by Kenneth F. Sheets
Humans Rely on Other Humans for Information About Things They Have Not Perceived
Many humans, in their limited understanding, have wondered about the existence of things they cannot perceive. They live in a limited space, but they can perceive by their senses that much greater space exists, especially if they combine all the space that all other humans can perceive, but they must rely on other humans to tell them of all the other spaces where they live. Humans also possess only a limited, actually very small, amount of knowledge, but they can perceive that much more extensive knowledge exists, especially if they combine all the knowledge that all other humans can perceive, but they must rely on other humans to communicate all the other knowledge to them. The issue, then, is that humans are limited beings; they are finite, living and moving and existing, in the limited space where each one of them exists. Thus, humans learn very quickly to increase their knowledge by relying on other humans to give them information about things outside what they can see and know in their own space, that is, they know that they are dependent upon the knowledge and perception of other humans, and they depend on the oral expressions, the writings, the books, and all the other means of communication, to help them accumulate and build the great body of knowledge which helps them function and interact successfully in their own part of the world.
Human Transfer of Information Is Affected by Their Desires and Limited Abilities in Doing So
Normally, this system of learning and accumulating knowledge works well, but it is also dependent upon the accuracy of the information being shared, and, as so many in the world have learned at great and often destructive cost, the information shared is wrong, sometimes totally wrong, or it has been designed to deceive and destroy. No human, or group of humans, perceives everything perfectly, nor are they able to perfectly convey that information to other humans . . . both the “teachers” and the “students” are limited in their abilities. Then, too, humans tend to seek some kind of advantage or authority over one another, so the information they share can be twisted and perverted to work to their advantage in some way, or, perhaps, just to make them appear worthy of some special measure of honor or respect. Thus, human-to-human information may be valid or it may be worthless, even destructive, because the will of the person or persons providing the information is shaping the nature and manner in which that information is shared, and when the person sharing about God is wrong or at enmity to God, their representations of Him will also be wrong.
Humans Reject Information Which They Cannot Perceive by Their Physical Senses
Humans learn very early in life to use their physical senses, seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching, to perceive the conditions of the world around them, but God cannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or touched. Nonetheless, though they recognize that things exist which cannot be expressed by these physical senses, they typically insist upon relying upon these senses to determine what is real and what is not. For most humans, then, their questions regarding whether or not God and His design actually exist, or whether He is simply the product of human imaginations or the manifestation of something else, is a valid question. Is He there, or is He not there? Does God exist, or does He not exist? If He cannot be seen, heard, smelled, tasted, touched, or “proved” to exist by any finite human sensory ability, then the logical conclusion of finite human minds, which do not allow their perception to be conformed to the evidence coming to their senses, is that He does not exist, and that anyone who “believes” that He does exist is deranged in his or her thinking.
Humans Reject the Possibility That Others May Actually Perceive God and His Design
With respect to the knowledge of God, those who have concluded that He does not exist may indeed be considered “non-believers,” but, in every aspect of life, regardless of its nature, they build and conduct their lives according to a set of ideas and thinkings about who and what they are, and about what life is and how it should be, and they are, thus, “believers” of their own specific set of ideas and thinkings, their own set of “beliefs” about everything. Indeed, these “beliefs” are often so highly valued that the “believers” are willing to give their lives to protect them and ensure their continuation. There is, however, a major inconsistency and failure in their reasoning, an inconsistency and failure which they purposely and ignorantly choose to overlook. Though each “non-believer” has developed his own set of “beliefs” according to his or her own perception and correlation of the information coming to his mind, and though each knows that his perception is limited, and that, thus, he is ignorant in many realms of knowledge and perception, he assumes absolute knowledge that no God exists. It is as though the only realm in which they possess absolute knowledge is the realm of the knowledge of God, and thus, they reject absolutely the possibility that they may be, and are, ignorant in this realm. They reject absolutely the idea that other individuals have actually perceived God and are seeking to conform their “beliefs,” their own ideas and thinkings, to His person and nature, and to the criteria of His perfect design.
