Well let me put it like this;

You and your friend are painting pictures together but you have to share the paints. So your friend says to you, "Can you pass me the yellow paint please?" You reach for the bottles of paint, but instead of taking the yellow bottle you grab the red bottle of paint and respectfully hand it to your friend who is surprised. "No, not the red paint, I wanted the yellow paint." So you look at the bottle in your hand and proclaim, "It IS the yellow bottle of paint!"

Now which one of you is seeing the "truth"? Who is correctly seeing the bottle of paint? Are they both wrong?

The parallel I am trying to make here is that the concept of god is NEVER a consistent nor fully agreed upon idea. Some like to write it off and say god just can't be conceptualized by humans so stop trying. But then if I ask if god is evil, they quickly state that god is not evil. They then try to state that through their deductive reasoning it can be stated that god could not be evil. Well that is fine but then can't I use deductive reasoning as well to also point out my reasoning? But they object as if only their statements can be the correct ones, where as my points are invalid.

So if we are even going to try to talk about a topic, the definitions or applied concepts must be agreed upon or else you can't finish the painting.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm simply stating that god is not subject to sensory perception, deductive logic, empirical analysis, or any reason. He is in a supposed superior, dimensional mode of existence. Therefore, there is no objective endorsement for his existence. Without an objective basis on existence, there can be no true judgement on anything derived from existence(which is everything, given that existence is primary.) I'm not saying that there isn't an intelligent designer, in fact, his existence is almost necessary. However, any judgement pertaining to motive, identity, etc, is pure unmitigated speculation. Faith is divorced from all reason.

But what I am saying is that even this you stated above, has no actual basis if you are implying that a god is not subject to deductive logic or reasoning. You making these arbitrary distinctions are based off something, but you ignore that you are doing that. Later you go on to say have and must, but those to imply that you can know through some form of reasoning that they must be true statements, but turn around and make a claim that you can't use deductive reasoning. So which is it?

To be totally and utterly honest intellectually NOTHING stated in any sense of the word could be applied to a thing in which can not be deducted through logical means nor otherwise. To do so you make your own possibility impossible.

So where does "dimensional mode of existence" come from? How do you arrive at such a statement? Is it only through deductive reasoning since no other options support the concept? So since a god can't be experienced with the senses it must supersede the senses? That doesn't say anything. Because ALL things that can not be experienced with the senses are then superseded from the senses. So the flying pink elephant does exist!

krumple-
what about things perceived through senses other than the usual five? of course there isnt any physical proof there are any, but if they exist outside the physical part of us, which also hasnt been proved to exist, and perceive something outside of what is physical...then that perception would be proof, wouldnt it? can logic go anywhere from there? or do the other senses have to be named and described and documented first? is intuition a sense? could there be more or others beyond that?

let's look at it this way. suppose we can prove we have senses other than physical. they would be there only for the purpose of sensing things that are not part of the physical realm, wouldnt they?

(this has nothing to do with the existence of god in particular or his purpose if he had one, but it has to do with there being another realm or dimension that we also partly exist within but are unaware of as yet)

thoughts arent physical are they? but you must agree they exist. so in what realm do they exist?

[QUOTE=salima;107005] what about things perceived through senses other than the usual five? of course there isnt any physical proof there are any, but if they exist outside the physical part of us, which also hasnt been proved to exist, and perceive something outside of what is physical...then that perception would be proof, wouldnt it? can logic go anywhere from there? or do the other senses have to be named and described and documented first? is intuition a sense? could there be more or others beyond that? [/QUOTE] You are approaching the rationalist versus the empiricist theories of knowledge and also the pan sensationist theory of knowledge. Does our only knowledge of the world arise through sensory experience?

I think quite often pure reason and imagination; thought experiments "discover" the truth. Einstein's musings in the patent office are a good example. In many ways I think scientific truth, moral truth, aesthetic truth; religious truths lie deep in the nature of the universe and are discovered by reason and imagination and verified by experience. I believe in transcendent value and transcendent truth so my notion is one of truth discovered by man and created by god. Some of your discoveries or intuitions can be verified others can not. All human truths are partial, incomplete and contingent.

