these questions have definitive answers right now (other than assertions from people). And they both need to have a definitive "yes" answer before we start to contemplate how our relationship with God will be.

Ah, I see. I was slightly confused. In the first message it was stated "a communion" and then modified as "a relationship". In the next message it's the other way around.I was putting more priority on the word "relationship" when your discussion with Phat seems to be more geared towards the word "communion" (what I referred to as an equal-relationship). Taking the quotes out of context, I think I made an error in what was trying to be conveyed.Yes, using your terminology, I certainly agree that we cannot have much of a communion with God. It may even be impossible. We can, though, have a relationship... a very poor, extremely lop-sided one. Agreed.

Again, I agree with your conclusion, but not with your reasoning.I agree with your statements that you identify, but I think you end up equivocating with them:

1. Betterness begets difference (Better ’ Different)
   -I agree completely with this, being better obviously denotes a difference
   ​
2. Difference begets limitation of knowing (Different ’ k-Limit)
   -I don't think this one is as easy as a simple notation.
   1. People can learn, therefore they have the ability to decrease the limitation of knowing.
   2. Even though we can learn, I agree that there is a point where it's possible that we're just not smart enough to learn something.
   3. Even if we can't learn, this limitation of knowing is only on our human side, not on God's side. That is, there is a limitation on us knowing God, not on God knowing us. Since God does know everything we know, our relationship with God isn't limited at all. It's only us who don't know everything God knows. Therefore, it's only God's side of the relationship that is limited.
   ​
3. Limitation of knowing begets limitation of relationship (k-Limit ’ r-Limit)
   -Again, because the limitation of knowing is only on our side, God does know everything we know. Therefore, our relationship can be as full as any other relationship we can have. It is only God's side of the relationship that is limited because we do not know everything God knows. We need to be careful not to equivocate between God's relationship with us being limited and our relationship to God being limited.
   ​
4. God has innite betterness (iBetter)
   -Agreed again.

And then in your concluding-thought process: Agreed Agreed. But remember, this limitation of knowing is only our limitation for knowing God. God is not limited at all in knowing us. Agreed. But remember, this limitation of the relationship is only on God's side (since he knows more than we do). Our side of the relationship is as full as any other relationship we're capable of. Not true. Remember, the only reason the gap is infinite is because God is infinite. And the gap is only on God's side of the relationship (our side is as full as any other relationship we can have). Therefore, an infinite being is quite capable of closing an infinite gap, especially if the limitation is only on God's side. Agreed This statement is true, but irrelevent. We don't need to close the infinite gap. The gap isn't on our side of the relationship. The gap is only on God's side of the relationship, and God certainly can deal with an infinite gap, being infinite himself. No. What we're left with is an infinite limit on God's side of a relationship with a human. Of which an infinite God is easily capable of dealing with. We are also left with a full-relationship (as full as any other relationship, anyway) on the human side. Only if it's trying to be accomplished by a finite being. It's possible, and easy, for an infinite being. No. It's only impossible to have an equal relationship with God. As long as God is willing to use his infinite power to overcome the infinite gap between us, the relationship will work just fine. As seen from the human side, the relationship is just as full as any other relationship.However, here we are talking about having a relationship with God. But we can't even know that we're talking to God, or that God even exists in the first place, since we have nothing to compare God with.The reason we can't have a relationship with God is because we cannot know that we're even talking to God.But, if we go around that and say that God existing, and God wanting a relationship with humans are both given... (I have no idea how we'll ever figure these out) ...but, if they are both given as true, then we certainly are capable of a relationship with God. And that relationship (from the human side, anyway) certainly has the potential to be the best relationship any human is capable of.

Message 49 already does this. But, I can re-word it and try again:Your arguement seems to imply that there's an infinite gap in knowledge between God and humans and that this creates an infinte gap in the relationship and therefore this relationship cannot exist.1. Infinite gap in knowledge between God and humans.
-Yes, agreed. God has all the knowledge a human has, God just has more.2. This creates an infinite gap in the relationship.
-Not true.The relationship has 2 sides to it. The human side and God's side.The human side of the relationship is just as full as any other human relationship can be. In fact, since God is so infinite, the human side of this relationship can be the best relationship possible for a human.God's side of the relationship is infinitely limited. We are incapable of sharing the amount of knowledge that an infinite being would possess. Therefore God's side of the relationship will not be as full as God's relationship with an equally infinite being. This, however, has no affect on how full the human side of the relationship is.3. The relationship cannot exist.
-False. It just cannot exist as an equal relationship.The relationship certainly can exist. It can be the most fulfilling relationship any human is capable of. Poor God, however, since his side of the relationship will be extremely limited. This doesn't stop the relationship from happening though, God just needs to want the realtionship to happen. As long as God wants the relationship, he can easily deal with the limitations on his end.

