Infinity and God!

  • Thread starter Thread starter wittgenstein
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
wittgenstein said:
But qualia is ( by definition) first person knowledge. Yes, I can understand your pain intellectually but I do not truly know it because I am not experiencing it. Similarly, an infinte being can intellectually understand our pain but not where it really counts, subjectively. Only by becoming human (even if only temporarily ) can he be said to actually understand it.
Click to expand...
I do not believe the bolded is true. Please give me some evidence for it.
 
Can God ( the father) understand our pain if he doesn’t understand ( experience ) it? However, God the son can, and that explains the reason behind the incarnation.
To truly understand our pain one must be finite. God, the father being infinite cannot experience being finite. However, God the son can.
 
If you’re anxious for to shine in the high aesthetic line as a
man of culture rare,
You must get up all the germs of the transcendental terms, and
plant them ev’rywhere.
You must lie upon the daisies and discourse in novel phrases of
your complicated state of mind,
The meaning doesn’t matter if it’s only idle chatter of a
transcendental kind.

And ev’ry one will say,
As you walk your mystic way,
“If this young man expresses himself in terms too deep for me,
Why, what a very singularly deep young man this deep young man
must be!”

-W. S. Gilbert

How extraodinary clever you are. The problem is you haven’t proven anything. Why? Because God doesn’t choose to play " mind " games. But if you think he does, you will certainly find out one day that he doesn’t. He means what he says regardless of how clever we are. You see, he doesn’t really care how clever we are, he cares about how we have followed his plan for our salvation. The whole world can stand up and shake their collective fists at God and accuse him of being unfair and all sorts other shortcomings. It will just demonstrate how stupid the world is. But you see, he knows what is good for us. And he knows the absolutely worst thing for us is that we pretend that we are god. End of story. 👍
 
Code:
You have only stated that I am wrong and clever,without showing why ( that is not an argument,only a statement of your opinion). Perhaps a better way to refute my argument is to actually engage it. As I said previously, I welcome constructive criticism. I am old ( and at the risk of sounding egotistical ) want answers more then attaining brownie points at Catholic forums.
Virtual respect ( like virtual reality) means nothing to me.
To paraphrase Jesus," What would it profit a man to gain all the world’s symbols and lose reality"?
 
Post 23 is silly. I never said that I was God or that God is inferior to me. PLEASE read my posts. That will prevent you from posting gibberish.
 
Please read my posts! I specifically said that intellectual attainment ( 2 vs 1,000,000=cleverness ) does not get us closer to God!
 
Also, your argument is a fallacy. “I am right because I know that God will punish you for disagreeing with me.” There is no substance to your “argument” only threats. But I’m not upset, you are objecting not to me but to how you precieve me, another logical fallacy called “strawman”.
Perhaps you should stay away from the philosophy section of this forum. Philosophy is about rationality, not emotionalism.
 
wittgenstein said:
Can God ( the father) understand our pain if he doesn’t understand ( experience ) it? However, God the son can, and that explains the reason behind the incarnation.
To truly understand our pain one must be finite. God, the father being infinite cannot experience being finite. However, God the son can.
Click to expand...
wittgenstein, i hope you don’t mind if i say your idea is daft. he would have had to set us up for a fall with a fake devil tempter so that he could have the experience of being finite and experiencing pain. it sounds like a star-trek storyline. do you write for tv? in all seriousness, to be tortured to death as an experiment?
 
So you are saying that God (the infinite father) can experience being finite without becoming the son (a finite being that actually said," My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me")?
 
Actually, Paddy I am a nerd and love Star Trek. Google “youtube Q’s lessons”
However, to reject my arguments because of me is to commit the logical fallacy of “ad hominum”. For example the below is a logical fallacy.
  1. Manson is an evil liar.
  2. Manson said that 2+2=4.
  3. Therefore 2+2 does not =4.
    Anyway, google “youtube Q’s lessons”. It is very amusing. Unfortunately,. I’m using a tablet and cannot give a link to the site.
 
wittgenstein said:
Code:
You have only stated that I am wrong and clever,without showing why ( that is not an argument,only a statement of your opinion). Perhaps a better way to refute my argument is to actually engage it. As I said previously, I welcome constructive criticism. I am old ( and at the risk of sounding egotistical ) want answers more then attaining brownie points at Catholic forums.
Virtual respect ( like virtual reality) means nothing to me.
To paraphrase Jesus," What would it profit a man to gain all the world’s symbols and lose reality"?
Click to expand...
Wittgenstein, you can believe or think whatever you please. But don’t suppose that your mind games have shown us a path to Truth. Neither I nor anyone else has to refute them, they are just silly. If you think, after all the decades of your life, that they will lead you to the Truth, I pitty you. However, St. Paul had the best approach, “…I will preach Christ and Him Curcified…” If you are really interested in the Truth, read the Scriptures ( with an open mind ) and then read and study the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( no need to invest in is on the Vatican website for all to read). That is my answer, my argument if you will. 👍
 
