Финиковый компотIn the Russian philosophy magazine, Date-Palm Compote, philosophy student at Moscow State University, Eugene Loginov, recently interviewed Steve Fuller on his views about arguments concerning the existence of God. Question is for what sort of god are we looking for? I think we should wonder if there does exist some God above all those gods human beings took for themselves.

Eugene Loginov, asks

If you tried to prove God’s existence (or to make a claim against its existence), what definition of the notion of “God” would you use? Do you think that the classic definition of “God” as “the all-good, omniscient and omnipotent creator of the world” is still the suitable one? {Steve Fuller on Proofs for God’s Existence: An Interview, Eugene Loginov}

Has mankind a need of a Omnipotent God Who is above all other gods? Is there a need for such God and are we willing to see such a God in case He exists. When there is such a Divine Creator God could we describe Him as  “the all-good” when we do so much suffering on this world? Certain Christians say their god Jesus died for the sins of all people and now they are saved, but we still can see lots of suffering going on. So when they are right and The God would have come to earth to bring salvation, why did He wait so long and when he took charge of that saving action by doing as if he died on the cross, why did not all misery came to an end?

What do some Christians mean with God being the

transcendental optimizer of all the virtues. {Steve Fuller in his interview with Eugene Loginov}

According to Steve Fuller

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, a philosopher who ...
Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, French Jesuit priest and philosopher who trained as a paleontologist and geologist (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

God is not merely all good, all powerful, etc. After all, any of one of those qualities taken to the extreme may be incompatible with the others — and may turn out to result in more bad than good. (Think of what might happen to humans if God were a ruthlessly efficient superintelligent computer.) It follows that God contains all the virtues in a way that enables them to cohere together in his person to maximum overall positive effect — a convergence to a ‘divine singularity’, if you will, or what Pierre Teilhard de Chardin called the ‘Omega Point’. However, it may not be obvious what such a transcendental optimizer would look like, since such a God would be constituted in a way which appears — at least from a human perspective — to involve trade-offs between the virtues.

It looks like this man does not believe God is a very Super-intelligent Being. Though when everything came to being by the Word spoken by That everlasting, always having been there and having no ending, this Omnipotent God must have all the wisdom which transcends all wisdom of the things and beings He created. The Divine Creator must have all Wisdom in Him to be able to create what we can see around us and all the things we do not even see now at this moment, but which shall still have to be discovered.

Stained glass at St John the Baptist's Anglica...
Stained glass at St John the Baptist’s Anglican Church, Ashfield, New South Wales. Illustrates Jesus’ description of himself “I am the Good Shepherd” (from the Gospel of John, chapter 10, verse 11). This version of the image shows the detail of his face. The memorial window is also captioned: “To the Glory of God and in Loving Memory of William Wright. Died 6th November, 1932. Aged 70 Yrs.” (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

For some Christians their god transformed himself on several occasions.  They look at Jesus Christ describing himself thrice as “the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end” who who in the words of the Nicene Creed, would be “God from God,” “Light from Light,” “True God from true God,” and “through him all things were made.”

When we are created in the image of God it must be that we are having elements like certain things that God has. Men and women both have to be in the image of that Supreme Being, so you could wonder if He is both male and female.
When created in the image of God you also would think God has implanted in His creatures by nature the knowledge of His existence,

although “in a general and confused way,” as a consequence of the Fall. {God exists — Thomas Aquinas’ Five Ways}

writes Who Needs Truth? and the apostle Paul also pointed to that way

As the apostle Paul says, “For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse” (Rom. 1:20, ESV). {God exists — Thomas Aquinas’ Five Ways}

Cameron, speaking at a debate on the existence...
Cameron, speaking at a debate on the existence of God at Calvary Baptist Church in Manhattan, May 5, 2007. In this picture, Cameron cites the lack of a “crocoduck” as evidence against evolution. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Having attributes of God implanted in us we also do have desires and have the possibility to think and to become aware of things provided by that Maker. Being created in the image we may well have some idea of attributes we have, god may have too. But when He made us He would be even greater than us. Lots of people say they know that God is immaterial, spaceless, timeless, and can appear at more than one place at once, but how do they know that? What makes them think those things?

Atmospheric optical phenomenon often seen as a sign of the gods or of God. – A double rainbow at Minsi Lake, Pennsylvania

We know that many natural phenomena were contributed in the past to gods. It was an easy way to explains such phenomena. Those things we could not explain where said to be caused by gods.The unexplainable was considered a wonder, miracle or magic. Those special features people could see around them occasionally have been defined as supernatural events, but this definition presupposes a very specific conception of nature and natural laws and cannot, therefore, be generally applied.