For truth as correspondence you can not "know" if it is the "truth" or not until it is "empirically verified" by observation. Then there is the notion of truth as coherence which may be applicable to speculative philosophy or truth as consensus applicable to cultural and social truths. Then there is the metaphysical notion of truth as a transcendent eternal value. Is there a relationship between "truth" and "gods purpose". I would say yes. God's purpose is the actualization of the true, the beautiful and the good. Gods purpose is primarily aesthetic not moral.


[QUOTE=salima;107005] let's look at it this way. suppose we can prove we have senses other than physical. they would be there only for the purpose of sensing things that are not part of the physical realm, wouldnt they? [/QUOTE] Materialism is the dominant metaphysic in science. The question is whether science gives us a complete or only a partial and incomplete view of reality. Is there more to the world than the material or the physical? Can science (like Laplace's demon) eventually explain and predict everything?

[QUOTE=salima;107005] (this has nothing to do with the existence of god in particular or his purpose if he had one, but it has to do with there being another realm or dimension that we also partly exist within but are unaware of as yet) [/QUOTE] Well in modern physics M brane theory of everything there are I think eleven dimensions. Who knows what is going on in those other dimensions?


[QUOTE=salima;107005] thoughts arent physical are they? but you must agree they exist. so in what realm do they exist? [/QUOTE] Mind and qualia (mental experience is perhaps one of the most controversial areas of investigation. There are physicalist and materialistic theories of mind. I do not believe them "true" but it is a commonly held notion; perhaps the dominant notion in the scientific community.

Somewhat disjointed musings on my part, sorry. Why is this in mythology?

Yeah there are a lot of things in which we can not perceive with our senses but we know they exist because we have designed tools which can detect them and even exploit their existence.

I am not in conflict with anything outside the sense fields.

What I was trying to point out is that anything that does exist outside our sense field is completely and utterly up to speculation if we don't have a tool which can determine the characteristics of such a thing. So me making the claim that a flying pink elephant exists, is not any different than saying a god exists. Because we are both using the exact same premise and lack of sense data.

But most tend to object to that. If you use an argument that god can be known where as the flying pink elephant can not then by what means does that become true?

I did not make distinctions pertaining to an "actual god." I did and do not claim any knowledge on god. Quite the opposite, I understand and accept the recondite nature of god. I simply admonish a moral code grounded in faith, because i believe a rational ethical code exists independent of human subjectivity, a code firmly entrenched in reason. Morality, i believe belongs to the natural world not the supernatural.



Not once was i pretentious enough to claim any definitive objectivity concerning god. How did you come to that inference?



Bravo



God's contingent identity exists in a realm detached from human consciousness. That is, a "dimensional mode of existence" independent of the natural world. I arrive at this from the absurdity and irrationality of the competing circumstance, a duality of the natural and supernatural. If god exists it is in a "mode of existence" different from our natural world.

However, you are correct that with no sensory evidence no definitive statement can be made. Since reason is the foundation from which the edifice of human knowledge is built. With no reason, there is no foundation for knowledge. With no foundation, there is no structure. With no structure, there is no purpose. That much we can agree on.

And yes, i know the flying pink elephant does exist...i'm not a complete fool :Glasses:

i guess the idea of the flying pink elephant hasnt been subjectively experienced by as many people in as many different countries and historical eras and cultures as the idea of god. that and the fact that there are more wars and arguments going on about god than the flying pink elephant would lead me to suspect there must be something behind it. but other than that, no there isnt any difference as far as proving it to be true.

yes, why is this thread in mythology? if god is a myth, why is there a religion forum section on the board? you mean you didnt put it in mythology, prothero? i thought it was your choice, and you were discussing the concept of 'a god' rather than within any particular religion and you didnt know where else to put it...was it moved?

Before you beat up prothero, it was I who started the question. I couldn't decide where to put it since I felt that if I had actually placed it in the religion section it would have been considered inflammatory in nature. So I figured if I put it in mythology it could be considered divorced from any and all religious finger pointing. Even though the concept of god can be applied to almost any religion the question is equally fair for all instances.

