God is described in the Bible as having infinite understanding. Various synonyms are also used when describing him, such as eternal (infinite time). The rest of his infinite properties I have heard from relgious people, made up I guess, to further put your god on a pedestal.
How do you define "infinite"?
How many times to I have to explain infinite this week? In common lay usage, it can mean just something really, really big or without end. In correct mathematical usage it is the set of numbers where for every number N there exists (N+1).
To you, is there such a thing as half infinite love, and would that be less than infinite love?
Any subset of infinity is infinite. That is one of the definitions of infinity.
I'm not privy to all your conversations. I'm pretty cool, but I'm not omniscient. Sounds like I'm getting confused with god again.
In common lay usage, it can mean just something really, really big or without end. In correct mathematical usage it is the set of numbers where for every number N there exists (N+1).
I asked for your definition, as you used it in YOUR definition of god. In particular, what do you mean by "infinite love".
Any subset of infinity is infinite. That is one of the definitions of infinity.
Okay, so when you write of "infinite love" or "infinite power" or "infinite time", by "infinite" you are referring to some set that can be put into a 1-to-1 correspondence with some proper subset of itself? Seems like you are on the road to making sense by following set theory, but I don't see how you can follow that road for long.
First, take the set "god's love". To make sense, "god's love" would have to be a collection of definite, distinguishable objects of our intellect to be conceived as a whole. However, the objects of "god's love" don't seem to be distinguishable as I can't even imagine what a single element would be. For the same reason, how can the objects be definite when I can't even imagine what you might throw at me for me to decide if it is a part of "god's love" or not.
Second, you surely know that not all 1-to-1 correspondences are similar. Take the smallest infinite set, the set of integers. Is god's love similar to that? Well, if you were then to map god's love to the real numbers (of course not being distinguishable or definite, a mapping is impossible), then you'd find plenty (infinite) unmapped real numbers. If god's love can be put into a 1-to-1 correspondence to the real numbers, then you'd find a "bigger" set in the set of all subsets of real numbers. If a god's importance can be characterized by the "size" of infinite power he has, then you'd find there is no supreme god since the size of the set of all subsets of any infinite set is always a "bigger" set.
So, even if you really intended to use "infinite" to mean something like "greatest possible", you can't succeed.
Finally, "infinite time", with infinite used in the mathematical sense, simply does not make any sense. Mathematics is the science of measurement with all physical units abstracted out. Time has physical units. Infinite and infinitessimal quantities in the physical world have been theorized but never observed. To observe one would be strange since it is impossible to conceive of an infinite observation.
Even in set theories, the notion of always being able to increment a set size must be axiomized. There is no observation or reductio ad absurdum argument that makes it true. The concept develops once the observable world has been abstracted out.