Belief in miraculous happenings is a feature of practically all religions, and the incidence of miracles (i.e., of belief in and reports regarding miracles) is universal, though their functions, nature, purpose, and explanations vary with the social and cultural—including theological and philosophical—context in which they appear. However inexplicable, all miracles have an explanation in the sense that they are accounted for in terms of the religious and cultural system that supports them and that, in turn, they are meant to support. Without such an accompanying—explicit or implicit—theory (e.g., the presence, activity, and intervention of such realities as gods, spirits, or magical powers), there would be no miracles in the aforementioned sense but only unexplained phenomena. {Encyclopeadia Britannica on the topic miracle}

Baldung Hexen 1508 kol.JPG
Witches by Hans Baldung. Woodcut, 1508

When we look at special or incredible events,being called miracles, we can see that those (real) miracles are likewise convincing to a limited number only.

For instance, a Buddhist would not be convinced by the miracles of Moses which are proofs only so far as the orthodox Jews are concerned, because they love Moses. On the other hand the miracles attributed to Jesus Christ are refuted by the Jews as a whole, saying

“No one lives today who has seen these miracles performed, therefore, who can bear testimony to them?” {4 October ― 8 Mashíyyat}

Man’s eye’s and mind often do not perceive how to cope with those incredible things which are notated in the sacred writings of the monotheist worshippers who claim to worship the Only One True God. some may think it all has to do with stories in which people came to believe, whilst others still claim that miracles still happen today. Others find such miracles just sorcery or witchcraft, like it was also thought of in the middle ages.

Sorcery be it witchcraft or black magic or wizardry, became used to invoke the supernatural powers for personal or evil purposes, thus evil magic. But also people who followed nature and seemed to do things others could not find ‘normal’, being credited with usually malignant supernatural powers became accused to be witches or sorceress and often where killed because they did things others did not understand or because they managed to live longer than others. People saw witchcraft or sorcery practised by a women whom they accused of being possessed by demons.

Allah has described in the Qur’an that these magic trickery and astrology was taught to them by devils by which we can wonder who those devils and demons where are are. Are it bad gods or strange eternal or extraterrestrial beings? Many Muslims also believe it was God Who gave the task to two angels, Haroot and Maroot, to test people. But why had those people to be tested. though it is also said they used to warn people, but they did not listen, and learned which caused harm to other people. There are Muslims who believe that the harm was done by Allah’s permission, so in reality this would mean that we are harming ourselves by learning the magic, as act of disbelief is to be committed for learning magic and that God allows us to be harmed.

In Torah sorcery is forbidden, and a learner of it is considered to be a disbeliever, and that he will be in hell forever. For that reason it is said that the punishment of eternal residence in hell (as the will have no share in hereafter) can only be for something sever and haram. [In Islamic jurisprudence, haram is used to refer to any act that is forbidden by Allah, and is one of five Islamic commandments (الأحكام الخمسة‎ (al-ahkam al-khamsah)) that define the morality of human action.]

But still today lots of people love to believe in extra incredible things, magic or things they would be able to claim from their gods. In that way we do find many religious people who make statues of their gods and so called holy people and dress up their gods even bringing them food and other offerings for them. But what did those gods really do for them or how did those worshippers get replies? And what made so many generations still keep worshipping such gods?

What made the worship of those different gods so different to the worship of Allah or the Divine True God?

Did the Creator Allah or the Divine True God, Most High Maker of all things, allow all those other gods for a certain reason? Could He have prevented it, or did He allowed it to happen so as to make people aware of its reality and how to deal with it?

When we look at the Holy Scriptures we come to read that one of the most important attributes of Allah would be the “al-Uloo”, meaning highness or transcendence, Him being everywhere and in everything, dwelling within His creation and existing above and within His creation. The name Ali, is derived from it, meaning the transcendent one, one of the names
of Allah and acceptable as human name as well.

Having been made in the image of the Divine Creator one can imagine that Maker having implanted some instinct or an inborn knowledge. as such there are people who know of Allah or God by virtue of His generosity, bounties and favours. Others know of Him through His forgiveness, clemency, and pardoning, feeling those blessings, like His mercy, goodness, kindness, courtesy,  in their daily life. Throughout the ages all over the world there have been people who felt God’s presence and felt His guidance. By His knowledge and wisdom they found Who God was and what He did for mankind. Others recognize Him by His Might and Majesty, whilst others by His subduing and sovereignty.
Most special about that God of gods is that many people have felt that magic touch and powerful presence Which gives them answers to their supplications and fulfils their needs plus also relieving their grief.