Maybe it would have been better to place it into politics since now it seems I still wasn't successful in avoiding critism.

by now i had completely forgotten who started the thread, and i am getting mixed up trying to separate this from the one 'is god omnipotent'...

naw, people will always point fingers especially concerning religion. but it could just as easily, especially for the point of discussion or speculation, be considered a part of mythology as roman gods are, dont you think?

i have found that if a person has religious biases they will come out no matter what. there are still some left rattling around in my head that may be uncovered in a thread...and that is a good thing. it is when they are not recognized by the owner that they do the most damage.

God is the only thing, construct, design,etc that came first and in being first knows what preceded loss, what preceded something which was nothing, nothing but a God. No space, no time, no room.
You could say in creating us God gave its 'self' thing, construct, design, etc purpose. 'We are Gods purpose' (God is Gods purpose) said quite easily or flippantly, but we need to look into this somewhat, what is purpose but not intention?
So God wanted intention, so does intention have an answer? does a purpose have an answer but for the solving but for the discovery but for the voyage? so this lends to the fact God created something God does not fully understand.
Or possibly ever will?
To have purpose means you are striving towards something, means something is unanswered, possibly means you will never answer but for having purpose having the quest, having a need.
Could God have created something that mystifys even It?
This seems to me the only explanation for Gods evolution, for Gods own growth, so purpose is growth? Yes i would say Purpose it has need to grow in order to fulfill.
God begins alone, a Ghost Spirit if you will, nowhere to go, no way out because there was no in to get into or out of, void, but for God and a ghosts intention, which is without purpose, a ghost does not haunt to scare people, a ghost haunts because it is trapped and has no intention of where it can be or cant be, or should be, a ghost is a presence in void, could very well be the void.
So God being God realises and sparks and grows and realises and creates Gods Self first by giving birth to Itself, it now in the act of concept now realsies it has something to offer gain, it has power it has answer and that all this comes down or up to the first intention the first purpose, 'I need (to be) Me', to breath to birth to create self , but finding that God being alone cannot breed to make another First as It, now in created position of Self, (you can only be a self if you have reason to be, you can only be self if you wish for something other than void, if you wish for purpose fulfillment, and self needed position, you need to be something you need to be somewhere). So God gave birth first To Him Her Its Self, a Father Mother was created, but in order to be self as i have said It needs a place to BE (not yet for), so God creates a place for Its Self to be conceived, the universe is born out of need to have purpose the need to BE. In place.
(And this is where i might lose you, if i have you at all) But God finding that the space of things is slightly more lonesome, is slightly more empty for there is space but nothing to fill it, all the room in the world with no place to Be or Go attend, the need for purpose, the need for a place to be and a person to be, not even yet to come from.
So God is now a parent to something, is now charge over something, and discovering that it is more lonely to be a self than to be a ghost God creates others alike It, other god like creatures, planets for the god like creature and more forces for them to over come so that they shall not know the emptiness of being ghostly (could be the only unatural things in the universe are ghosts), God creates the work that the other godlike creatures will do, tries to give them purpose by giving them, something to do something that God has already conquered because God has given birth to it. God finds that this is not purpose, for what they do does not matter, does not mean anything because it has already been answered because God was that which gave it design and force to begin with, so God finds that he is ever more lonely because all that God has created does what it is told does what it is designed to do, self fulfilling prophecy, it means nothing, it has no intention because it has nowhere new to go, it can not discover on its own anything that God has not already presided over, God knows all because God created it, so God for all of the business around him has no purpose again, because there is nothing that has a quest in it , nothing that has intention, nothing that has purpose and nothing to find or to lose.
So God comes to his recent inspiration, i will create something that has dominion over nothing but itself and environment, first as I am, but will never be first because it is last, i will give it self (or it must have needed to take it), i will give it place, i will give it the same quest i have not been able to fulfill and finish (by this time God may have realised that Gods very existence was only to serve Gods self in discovering what needed to be found, God needed to create, God was serving as all Fathers are created for; purpose to serve their creation, which at this point was only Gods Self.
But in order for God to find the next solution step Self, God needed to create something that could teach God, something that God did not have power over but for the creation, (and fathers can leave even if always in debt) God could owe us more than we even know how to ask for, but for God to fulfill Gods purpose God cannot interfere, God needs to only watch, to learn from instead of teach to.
So God created Man and man found that he too was as god and it both freed and corrupted him, because these god men had to deal with every other man not god, there was a first a second and an infinitum of god men to not be alone with. All the while being mans creator, all the while being mans decision and intention and purpose, or at least at this point this is what God reasoned was what God was for even if God could not interfere.
They are my creation I must watch over and judge them when they chose to do what i do not see as purposeful, and learn from them when they find purpose, what i do not see as good i will judge but do nothing. (for good purpose is to be fulfilled, is to be answered as well as asking)(whereas contrary to this; bad or evil is not trying to fulfill any purpose at all)
(And you know where i'm going with this?)
Then God learned that God could be a God man itself and not be alone and learn more what it was that might solve this nagging feeling that all who are purposeful have, i might find my purpose God thought by becoming a man, i might find the solution to this thing called purpose.
And God did find that to be whole, to be fulfilled God needed to become the Child, the Son the Daughter the Teacher (the teacher of all is the child), the Seed not just the root, not just the first but the every and for the first time God was always. God became Gods own creation God became for the first time Its own justice (which some might say justice is a purpose fulfilled). God found that He too could love and feel as if he was no longer alone, he could teach freely, God found that he was part of the family, God was now for the first time a family a unit, not just a ghost, not just a provider parent, God to himself could now receive fulfillment.
God was now, no longer alone.
But something happened and God saw the lonliness in and of all his creation his family around him and that they too were suffering as he had, and this God could not bear, for he had found love and found that love was purpose that family was the only place where intention and purpose were forgotten (some might want to call it contentment), but God as man saw that man was alone and that God had not done enough for his creation. now finaly seeing it as his creation as his children as his brothers and sisters, having finally understood what it was to not be alone, to be fulfilled. And God wanted for all and any of his creation to know that if they truely ever needed to fulfill purpose its need to be not empty, if not forthcoming from their other fellow men he would give them purpose fulfilled and love and place and freedom freely but for one thing needed so as to receive, find their purpose, ALL THEY NEED DO IS ASK, and i and my now and forever children brothers and sisters shall answer. Whatever stands in their way i shall clear, if they want me and love and to not ever be alone, all they ever need do is ask. I shall answer, i shall be there for their need, i shall be there for their purpose should they so wish for me to be It.
So God is man and man is God only if they ask for it. If they purpose it.
And what is purpose but for the unanswered but asked question, and for the first and only question need to be asked is.
Where can i be whole? Where can I be found?
God says you can be with God, God says you can be God, Spirit, Parent, Child, Purpose in the Being.
And if you do find it without God, you very well may be answering something not yet even asked, wondered by God. But i doubt you can ever find purpose alone.
I think this answers your question, Gods purpose was to not be alone, to be fulfilled, to love and to hold and be held. The miracle is that God offers this fulfillment to those who cant find their own purpose, love, family, intention, justice.
The moral comes that only the truely alone has no purpose and nothing, not even God, can or should be alone or without purpose. To need and to be needed.


