That which is not a thing, and that which is not nothing. I picked this definition since God's existence is indisputable (even if you say that God exists only to man), but it is also impossible to say what is God without limiting God's existence to a set of qualities. Critique. Offer alternatives. Thank you.
If you buy into the ontological nonsense of Anselm, god is that which you can think of nothing greater, which tautologically proves it exists. If you accept the nonsense of Berkeley, then god exists because things exist independent of the human mind. He thought that for anything to exist, they must be thought of and, thus infinite things must be held in existence by an infinite mind. But if you accept the mode of reason, there simply is no need for a god. "God," then, is a social construct to which gaps in human knowledge have always been attributed by those that were hesitant to allow for natural explanations for that which is observed in nature.
Now, are you characterizing these positions as "nonsense" because you find them to be philosophically unsound? If so, a well thought out line of reasoning would be preferable to your unsophisticated labelling of this and that to be "nonsense". Oh. I guess the reason is that you have an emotive hostility toward particular concepts which don't jive with your no doubt deterministic, materialistic worldview, which leads you to dismiss out of hand a broad range of human experience. I mistook your reply as an honest attempt at philosophical critique. Forgive me.
if by reason you mean empiricism, you just left a gaping gunshot wound in your foot Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
if you say that god is nothing, you don't have a god that bears any significance on the world - given that god is reputed to be the possession of many characteristics, to say the least being the cause of all causes and omnimax, it snot clear how 'nothing' is a suitable definition ("nothing mundane or material" could be suitable however)
Every smallest unit, knows nothing about the other, only its reaction to the others reaction. If I am me, I am one unit God is the part which simulate heaven, hell and earth with electrical impulses in every smallest unit.
If every part of everything knows nothing about any other part but its own reaction, how can a human be conscious yet not everything else?
When you look on something you see an image of it, That image must therefor be seen by a unit in which every part knows what the other sees.
or alternatively there can exist material qualities and forms and spiritual qualities and forms, and god has a no material qualities or forms but spiritual qualities and forms