Immanuel Kant (painted portrait).jpg
Immanuel Kant, German philosopher whose comprehensive and systematic work in epistemology (the theory of knowledge), ethics, and aesthetics greatly influenced all subsequent philosophy, especially the various schools of Kantianism and idealism.

Human writers like the German philosopher who is considered the central figure of modern philosophy, Immanuel Kant offered theories of knowledge and about human beings their way of feeling and need of certain ideas. He thought about being beyond the limits of experience and hence unknowable. Would it not be possible that the Divine Creator God is such a Supreme Being that It/He or She surpasses all other beings? Could it not be that the Source of everything is a Rabb (Lord) to Whom belongs the most majestic and perfect attributes which surpasses all human attributes? Naturally man with his pride has difficulties in believing in such Being that would be far removed from having a parable or equal, free from all kinds of defects and imperfections, qualified with every beautiful name and every perfect attribute, doer of what He intends, what He wills, above everything. Most difficult thing to accept for human beings is that this Supreme Being would encompass everything while He is the Most High above everything; the One Who is able to do everything, the One who manages the affairs of everything. Most people want to have everything themselves under control and want to command others, not being commanded themselves. So having to face Some One Who would command and forbid and Who speaks the Legislative and Universal words, being greater than everything makes it harsh to cope with. When He/She or It also would be the Most Beautiful, the Most Merciful, the All-Able, the All-Wise, this makes many jealous and not willing to accept such a Supreme Being would be able to exist.

With that Supreme Being that spoke and Its/His or Her Words came into being, did come things to be, or where made, because Its/His or Her greatness, excellence, superiority, supremacy, ascendancy, pre-eminence, sublimity, paramountcy, incomparability, matchlessness, we do have to face a Transcendent Being in contrast to a Immanent Being or something what is just only in each of us, remaining within; inherent and restricted entirely to the mind; subjective.

Immanence has had an important role since the time of Kant, who posed the problem of the so-called immanent use of reason, that is, of its limitations: in Kant’s view, the valid use of reason was limited in scope to the world of phenomena given in experience (as opposed to the invalid, or transcendent, use of reason, which goes beyond the bounds of possible experience). The adherents of immanentist philosophy refer to their conception by that name because in their view the object of knowledge appears as the internal content of consciousness. The term “immanent” is also used for philosophical criticism that considers a doctrine from the point of view of how consistently it adheres to its own premises. {immanence; The Great Soviet Encyclopedia, 3rd Edition (1970-1979). © 2010 The Gale Group, Inc.}

Human beings are limited by lots of elements and would love to see a Being that has no such limitations, though often it also makes them afraid to have such a  superior being. This way there where those who are totally against such a being whilst others created many gods. But what we can see about them is that most of them, not to say all of them, had human elements in them which also limited them or brought them in awkward situations. Looking for a Being to have the quality of being able to go beyond normal limits or boundaries also can have created the idea of there being a god, gods or Allah The God. As such The Divine Creator God has to have the quality or state of being transcendent.



2nd question: What or where is the beginning

3rd question: Does there exist a Divine Creator

Looking for answers on the question Is there a God #2 Pantheon of gods and celebrations


Additional reading

  1. An anarchistic reading of the Bible (2)—Creation and what follows
  2. Creator and Blogger God 2 Image and likeness
  3. Creation of the earth and man #17 Man in the image and likeness of the Elohim #1 In the image and after the likeness
  4. Creation of the earth and man #18 Man in the image and likeness of the Elohim #2 Assimilation of character
  5. Creation of the earth and man #19 Man in the image and likeness of the Elohim #3 Beholding image and likeness of the invisible God
  6. Man in the image and likeness of the Elohim #8 The Formation of woman #1
  7. Man in the image and likeness of the Elohim #9 The Formation of woman #2
  8. A multifold of elements in creation and a bad choice made
  9. Messenger of Satan