If God does lack purpose it is because he has already given all that needs to be given and does not need to do anymore because He is fulfilled.
And i hazard to add that if you think you can survive without purpose and without need to feel and find purpose (which as i said is love of man and God so as to not be alone) you may be in trouble, not from any judgement but from yourself and lack of what is true justice out there for you to discover.
The path to yourself is the path to God, either way does not matter for you are not alone. And the journey will teach you to find others lost or just searching as you along their way and to give as well as receive their company and love and knowledge and guidance.

Have i converted you yet?

---------- Post added 12-06-2009 at 03:41 AM ----------

God would still be a ghost if God had not created Self and a place for it all to be.

actually sun, that sounds pretty good-and original, like you thought it all out yourself. i especially like the idea that in this life it could be possible to discover something that the god couldnt have known before.

so if god doesnt intervene against evil, do you think it is possible that the evil will at some point overcome the good intentions? or do you think that good intentions will be enough to overcome evil, overpowering them by quality rather than quantity?

What do you mean like i thought it all out myself?
To expand briefly upon the idea you liked, God has evolved therefore God started somewhere knowing less than what God knows now, God was not yet whole, until we became, God could have been existed blind dumb and mute, as a ghost, this fits, and as God has allowed and nurtured and grown the universe around It, God although creating it, will then have the first seat, the first reference the first clue. the first foresight, then we move onto the creation of something that has free will something that does not know its future, something that doubts, that is what could be called spontaneous, and unless God knows what is going to happen which is only through the reference/foresight, what he can sooth not what he can see, not through being able to see the future else God would have been existed as the trilogy already in situe. And God would have known that we were going to steal the knowledge ability/debility, which is another why as to God not seeing, possibly only perceiving the future through what has gone before reference, what God has learned is our likely path and what we are most likely to vote for, telling the future is still rather easy when you understand everything even but one thing. And even that one thing is habitual and often more predicatable than we give our selves credit for.
But here will always be something new and a creation with free will that has choice and the ability to learn, evolve and grow as God does will always surprise even if just in the mundane.
We have choice to not choose God else free will would mean nothing. Father tried to force us (or we did), didn't work.
God would be the first to admit that God dose or did not know all, else why would God become man? to learn, to experience, to die and it is a highly held belief in the Christian Church that God was not complete until God became a man, the Holy Trinity, therefore God was lacking some vital piece of knowledge that enabled and taught him to give us the chance at being His purpose and He being ours some piece that by only becoming us could be found and known and seen and believed. God would not become man unless God needed to know something of what is was to be man, something God did not know, and this he filled himself up with, hence the compassion, hence the forgiveness, hence the chance of heaven or rain, these things God did not know before God became man.
God needs us as much as we need God, not for the prayer, not for the platitudes, not for the churches, not for the religion, these are all for us. these are all our faith, God needs to know us and our faith, else God could not have become the embodiment of all that is Love that is Son of God, Family of man, Child of God. God needed a family and he found it with us, he found His True fulfillment from being us, God didn't know what love was before God created us, because it was always a given, Gods previous creation automatically loved God because for one they were sure that God existed, God was there, God directed all that they did and built, as to the choice some creations might have made to no longer give this empty love to God, this God knew would happen, had to, Hell was already there waiting, but you see it is even easier to predict something that does not have free will, and the godlike creatures are nothing if not automated and utterly with out will oof their own.
Did God give a bad will to something, to a creation, only if God thought that it might need ask to be forgiven, only if it was redeemable and only if it wasn't free.