No. It doesn't make an equal relationship. However, it certainly makes a relationship, just not an equal one. Yes, but "the limit to what the lesser party can know" is irrelevant to the lesser party. The relationship is still as full as any other relationship the lesser party is able to participate in.And the infinite difference is easily overcome... by an infinite God.If infinite things are impossible, than so is God. And then you're no longer saying a relationship with God is impossible, you're just saying God is impossible. Once you accept God is possible (by talking about a relationship with him), you accept the possibility of infinite powers that are certainly capable of overcoming their own infinite differences. True. Good thing for us, the difference is irrelevant to the lesser-being. The difference only has to be overcome (or dealt with) by the greater-being. And, being infinite himself, an infinite difference isn't any trouble at all for God.

No fair. Now you're trying to force this conversation to represent reality. I've already stipulated that this discussion is useless becase we do not know that God even exists. After that, we still need to know that God wants to have a relationship with us.What I'm saying is that given an existing infinite-God, who does want a relationship... all three of those things would be possible.An infinite God would be able to play fetch and warn you of visitors and such better than your dog can.An infinite God would be able to snuggle with you better, share funnier jokes, get you soda quicker and be better at sharing milkshakes.An infinite God would keep you better company, give you easier rides, and always be able to share better fries and cuppa.Of course, this relys that in infinite God exists, and wants to have a relationship with you. But, I've said that from the beggining.Looks to me like reality is pretty clear that either an infinite God doesn't exist, or this infinite God doesn't care too much about us.But I'm not talking about reality, only a hypothetical situation. One that was clearly stated. Or is it your point that even if an infinite God wanted to, they would be unable to be better than your dog, girl/boyfriend or friends? Doesn't sound very infinite...

Yes, I agree completely. That's what I mean when I agree with Jon about his conclusions, just not his reasoning. The conclusion that we can't know God is sound. The reasoning that it's because he's infinite and therefore we can't have a relationship is fallacious.

That's not weird at all.The weird thing is that we have nothing to compare God to. We cannot say to someone "this is God". And have them say "yes, my God is exactly the same... see?". Since our only connection with God is internal to our own minds, there's no way to identify if anyone is conversing with the same God. There's not even a way to identify if the internal conversing is actually with God, or our own imagination.As I stated in my first post in this thread. The way we verify relationships is by observation, comparison, and likelyhood:We can observe how someone interacts with us.
We can observe how someone interacts with others.
We can compare these observations.
We can then form a likelyhood that this someone is deceiving everyone they talk to or not.We can observe how God interacts with us.
We cannot observe how God interacts with others.
We therefore cannot compare our observations.
We cannot even identify if God's simply a figment of our own imagination or not.Take your post, for example. There's no way for me to tell if you're lying or not about conversing with God. Absolutely no way.If someone else tells me about God, there's no way for me to know if the God you converse with and the God they converse with is the same God. Absolutely no way.Even if we could say that you're absolutely telling the truth, there's no way I can tell if you're suffering from a delusion or not. Absolutely no way.We can't know.And there's no chance I'm laying something as important as my ethics, soul, loved ones, and life on something I can't even identify.

That's what I'm hoping for. Of course, it'll suck if I piss off an easily-offended God. But I'd still do it anyway, I like to fight for truth and righteousness, even if that's the little-guy That's the current plan
I don't have much emphasis on 'being found'. I tend to put my priorities on fixing/helping things I know are broken/wrong. Seems to me that's a much more efficient way for actually doing some good.

Thanks for sharing, then. Any forum is only fun and interesting if people share.You seem to know a lot about God: ..but I think you're missing the main point here. You're already explaining this God you know.But how do you know all these things?Where did you learn them?Why can't it be different?

