5 ms·

For whatever it's worth, at least as that wiki page described it, 'god' isn't cognitively meaningful. Most Christian philosophers I've read fall into a camp tha

For whatever it's worth, at least as that wiki page described it, 'god' isn't cognitively meaningful. Most Christian philosophers I've read fall into a camp that would say that "hope" and "love" are real and cognitively meaningful, but also metaphysical and therefore something that we can know partially but not completely (and, as you say, understood poorly as a result of the incomplete knowledge).

jimmy1 9y ago
yes. God is love, and God is hope, but those do not constitute the entirety of what God is It corresponds with God's name of himself in the OT as well as Jesus's name of Himself as well: “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM”. “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’" then in John's Gospel, Jesus says, "before Abraham was, I AM"
- padobson 9y ago
  I don't know why you're being downvoted. Those passages in the Bible are some of the most relevant to the OP.
  - jimmy1 9y ago
    I've come to expect it in the current climate. People see bible passages and have an instant visceral reaction. I can understand it to an extent.
    - 09bjb 9y ago
      I've got some gripes with Jordan Peterson's popularity but everyone needs to hear this (paraphrasing): "OK, you're going to disregard all of Christianity because there are literal untruths in the Bible? We have a word for people who insist on the literal truth of sacred texts: fundamentalists. I'm sorry, it was probably never meant to be literally true, it's describing stuff that's better understood as story/myth. You're going to have to try a little harder."
    - bonesss 9y ago
      While persecution is expected and desired by that particular faith, I think you're awful quick hopping to a visceral reaction to religious sources instead of HNs visceral reaction to factual inaccuracy. > yes. God is love, and God is hope, but those do not constitute the entirety of what God is This is a reply in the context of an epistemological argument that that word you are using simply cannot mean things if you keep using it like that, and very much not the things you quoted... Not "yes": "NaN" or "undefined symbol" or "mu". How many liters of god can I pour into my bathtub? How many liters of Coca-cola? ... We used to, but we no longer talk about god as a 'thing'. "Coca-cola is love, coca-cola is hope, but coca-cola is so much more"...? Sure. Things respond well to metaphor, and simile. "Hate is love, hate is hope, but hate is so much more"...? No, doesn't work, because hate is a meaningful concept. Meaningful concepts cannot arbitrarily be ascribed other meaningful concepts while retaining their meaning. "God" can though. Despite its framing, like in your post, as something that should not be able to arbitrarily be ascribed to other concepts. God is itchiness, god is morning sunrises, god is monkey brains covered in dew. God is all, god is nothing, alpha and omega...? That "god" cannot be a god, or GOD. That "god" is both an abstract and meaningless notion. That god is awesome for selling subscription services, tho.
      - jimmy1 9y ago
        > HNs visceral reaction to factual inaccuracy. Interesting claim. In any case, I wasn't responding to your comment about theological noncognitivism, I was commenting on parent's reference to apophatic theology (theology which emphasizes our inability to know God with our minds) by merely driving the point home with some traits or characteristics commonly used to refer to God but also saying these things are not the entirety of God's being or character. The rest of your silliness doesn't really apply since I was not arguing "God is everything"

jimmy1 9y ago

yes. God is love, and God is hope, but those do not constitute the entirety of what God is It corresponds with God's name of himself in the OT as well as Jesus's name of Himself as well: “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM”. “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’" then in John's Gospel, Jesus says, "before Abraham was, I AM"

padobson 9y ago
I don't know why you're being downvoted. Those passages in the Bible are some of the most relevant to the OP.
- jimmy1 9y ago
  I've come to expect it in the current climate. People see bible passages and have an instant visceral reaction. I can understand it to an extent.
  - 09bjb 9y ago
    I've got some gripes with Jordan Peterson's popularity but everyone needs to hear this (paraphrasing): "OK, you're going to disregard all of Christianity because there are literal untruths in the Bible? We have a word for people who insist on the literal truth of sacred texts: fundamentalists. I'm sorry, it was probably never meant to be literally true, it's describing stuff that's better understood as story/myth. You're going to have to try a little harder."
  - bonesss 9y ago
    While persecution is expected and desired by that particular faith, I think you're awful quick hopping to a visceral reaction to religious sources instead of HNs visceral reaction to factual inaccuracy. > yes. God is love, and God is hope, but those do not constitute the entirety of what God is This is a reply in the context of an epistemological argument that that word you are using simply cannot mean things if you keep using it like that, and very much not the things you quoted... Not "yes": "NaN" or "undefined symbol" or "mu". How many liters of god can I pour into my bathtub? How many liters of Coca-cola? ... We used to, but we no longer talk about god as a 'thing'. "Coca-cola is love, coca-cola is hope, but coca-cola is so much more"...? Sure. Things respond well to metaphor, and simile. "Hate is love, hate is hope, but hate is so much more"...? No, doesn't work, because hate is a meaningful concept. Meaningful concepts cannot arbitrarily be ascribed other meaningful concepts while retaining their meaning. "God" can though. Despite its framing, like in your post, as something that should not be able to arbitrarily be ascribed to other concepts. God is itchiness, god is morning sunrises, god is monkey brains covered in dew. God is all, god is nothing, alpha and omega...? That "god" cannot be a god, or GOD. That "god" is both an abstract and meaningless notion. That god is awesome for selling subscription services, tho.
    - jimmy1 9y ago
      > HNs visceral reaction to factual inaccuracy. Interesting claim. In any case, I wasn't responding to your comment about theological noncognitivism, I was commenting on parent's reference to apophatic theology (theology which emphasizes our inability to know God with our minds) by merely driving the point home with some traits or characteristics commonly used to refer to God but also saying these things are not the entirety of God's being or character. The rest of your silliness doesn't really apply since I was not arguing "God is everything"