Humans Willfully and Ignorantly Reject the Knowledge of God
Though their perception, however limited and undeveloped it might be, has been the basis for establishing their own set of “beliefs,” in that intransigent arrogance which typically accompanies ignorance of God and His design, even among “believers,” they reject the possibility that others may have perceived something which they themselves did not perceive. In reality, this sort of thinking on their part is nothing more than a manifestation of a willful ignorance combined with a willful presumption of abilities and knowledge which they do not possess. Certainly, in many situations, they have observed and perceived great inconsistency in the representations of God which were evident in the lives of those who claimed to “believe in” Him, but, in their desire to reject God, they have failed to consider the many instances in their own lives where they misrepresented aspects of their own “belief system.” Here, then, is yet another inconsistency in the thinking of “non-believers”: they hold “believers” to a standard of perfect consistency in the knowledge of God, but they do not hold themselves to a similar standard in their own system of “belief.” They will, indeed, acknowledge their relative ignorance in many aspects of human existence, but, in regard to the existence and the person and nature of God, they presume to “know enough” to be absolutely sure of whatever they have chosen to “believe.” The ignorance and inconsistency of such a position is obvious to all . . . except those who insist on maintaining such a position, and, therefore, their position, their “belief,” is a matter of their human will and not actual evidence. Their perception, their “will,” though totally unworthy of trust, is the authority to which they have submitted themselves in the most important aspect of human existence . . . their knowledge of God.
All Humans Can Perceive the Characteristics of a True “God”
Even without any information which is claimed to be the “revelation” of God, certain characteristics of a “god” who is truly “God” would exist, even if he were merely the production of human minds. These characteristics of a “god” who is truly “God” would be very “humanized,” that is, they would not only be expressed in terms which humans can conceive, but also, they would be limited in the degree and nature of their expression. Stated differently, they would be finite expressions of finite human minds, and, even if those characteristics had been conceived in the minds of non-human beings who possessed more knowledge than humans, they would remain limited by abilities of humans to express and perceive them. Simple analytical human thinking identifies certain characteristics which a “Creator God” who is truly “God” would have. Thus, if a “God” exists who actually brought into existence all that exists, then:
– his existence is not dependent, in any way or to any degree, upon anything that exists, that is, he would exist “apart from” that which exists, but not separated from it;
– his existence “outside” anything that exists would mean that he is not subject to any thing that exists or to the entirety of all that exists, that is, existing “outside” that which is finite, he himself would be non-finite, “infinite” according to the true basic meaning of the word;
– from the perspective of created beings, his non-finite, “infinite,” nature means that he is without any bounds of any kind, except those which comprise his person. Though the true significance of this characteristic is beyond the abilities of finite beings to comprehend, finite beings can perceive that a true “God” must possess such a nature and existence;
– he must not only be greater than any single thing that exists, but also greater than the sum of all that exists, that is, he must exist “transcendent” over all that exists;
– in his transcendence over all that exists, no place, no location, no thing, and no condition exists outside his transcendency, and thus, every thing that exists, the entirety of creation, must exist within his being;
– as creator and originator of all that exists, he is the owner of all that exists, and thus, He would act in a “possessive” manner with respect to all that exists;
If he did not do so, then he would be misrepresenting himself and his relationship to the creation, failing to relate to the creation as both he and the creation actually exist. Thus, he must relate to everything that exists as though he owns it, and any failure on his part to act in this manner would constitute his presentation of a false condition . . . and that He cannot do.
– no thing of the creation, by virtue of its finite, created position subordinate to his “transcendency,” could ever know or comprehend him as he actually exists, unless he, of his own will, chose to reveal himself, and then, in a manner and to a degree which his created beings could comprehend;
For any created being to know him, that being is totally dependent upon him to choose to reveal himself, that is, he alone can and must provide that revelation, and he must do it freely, because nothing of creation, nor the totality of it, could do anything that would constitute him owing that revelation to it.
A “god” with these characteristics would be “God” in truth, and, indeed, the “God” revealed by the Scriptures possesses all of these and more. Humans, however, possess a will which influences whether or not they will even allow their “beliefs” to be in agreement with the Scriptures. Moved by their choice to reject any evidence which even appears to confirm the existence of the God they have rejected, they devise explanations for the existence of everything though those explanations cannot be validated by any objective analysis of the existing evidences.