No problem. Thanks for discussing. It's very difficult to find someone I can ask questions to without them getting defensive and hurt. I don't want to hurt people, I just want to try and understand things from other people's views. I want to see if I can view things like that. I want to see if I'm missing something. I want to learn.Thanks for taking the time to discuss things. And remember, you're not only talking to me, I bet there's a bunch of people reading this that will never post here. They're worth speaking out to as well.And have fun I didn't know, and I still don't know.I said you seem to know. And I said that because you make a lot of statements about how God is (or maybe how you think He is?). I was wondering how you knew those things. Why can there be only One? I agree with you that it would be simpler and easier to keep-track-of if there was only one. But, well, life and reality isn't always simple and easy just because that's nice and neat. In fact, usually it's complicated and messy. What makes you think that because it's cleaner to have only one God, there actually really is only one God? I also agree that it sucks if we're nothing more than a chess game, or gambling tokens. But, well, it sucks that we don't have wings for flying too. It also sucks that many people die of hunger every day. Life doesn't seem to cater to how we would like things to be, it's simply the way things are. Sure. But, well, you started this with an "if". It's certainly possible that this "if" is wrong. There's nothing to say one way or the other. Reality has no responsibility to be reasonable or logical, or any other ordered structure we'ed like it to be. No. I recognized that you are a part of a large section of the population that believes in "God". I am simply not ignorant of major religions, that's all. I definitely don't know that you "know" Him. In fact, that's exactly what I'm questioning I certainly understand that you want to know him, and possibly think you know him. But I certainly don't think you know him. I don't see how you could. I understand what you mean.But some people "commune with God" and become very nice, tolerant, loving, caring people. Others "commune with God" and become vindictive, hateful, oppresive and greedy.They both tell me it's the same God.Who can I trust? Why must one even be true? There's nothing for me to look at to compare with the two polar opposite ideas for me to make my own decision. First - I don't find this true. And, even if it is true, people also love to hate many, many things. This doesn't make any of those things true, or real. Things are real and true to me because they are real and true, they can be shown. What other people think (hate or love) doesn't matter.Second - "He" seems to have chosen you, along with many other people. Some of those people are very nice. Some are very bad. Some commit suicide and even convince others to do the same. All because they say "He" chose them. I don't see how I can know that the "He" that chose you is different from the "He" that chose others. Or even which ones may be imagining things.Third - That's really nice of Him. Other people tell me that "their God" is willing to die for them too. Who can I believe? Why should I believe either one? Which is better? How do I even know it's not just people imagining things?Fourth - How do you recognize His Image in others? Because they're good people? I know good people who believe in God. I know good people who adamantly do not believe in God. I know good people who believe in other Gods. How do I know who's telling the truth? How do I know it's not just their imagination?Stile's maing point: I agree with your statement here, it seems very intuitive to me. But what I observe in people doesn't reflect this structure at all.As I said above, some people are "touched by God" and become very nice, loving people. Others are "touched by God" and become hateful, oppresive people.They all say it's "God".How do I know which one is true?How do I know either is true? Why can't they both be wrong?The very fact that there are such varying descriptions and results from being "with God" implys to me that:1. God doesn't exist, or doesn't interact with humans at all.2. Multiple God's exist.3. One God exists, can't connect with everyone (for whatever reason) and some of those people are either imagining things or lying.And my problem is that I see no way for me to differentiate between any of these choices. I don't see how I can identify if any of them are true. I don't see how I can identify if any of them are false (then I could eliminate them as choices).Do you see any other choices?

Don't worry about it. That's what's so nice about this form of communication. We can take weeks to reply, and our whole conversation is still sitting right here, waiting. Don't worry about being speedy, quality is much more important. And everyone understands that life can get busy and time-consuming. I don't think so. I value your un-offended replies and mature attitude. Sure, some people will laugh and poke fun just because "they don't agree". But without a basis for their own position they only suceed in looking foolish. I wouldn't worry about it.I'll try to focus on my main problem: You replied, but I'm not sure it addresses what I'm asking about. I agree with a lot of what you're saying, I just don't see how it helps me answer any of the above questions. It's okay, I don't really think it's possible to answer the above questions Fair enough. But then, how do you recognize Him in others? You then went on to explain how only God is good. I can agree with that, but it doesn't help me recognize Him in others. Okay. Does this mean you recognize God in others if they are humble and contrite? I know humble and contrite people who believe in all sorts of Gods. I also know humble and contrite atheists. I don't know if this helps identify God at all or not. It seems to simply be a human attribute that any nice person can have. I don't understand this sentence. Can you rephrase it in another way, maybe? What I'm getting from reading this is that you recognize God in others if they seem to act like how you think someone would act if they had God in them. But I'm not sure if that's right... is that what you mean? I agree that motives and intentions can have great value. But, again, I know God-believing people with kind motives, and I also know atheistic people with kind motives. We seem to be just identifying the nice ideals that would make a good person. The problem is that these ideals are not "only for those who believe in God" in any way. It seems that anyone and everyone is capable of these ideals. Is there something imparticular you can identify that "those who believe" are capable of that "those who do not believe" are not capable? Yes, I agree that no human is perfect. We can never be as good as "infinite good". Providential grace? What identifys this grace?Like I said, I know very kind, very humble, very contrite, very thoughtful, people who try their best to help others and make other people's lives easier... some believe in God, some believe in Allah, some believe in The Way of Buddha, some don't believe in anything.I don't see a difference. I just see nice people. From what I can tell, "God" isn't necessary for a person to be nice, or kind, or good, or a hero, or a wonderful parent...If all these characteristics are present in all these varieties of believers and unbelievers, how can we know God is present in any of them? Maybe The Way of Buddha is simply overflowing and helping to guide all these people. Or maybe there is no outside force, and people are simply capable of these acts on their own.I don't see any way to identify a source at all. Let alone to specify that this source is actually a unique God. How can I know that God is behind anything?Again, I'm not saying that I know God isn't behind these things (personally, it seems incredibly unlikely to me, but that's irrelevent). The only thing I'm saying is that I don't see how we can know that God actually is behind these things.