Further reading

  1. Atheism and the Meaning of Life
  2. Defining God
  3. Who Is This God?
  4. God the Mother
  5. Quote of the Week: Francis A. Schaeffer
  6. Meet Your Maker: God’s Image in Us
  7. Created in God’s image
  8. The Early Church’s view on the image of God and the Logos Doctrine
  9. Image of God: A Design Restored
  10. Image of God
  11. The Image of God
  12. Nuggets – God’s Image
  13. Images of God: Rainbow
  14. Gods Image of Humans
  15. What Is Your Image of God?
  16. It’s a Bizzare Image at That
  17. In God’s Image
  18. In the Image of God?
  19. There is a difference between God’s “image” and God’s “likeness”.
  20. Our Image
  21. In His Image
  22. Self image and God image
  23. I Am God’s Impeccable Image
  24. God’s Image Grows From Boys To Men At Transformation (Video)
  25. My self image vs God’s image of me…
  26. The Image of God: Our Divine-Connected Dignity
  27. The True Temple of God – a sermon for Advent
  28. Jesus Christ: The Word of God
  29. How Can God Be 3 In 1
  30. The Identity Beneath Your Identities
  31. Daily Riches: Where God Prefers to Live (Thomas Merton)
  32. Man as a Microcosm
  33. 21 Days Devotional: Who Am I?
  34. Revealed In Us
  35. No, You Are Not of Infinite Worth
  36. The Atheism of Believers
  37. More on Denying God’s Existence and Yet Oddly Confirming God’s Law
  38. A learning God?
  39. What Does it Mean to Be Created in God’s Image?
  40. Our Failed Attempt at Being gods
  41. Just like God, but not really
  42. Meditation Monday: Reflection
  43. Picked Apart-Put Together-Pull Up
  44. Christmas Without All The Trimmings
  45. Omer – Day 49
  46. #TuesdayThoughts – Image
  47. #ThankfulThursday – Being Me
  48. Aoration
  49. Why God’s View of Humanity Matters
  50. You are Beautiful!
  51. Created
  52. Congratulating or Greeting the disbelievers | Ibn al-Qayyim
  53. “Those With Him Are Severe Against The Unbelievers…” Surah 48:29
  54. Internal Evidence
  55. 4 October ― 8 Mashíyyat
  56. The Baptist Catechism: Holy Scriptures chiefly contain what man ought to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man.
  57. The Baptist Catechism: The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the Word of God, and the only certain rule of faith and obedience.
  58. Wonder and Comfort
  59. All Scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach … (2 Tim 3:16-17)
  60. Scripture study suitable to the needs of the present day
  61. World’s Fastest Growing Religion?











27 thoughts on “Looking for answers on the question Is there a God #3 Transcendence or Surpassing other gods and man

  1. ‘Welk soort god zoeken wij’ betekent een puur verstandelijke benadering of vraag vanuit ons nieuwsgierige brein terwijl die vragen onbeantwoord blijven omdat die vraag niet gesteld kan worden. God leeft in je hart en is dus een gevoelskwestie, een gevoelservaring. Iedereen die vanuit hartsbewustzijn heeft leren werken (voelen) weet dat god dan naar jou toekomt en ervaringen met jou gaat delen. Alle vragen die mensen kortom over god stellen, is vanuit een invalshoek die onbeantwoordbaar omdat die god niet bereikbaar is en ook niet bestaat. Zie de omschrijving van God de Vader in Urantiaboek (waarover bij een volgende gelegenheid meer; zie ook op internet).

    Maar hierbij ook de link naar mijn site waarin ik Jaap Hiddinga aan het woord laat over het wezen of de manifestatie van God:


    1. Als onvolmaakte wezens die de kern van het leven willen ontdekken, zitten wij natuurlijk gekweld met die vraag van oorsprong en zoeken wij nar een bepaling van datgene wat tot het ontstaan leidde.

      Ik ga totaal akkoord dat God iets is dat moet leven in je hart. Men kan er niet onderuit dat God een gevoelskwestie is. Men moet God aanvoelen. Zonder aanvoelen kan er trouwens geen bewustzijn zijn.

      Ik kan echter niet geloven dat “Iedereen die vanuit hartsbewustzijn heeft leren werken (voelen) weet dat god dan naar jou toekomt en ervaringen met jou gaat delen. ” Er zijn namelijk voldoende mensen die werkelijk vanuit het diepste der diepste innerlijke zelf eerlijk tegenover anderen willen staan en aan anderen goed doen. Nochtans zijn die atheïsten die ook zeer veel goede werken doen en werkelijk vanuit hun eigen hartsbewustzijn leven niet instaat God te vinden. Of willen zij God niet erkennen, maar voelen zij wel zo iets aan?


      1. “Ik kan echter niet geloven dat “Iedereen die vanuit hartsbewustzijn heeft leren werken (voelen) weet dat god dan naar jou toekomt en ervaringen met jou gaat delen. ” Er zijn namelijk voldoende mensen die werkelijk vanuit het diepste der diepste innerlijke zelf eerlijk tegenover anderen willen staan en aan anderen goed doen. Nochtans zijn die atheïsten die ook zeer veel goede werken doen en werkelijk vanuit hun eigen hartsbewustzijn leven niet instaat God te vinden. Of willen zij God niet erkennen, maar voelen zij wel zo iets aan?

