Good! finally someone who knows the definition of "God". What is it?
Good! finally someone who knows the definition of "God". What is it?
Your question is inappropriate.
"not a thing" is the Old English nān þing "no thing" (the indefinite article is intrusive as nān/no was only originally used before consonants.
The Þhing was the deliberative Assembly of the Anglo-Saxon people and by extension came to be used for matters and subjects that were "Thing worthy" of being considered in legislatures and judicial assemblies, or indeed any matter that should be considered.
Saying something was nān þing in Middle English was to say in was it something not worth considering, reckoning, or mentioning.
So "God, by definition, is not a thing" is stating "Who cares? it doesn't matter"
You do not need a definition of God because you already have knowledge of Him (that you suppress) in that He reveals Himself continually to you through the natural order, through your conscience, and through your very use of reason.
Nevertheless, I will humor you with a definition fit for the occasion. God is that self-existent and self-determined, free of all contingency One Who is the necessary precondition for your attempts to make sense out such notions as wisdom and foolishness that you use, but which you cannot account for or justify on the basis of your own naturalistic world view.
Your unacknowledged presupposition in post #1 of this thread is that there is an absolute standard by which such things as wisdom can be measured and found lacking, but the existence of an absolute, non-material and authoritative standard is a presupposition that is at odds with your own assumptions about the nature of the cosmos.
On your terms, the preconditions for this very discussion are nothing but matter in motion. You have random neuron firings. Other people have other random neuron firings. So what? What the essential difference is between the chemical reactions in the brains of those you categorize as fools and any other chemical reaction you cannot say. So why are some chemical reactions just there, neither true nor false, while other chemical reactions you categorize as true or false, or wise or foolish? The internal contradiction inherent in your position makes it impossible for you to say. Thus, your condemnation of some people as fools exposes your reliance on the notion of an absolute standard of wisdom, which is based on unacknowledged presuppositions and assumptions which you claim to reject.
Cordially,