Hello again. You'll notice I only pick small snipits and parts of your posts for me to reply too. I do read your whole reply, it would just get incredibly long for me to reply to each and every point you've made. I try to pick out the main parts, those that pertain to this issue. If you feel like I'm overlooking or missed something important, feel free to bring it up again and state that you do want me to reply to it imparticular. I don't skip things because I don't want to talk about them, I only skip them to attempt to keep my posts not-too-long.And, of course, if there's some important side-issue that opens up during our conversation, we can always start a new thread to discuss that topic. The nice folk who run this place like to keep things rather strictly organized. I agree with you. I can't know what their motives are as much as I can't know what your motives are. I can't know if you're telling me the truth (although I highly suspect you are). There is nothing I can compare what you say about God to in order to see for myself.Like your colour of the sky example: This is very true. And I can walk outside anytime I'd like and look for myself at these times and agree or disagree with you. "Oh, yes, he's right, the sky is black at night."However, I cannot do this with God. I cannot observe God for myself and say "Oh, yes, he's right, God is in this person."You say you compare nice, good and heroic to the absolutness of God. I simply compare them to the absolutness of the idea itself. Sorry, I was agreeing with you for the sake of the arguement and to keep things moving on. I was attempting to agree with your vocabulary. That is, I was agreeing to something more along the lines of "if we have an infinite God, then it is evident that this God is the epitome of what is Good, this God would be perfect-Good, and no human is perfect-Good".I don't see this as an "invisible truth", just something that can be learned by anyone who can use their imagination and can comprehend what "infinite" would mean. I don't really agree that God exists and that He is "perfect good" in our reality. Just that if there was an infinite God, He certainly would be "perfect good". My eagerness for our discussion seems to have created some confusion, sorry I don't place my faith in hoping what I do is good enough, or fallable men, or even God. And I have yet to hear of any important or spiritually meaningful "inerrent truth". I try not to place faith in anything, really. Especially where important things like my morals and eternal soul are concerned. For these things, I don't use faith, I base them on things I can show to myself and others. That's the only way I can know to the best-of-my-ability that what I'm doing is right and good.That is a fantastic story about your father. I am partly afraid to comment because I do not want to offend you or your father. But, I need to say that I still have no way to verify that this change that went through your father was because of God.This is what I know:
1. Your father went through an extremely huge, extremely beneficial change.
2. Your father claims it was God's doing.1a. Other people have gone through extremely huge, extremely beneficial changes.
2a. Some of those people claim it was Allah's doing.
2b. Some of those people claim it was because they follow The Way of Buddha.
2c. Some of those people claim they did it all on their own.I don't mean to diminish the power of what happened to your father. It is an extraordinary life-changing story. But do you see my point? I have no way to know which of these choices represents reality.I have no God to observe on my own.
I have no Allah to observe on my own.
I have no 'Way of Buddha' to observe on my own.I can observe the effects that people claim are a direct-result from God, Allah, or The Way. But even these effects are no different from those effects on people who claim they did it all themselves.How can I choose from this information? What information am I missing that shows me that God is the answer? It seems incredibly unlikly to me that God is actually behind these things. The single attribute that is actually the same amongst all these identical life-changing, huge events is that it happens to people, by people. This implies to me that people are capable of wondrous things. It also implies to me that God, Allah, and The Way simply do not exist. They are great paths to exemplifying the wondrous things humans are capable of... humility, kindness, being nice, good, heroic... but it seems to me that humans are all capable of these things on their own.You tell me that those who follow The Way of Buddha simply do not have the whole truth. But followers of The Way would simply say you are the slightly-misguided one. I have no method to identify which of you is actually speaking the truth. And, furthermore, there is no need for either, since there are people capable of all the things God-believers and 'The Way'-believers are capable of who do not attribute their skills to any external force.I am still not trying to say that this somehow proves God or The Way or Allah are not true. It's quite possible that those who do not claim any external force are either unaware of it, or lying themselves. It just seems like the simple answer that explains all the information to me, that's all.I am not saying I know that no external force exists.I'm just saying I don't see how we can know that any external force does exist. There doesn't seem to be any way to identify such a thing. Let alone, identify it down to a specific external-being (God, Allah, The Way or any other from the multitude of options).