[MarkBsnr]

***I am arguing against the proposition put forth by Kosta that we can either understand everything of God, or virtually nothing of Him at all. I was saying that just as a dog can have SOME real understanding, although it is not exhaustive, so too can humans have SOME understanding of God that is perfectly true, although not exhaustive.***

I would agree with both of you to the extent that we have a better understanding of God than a dog would of us; yet we only can understand what we as humans CAN understand of the infinite Creator which is extremely little.

[Forest Keeper]

FK: ***I am arguing against the proposition put forth by Kosta that we can either understand everything of God, or virtually nothing of Him at all. I was saying that just as a dog can have SOME real understanding, although it is not exhaustive, so too can humans have SOME understanding of God that is perfectly true, although not exhaustive.***

I would agree with both of you to the extent that we have a better understanding of God than a dog would of us; yet we only can understand what we as humans CAN understand of the infinite Creator which is extremely little.

Yes, and I hope you would agree that even though what we understand might be very little as compared to all there IS to know, it is nevertheless significant AND meaningful. This is the split between me and those who say God is "unknowable".