Any way where was I? Oh yes, those creatures that because they have free will are not under Gods rule unless they make the choice, unless they choose to make it their purpose, you can only force someone to do something so far, true belief and true love which is what God requires of us cannot be faked forced or falsified. And bad intention is all pretending, lying some might say, but not really real, not that it matters/means anything at all, not that it counts, where it counts.
It is the free will part, the curiousity part, the consciousness part that God needs from us, God only settles for the very best we have.
Now God cannot force us to do this, we have to teach and learn for and convince for ourselves, we must go and see, we must touch the fire to know its hurts (something is wrong if we are not learning, need to revalue the we). But the fact that God knew this when we were created at least with the capasity to steal else why order us not to? at least with the capasity to not choose what was ordered was all in the making, God would not want us any other way, because we need to go to God, not God coming to us. God was not so blind to this us creation that he did not know we were built to ask, to doubt, to wonder, but that is just it, God at this time was not complete, so God very well might not have had the full clue as to what we were going to do with ourselves and what laws we were going to break, another validation upon the fact God does not know everything, needs to learn more, just like us, and that only by what we have surprised him with has he learnt and dealt out prize/punishment.
Free will was the only new thing God could fathom/gift that nothing else in the universe had yet received, God was lonely God needed to be questioned by his creation, needed to be found in a companion not a prisoner or slave, and the only thing that God could think of to give so as to learn something new was his first gift his first ability, to need purpose to not know something is true unless you find it about your own person, and this can only be achieved through the first gift free will consciousness to know so as to become God. You cant become God if you dont have the equipment and consciousness is the first must, to know that one is both alone and in need of company, at least the well adjusted God we know and now love or at least want to, the fail safe part in us is the need for purpose funny enough, when we were created we were built with the missing question the missing answer because to have it to be fulfilled meant that we would not have had freewill, would not have need unfilled. And now the kick comes when we realise we can be God, and that we may very well be able to bestow consciousness upon other creatures, even create our very own universes.
God may have been weary, God may have wanted to give up before he met me, you and all our brothers and sisters, God may have created us to be as close to Him as is possible, God wants a comparative not a pet, so in saying this also one leads and tends to think that we may be bestowed the universe after Gods death/disapearance, and when God died/hides he gave us the responsibilty of the entire universe or at least as much as we can reach and touch and set fire to, to find. Until we ourselves go into death and there meet him and there be fulfilled by him. We may as yet surpass God in our evolution because it has been proven that God does not know as we know, God may know more but God does not know as we know,does not even know how we know else he would know how he knows and wouldn't find the time to bother asking us, also because we are born to die always were, God was existed to exist, His leanring has been harder and more costly than ours ever could should or would be.
But as i come to the end of this, the one thing we are still left with is the need for purpose, it may not always be Gods, but it is always ours and only with God can i find peace can my purpose be fulfilled, some children are meant to stay with their parents some are meant to fly the nest.
God is brilliant because God when creating us did not as most believe make us deficient, make us less than He we needed, God created something that naturally died, something that has an ending, something he had not thought to proceed upon himself until much later and something that he found completed him, dont you see we have a head start.
We are more than God then?, but the very fact remains that we are not completed without God, to see what men as God could and would do would be a wonder, our purpose is to find God out, to find all that is true Love, but maybe, just maybe this need to be fulfilled was given for us to find Gods partner other like Him, we need to ask, we need to find all that is God, to find another God that would fulfill this emptiness for ours, we may be his trained monkeys that are meant to seek out all that is God, and we may find where he has failed and so he created us to find for him another God. Have a little faith God knows what God has done, even if God might not know what He now fully is capable of.
Just a little something to chew upon.
I love my God and know i need my own, not someone elses unless it is everybody elses.
Paralel universes, do they have a different God, is it one God per universe?
I would still rather stay at home and know i have One.
Briefly i said, didn't I?