Good grief! As I said previously ,engage my arguments rather then insulting me. You continue on your path of appearing irrelevant.
Anyway, for something actually interesting, the Q’s lessons video I agree with. When trying to understand the infinite, the best thing to do is open your mind as too how weird God is to our finite mind. That does not mean that God is weird (a finite concept, that I am sure went over your head), it means that God’s logic seems weird to our finite minds.
I think that God truly loves those that have a craving to understand him. Just a speculation, I could be wrong, but I’m not!🙂
 
Actually, Paddy I’m a very handsome nerd and quite popular. Ask my wife!🙂
 
wittgenstein said:
So you are saying that God (the infinite father) can experience being finite without becoming the son (a finite being that actually said," My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me")?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure if I’m going to jump into this discussion beyond this, and maybe I’m just being picky - but, I wouldn’t call Jesus a finite being. Jesus, after all, remains God, an infinite being - although He has assumed a finite nature.

Maybe I’m too concerned with your choice of words, and I’m guessing you probably did not intend to say that God the Son actually ceased to be infinite.
 
wittgenstein;10156782 * said:
This is a very good, and quite valid point. Who is to say that the most sophisticated theologian, writing learned tomes, is any closer to God than the most simple peasant woman, mumbling the Rosary on her knees, or even the primitive man, gazing at the moon in unthinking adoration under the influence of peyote?

God is eternally beyond all, even beyond ‘God’ Himself…
Click to expand...
 
wittgenstein said:
Good grief! As I said previously ,engage my arguments rather then insulting me. You continue on your path of appearing irrelevant.
Anyway, for something actually interesting, the Q’s lessons video I agree with. When trying to understand the infinite, the best thing to do is open your mind as too how weird God is to our finite mind. That does not mean that God is weird (a finite concept, that I am sure went over your head), it means that God’s logic seems weird to our finite minds.
I think that God truly loves those that have a craving to understand him. Just a speculation, I could be wrong, but I’m not!🙂
Click to expand...
I agree that God loves all those who love him but we cannot hope to " understand " him fullly. He is infinitely beyond us. As Pseudo-Dionysis, St. Thomas and most good theologians emphasize. we can approach the true nature of God only by remotion. For example, we know he is Goodness itself but the comprehension of that Goodness is infinately beyond us.

God the Son became man by assuming a human nature. He did so not to " experience " our pain but because he wanted to offer attonment to the Fathe for man’s sins and to justify man so that his salvation might be possible. True, the Son experienced true suffering in his human nature. That does not mean that God did not know the real meaning of human pain and suffering before Christ was Incarnated. To say that God did not know exactly what this suffering was like is to say that God is not perfect, which is to say he is not God. We cannot apply human categories to God. He created us, he knows all about us and knows how we feel. He experiences our pain and suffering in a way infinitely beyond our understanding. 👍
 
How can something know ( first person, qualia) what it is like being finite, without being finite (even if only temporarily ).
To understand something from outside (a second person narrative) is not a first person understanding.
Pain (qualia) is a first person understanding. * For God (the father) to understand suffering he must experience suffering from a first person,finite perspective. That is the reason for the incarnation. Not as an experiment, Star Trek like( whatever that means) but as the only way to have empathy. The only way God ( or anything ) can love us.
To love us without understanding us is like saying,“I love"x”. “X” being something undefined, not understood. That is meaningless. God’s love for us is not meaningless. And that is the reason for the incarnation!
  • For example, suppose I have never experienced pain. Suppose, I have never experienced being vulnerable. Can I truly be said to understand your pain? God the father became (temporarily ) finite (the son) to understand our suffering, have real empathy and truly love us.
 
I strongly regret the viris in my computer,that makes me resort to this tablet. Not only because of the numerous grammatical mistakes I make because of my big fat fingers, but more importantly because I cannot paste sites.
Anyway, trust me! Google," youtube, good will hunting, park scene"!
 
wittgenstein said:
How can something know ( first person, qualia) what it is like being finite, without being finite (even if only temporarily ).
To understand something from outside (a second person narrative) is not a first person understanding.
Pain (qualia) is a first person understanding. * For God (the father) to understand suffering he must experience suffering from a first person,finite perspective. That is the reason for the incarnation. Not as an experiment, Star Trek like( whatever that means) but as the only way to have empathy. The only way God ( or anything ) can love us.
To love us without understanding us is like saying,“I love"x”. “X” being something undefined, not understood. That is meaningless. God’s love for us is not meaningless. And that is the reason for the incarnation!
  • For example, suppose I have never experienced pain. Suppose, I have never experienced being vulnerable. Can I truly be said to understand your pain? God the father became (temporarily ) finite (the son) to understand our suffering, have real empathy and truly love us.
Click to expand...
No its not the reason for the incarnation Biblically. Death through evil entered the world. Communion/Grace with the Father was altered. Communion was restored at the Cross.

The words you quote from Christ and the Cross are in relation to Psalm-22. God was never out of Communion with Himself as Jesus Christ, He came to restore the severed Communion. Had he been out of Communion, then He would not be God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top