        1. Nochtans zijn die atheïsten die ook zeer veel goede werken doen en werkelijk vanuit hun eigen hartsbewustzijn leven niet instaat God te vinden”. Dit is een gewetensvraag, waarop ik geen antwoord durf te geven. Waarom niet? Ten eerste vind ik het moeilijk op atheïsten een stempel van ‘ongelovigen’ te drukken, want wat voor een kerkelijk persoon een ongelovige is, is dat voor mij geenszins op voorhand het geval. I de tweede plaats zal die atheïst in beginsel inderdaad ontkennen dat hij in een goddelijkheid gelooft, maar 9 op de 10 atheïsten zal rationeel ontkennen dat er een ‘kerkelijke god’ bestaat en ze hebben gelijk. Vanuit dit symbolische antwoord wil ik maar zeggen dat waar de gemiddelde atheïst een rationeel verstandsmens is, ze hebben nooit geleerd om het goddelijke vanuit het gevoel te zoeken en te benaderen. Kortom, ik kan pas aangegeven of die persoon gelijk heeft of niet als ik in een persoonlijk gesprek tot een doorvraging kan komen om aan te horen wat hij/zij precies bedoelt. Daarom is een ‘gewoon antwoord’ op deze vraag niet mogelijk. Want persoons- en omstandigheden gebonden. De meeste atheïsten zijn bovendien intellectuelen, die geen ervaring hebben in het gevoelsmatige zoeken naar het goddelijke en zo vinden ze het nooit, terwijl ik het best mogelijk acht dat zij zonder het te weten dagelijks contact met het goddelijke hebben. Het klinkt paradoxaal, maar is dat niet, want zo kan het werken.

        2. “Of willen zij God niet erkennen, maar voelen zij wel zo iets aan?” En zo kom ik vanzelf op deze optie uit. Wetend dat zij die vraag zelf niet kunnen beantwoorden, omdat zij daarmee ‘gemiddeld’ geen ervaring hebben. Je zou dit ook (vrouwelijke) intuïtie kunnen noemen en dat is vaak de zwakke plek van mannen.


        1. Ik geloof dat er heel wat mensen zijn die wel iets van een godheid aanvoelen maar pertinent zich willen verzetten tegen dat wat zij zelf niet begrijpen en anderen ook idioot vinden.

          Het erkennen van iets dat men emotioneel aan voelt valt oh zo moeilijk.


    2. In de link die u opgeeft wordt over de schepping gesproken.

      Indien de “echte schepping nooit tot doel had de groei en evolutie van individuele zielen te bevorderen” (zoals u aan haalt) wat was dan de essentie van een godheid om zich te willen plaatsen in anderen? Waarom had hij anderen nodig?


      1. “Indien de “echte schepping nooit tot doel had de groei en evolutie van individuele zielen te bevorderen” (zoals u aan haalt) wat was dan de essentie van een godheid om zich te willen plaatsen in anderen? Waarom had hij anderen nodig?”

        Alles in de schepping en in de kosmos heeft een doel en dat is groei en evolutie waar het om individuele zielen gaat. Voor andere levensvormen geldt dat ook maar dan anders dan de mensheid van onze ‘golfstroom’. Ook geldt dat de essentie van het goddelijke in iedere levensvorm aanwezig is, zowel in mensen als in andere levensvormen. Alles is immers de totale God of het goddelijke Wezen. En dus het geen kwestie dat het goddelijke anderen nodig heeft, want die oorzakelijkheid bestaat niet. Wel dat het goddelijke alles bestiert en bestuurt, maar ook als goddelijk kerngedeelte in de vorm van een zielenkern in ieder mens aanwezig is, zodat Het van alles getuige is wat er gebeurt in de schepping en ook op aarde. De mens kan om deze Aanwezigheid nooit het goddelijke de schuld geven dat er zoveel fouten voorkomen in het menselijke DNA of in levenshandelingen. Want dat onvolmaakte gebeurt vanwege het onvolmaakte Bewustzijn van de mens dat oorspronkelijk goddelijk en volmaakt was, maar door het feit dat de mens zoals op aarde zijn eigen weg wilde gaan, draagt hij zelf ook de verantwoordelijkheid om weer terug te keren in het goddelijke Licht. Ieder mens die dat Licht heeft gevonden zal daarom ook als verlichte op een aards paradijs kunnen leven omdat hij vrede heeft met zichzelf en met zijn omgeving. Hij is dan één met het goddelijke in zichzelf en laat zich leiden door signalen vanuit zijn ziel. En komen dan geen onvolkomenheden voor.

        Is dit te volgen?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.