> some of what is being posted isn't even fully understanding the possibilities within the mind of man...quantum physics and the space time continuum.

?
i'm not sure how they relate

> If you have a problem with God

i don't have a problem with god. i'm trying to get clearer on his nature. hard to do that when people don't accept the rules of rational discourse, however (proof by contradiction). i've been thinking about how those who subscribe to intuitionist logic would respond to these ideas... whether they think it is possible to get clearer on the conception of god by using proof by contradiction... they don't subscribe to proof by contradiction in other arenas so i guess they wouldn't subscribe to it here... that being said, i'm fairly sure they agree that a contradiction cannot be the case... i'm fairly sure it is just reductio arguments that they don't accept (assume the conclusion is false, show how it leads to contradiction then you have probed the conclusion must be true).

> I believe that if you try to limit God, you aren't limiting Him, you are denying Him.

really?
hmm. i guess i'm denying the conception of god where gods nature is contradictory. because... contradictions cannot be the case. i can't accept that sort of god, nope. but like i said a while back philosophers opinions are about half-half with respect to believing in god and not believing in god. i'm fairly sure that philosophers aren't putting aside their reason in order to believe which leads me to believe that their conception of god is a little different from their folk notion... i'm trying to get clearer on this conception of god.

it is hard work to get people on board the exercise of contemplating his nature when people don't accept that contradictions cannot be the case, however.

i don't understand why the rock situation isn't a proof...

i understand that there are limits to reason. but that is because of our finite cognitive capacities of limited attention and the like. it isn't that we can't perfectly conceive of some things it is more that we can't perfectly conceive of everything. as things take up more cognitive resources we are likely to fall into error.

as i've said: i don't see how saying that god isn't contradictory (and couldn't be contradictory if he tried) is a LIMIT.

but people seem to have set up reason on the one side and god on the other so that you have to choose between them.

there is a difference between saying that god is far more rational than we

and saying that god is irrational / contradictory

believing in the latter would be... irrational. in the literal sense of the term (not a judgement, an observation)