The Epistemic Communication Dilemma Why Infinite Consequences Require Perfect Communication My Personal Argument

[Acltalls]

@anew1

If the attributes of God are 'omniscience’, the ability to know everything; ‘omnipotence’, the ability to do anything; and ‘omnipresence’, the ability to be present everywhere, which emphasize the infinite and transcendent nature of God, then God, in the visible sense is the Universe, Itself, and, in the invisible sense is the Mind, Itself.

When the word ‘God’ is being defined in the ways above, then how I know ‘God’ exists is because these things, which are attributed to God, obviously exist.

The fact that both the infinite, all-encompassing, Universe, and the transcendent Mind exist, proves that God, Itself, exists.

Obviously, God is not something that could be nor is above, beyond, or apart from Nature, Itself. What proves God exists, to me, are the very Things, which exist, that can be attributed to the word God.

I am basing my argument about God from this post you put about your definition of God.

You can’t claim that any of the three attributes that you say God has obviously exist without first proving such a thing so I ask these following questions:

How do you know omnipotence is possible? Or that omniscience is possible? Or that omnipresence are possible? How do you know that anything could have such properties?

What is the proof you have of the transcendent mind? How do you define the transcendent mind? What is the mind in relation to people if God is the mind itself in the invisible sense? Are you claiming that we are God? As in we are a part of God and God a part of us?