Pericles,

>>if you can pick and choose your definition of God<<

I do not remember having provided a definition of God. You asked me what was the image of God that Christians do not believe exists, and I tried to comply.

You can define a concept by means of other, more basic concepts, so the “definition” would depend on what basic self-explanatory concepts you choose to define the new concept with. I know what is the definition of a topological space, but I do not know how to “define” mathematics, time, culture, religion, God etc to everybody’s satisfaction.

Nevertheless, here is one example of such “definition” as found in the recent “The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss” by David H. Hart (Yale UP 2013). As all such “definitions” it must assume something that some can understand and agree with and others don’t:

“God is not only the ultimate reality that the intellect and the will seek but it is also the primordial reality with which all of us are always engaged in every moment of existence and consciousness, apart from which we have no experience of anything whatsoever. Or, to borrow the language of Augustine, God is not only superior summo meo - beyond my utmost heights - but also interior intimo meo - more inward to me than my inmost depths.”

And he adds,

“Only when one understands what such a claim means does one know what the word “God” really means, and whether it is reasonable to think that there is a reality to which that word refers, and in which we should believe”.
(ctd)

(ctd)

>>That tells us nothing about the God that he believes in, only what he doesn't believe in. <<

Probably so, a single quote does not tell you what Peter Sellick is trying to say. You have to read the whole article if you want to understand him. I don’t think I could extract more from what he wrote than you can.

>>atheists were dragged into your ponderings, courtesy of the Reverend Bruce Barber<<

I never mentioned Rev. Barber in my posts, I do not know who he is or what he wrote.

>>only Christians concern themselves with <<

Well, there are also things that only mathematicians, physicists, philosophers etc concern themselves with that outsiders don’t understand or are not interested in.

Ausieboy how wonderful to read a post that makes you smile, it was a breath of fresh air for a change. I must away and talk to the nearest tree who I am sure will understand my non beliefs in Gods, Fairies, Gnomes, Humpty Dumpty and the rest.
Oh my goodness I forgot that inventor of brimstone & fire, the Devil

peters patter/quote..<<..we…join with the atheists in claiming that God does not "exist",>>

THAT JUST BURNS ME UP
IMAGINE is it/from A GOD OF GOOD..
or a dark demon...his words sending me demons..[his words fruits]

<<in that sense..[non sense]..in which philosophical theists and atheists are forever locked in futile dispute.>>

thats just so funny/even in hell..demons are in no dispute/re god existance..none in heaven..nor in hell/what has changed between you freaking materialists..living here..THEN GOING THERE>?

DO TELL/WHAT HAS CHANGED
that all in the after life only dispute re the number
not that god exists..how do you not grasp omnipresent..includes every existance.

science says..the vast majority of the big bang was done [in point ooooooo/something..of one second]..and they cant see..the Forrest for the tree..

<<..For "existence" is far too content-less and sterile a term. That is the "easy debate."..>>

please clarify peter
i must judge the words fruits

<<Rather, today we want to say that God is the conclusion of "what happens" between Jesus and his Father in their Spirit>>

JESUS IS NEVER COMING Back
saul/paul..and so many others
have muddied..the waters..between man that jesus is
between our god who 'created'/ejaculated' the planetoids..AMONG THE DEEP/..of our father suns solar system..[waters] with stuff then made viSable...in HIS OWN logus/holy/love holy/de-LIGHT

AND THE COLLECTIVE
WHOLLY OMNIPRESENT SPIRIT..[THE UNIVERSE]=holy3..includes thee unto me

<<>>Surely, it is the doctrine of the Trinity, almost abandoned by Protestantism and mystified by Catholicism that brings to a halt the "easy" argument about the existence of God.>>

I THOUGH SO

<<>. authentic understandings that will revive that most difficult task of the ordained. It is also a good book for the laity, those long suffering listeners to sermons. The complexity of thought and the sermons that illustrate that thought would be fodder for a group study.>>

i hope so