Good intentions is good purposed, we will either find our purpose (whether this is ordained as correct or not is subjectifyable) we will either live our purpose, or we will end. The world cannot run on bad intentions, it wont survive and neither will me, we, you. Do i think that the bad intentions could overcome all that is good in this world? Do i think we could lose?
WE would lose? We will lose? Will the evil of men dictate earths death destruction demise downfall? Will the evil man win against the good one?
I hope not, and that's all i've got, good hope and good intentions and good actions.
I know it is not exactlly planetary but if we the planet Earth suceed in destroying ourselves from the inside out, i am fairly sure that God will just do it all over again, may destroy this universe along with the world he so dearly loves, become a ghost again and start from scratch.
What use are we to God if we cant control ourselves, did we ever truely have free will if this is what the outcome is? Maybe that is what God wants, if we cant save ourselves how could we ever save God?
And at least at the end of all things i will know i had God in my heart and as my purpose, another strange outcome of consciousness is that it is only ever individual, only one at a time can choose. i dont know if one man can change the world, but one consciousness can. One purpose, one intent, one hope, one Love, one world, one participation, one reason, one heaven FOR ALL.
All i need know is that it was not God who doomed us, it was me.

very interesting, sun...what i meant to say was that your words dont sound like it was something you read in a book and decided to believe, it sounds like something that you yourself pondered and concluded.

when you say trinity, which i construe to mean the human part, you mean all of mankind rather than one portion called jesus, right? but not the whole creation, only humanity?

you've given your god a higher purpose than most of the ones people come up with...

No worries



The human is part of the trinity yes, and if i am understanding you correctly the portion of mankind is also in Jesus Christ of Jesus Christ because it did not just evolve God it evolved us, we were finally given the leave to not believe, to not worship, and become our own responsibility. And as long as we saw the jesus in our selves we were finaly untouchable by hell and evil alike, we were truely independant, but better true participants. Jesus was and is our embodiment, is the embodiment of Man.
What it means to be human, and have reference to it, him, us.
The ghost of the Trinity is not human even if fathers can be.



I have given and been gifted my own higher purpose.

at least on my days off:D

I don't know SS you tend to contradict your statements.

First you say that god had a cause or motivation then end by saying that god fulfilled that motivation is without any cause or requirement.

Well fulfillment does not negate requirement or else the requirement was never an actual requirement. If you are hungry, you have a requirement that is food. If you acquire some food, and consume it then you could say you no longer require food? The initial onset most would say yes, the requirement has been met there is no further requirement. But the neglect is on the side of the hunger. This would mean that god has never actually achieved nor could he ever achieve fulfillment if the requirement were a creation. Why? Because if you were to remove the creation, then the need would return. Just like if someone goes without food, they will become hungry.

The other part about love is also a contradiction. Not only is it a human emotion, but it is not something that can arise free of conditions, despite what many would argue. There is obviously a condition for the arising of love otherwise you would experience it either all the time, none of the time, or completely and utterly randomly without any explanation. It doesn't happen like that so it is conditional. Love also requires a fluctuation or else it becomes washed out and numb. It is the flippant aspect of the emotions themselves which bring you back to it. When those don't happen love loses it's sense experience and fades. If you were constantly in love and experienced nothing else, you would soon not even know what it was. It is through the process of experiencing something else that it becomes definable. So if you are not experiencing anything else then you lose the ability to define the experience.

Maybe that is another thing that gets written off? For a deity, love is completely different and does not require any conditions. But if you really want to use that then why even start with god having a requirement in the first place? They can't be both true.

On further inquiry;

Dont you think everyone asks and answers concludes ponders their own eternity?

The human part is family is the unit, is the child that humanity is and ever will be, it took the child to complete the whole as both dependant and need. We are what the whole of creation has been built around, (some might say for its purpose), the purpose of the universe is not just to be but to be lived in. Is the universe worth anyhting if there is anything not in it to give it value?

Again my purpose is as high as any other can get, not bigger or better in any place but in my own home and estimation of importance, this is the individual in of me speaking,
But the individual means only something/anything to the same who inspires expires it.
God could not stand to be an individual which is why and how God created the family and what it is to be and need to be part of something other than just as individual and alone, the Child is the part of us that cannot be alone.

---------- Post added 12-12-2009 at 02:39 AM ----------

And to not be alone is ours and Gods only purpose.
Making it the all of us both and all.

---------- Post added 12-12-2009 at 02:42 AM ----------

Get onto contradiction tomorrow.:eek:

God's purpose is to look at himself with love, thru the eyes of those by which he is manifested, us. We are God, and our knowledge of ourselves is God's knowledge of God. But this is just a poem for those with open-minds.

We are the universe become self aware, self reflecting.
We are an emmantion of spirit a manifestation of the divine.
We are not however the measure of all things.

I think part of God's purpose is to give everything else a purpose.

To define purpose, you could say that it ultimately depends on a goal or a plan which is superior to the object in question; so for example, the purpose of a pencil might be, in some situations, to draw pictures. That doesn't tell you what the purpose of pictures are - possibly to decorate or to demonstrate something. Even, then, the purpose of decoration is called into question, and so on in an infinite regression. Unless, of course, the trail of purpose stops somewhere, at some kind of self-justifying purposeful entity. This is one of the most important roles that God has: to stop the infinite regression of purpose-seeking futility and provide an ultimate source for purpose and meaning in reality.

This could be construed as circular: the purpose of God is to give everything purpose, including God, but what is the purpose of giving everything purpose? God is the purpose. Such an incomprehensible scheme can only really be sustained by faith, but that's hardly an obstacle for religious believers.