One with out definition...
Do you not see how "One with out definition"
IS a definition?
You might also use the term NOTHING...
Do you see where this clearly means "non-existence," and therefore doesn't work at all, except for atheists?
as in NO-THING or not any definable something, at least the way most people think...
And even with your qualification, "no thing" tells us "nothing." It is a grasp to put into language "something" that is actually beyond our full comprehension.
Some one once discussed the idea that god was outside the universe and just observing what happened. I asked 'how can this be?' How can a creator be outside of its creation.
You were right to question this idea,
but not for the reason that you did.
It would be quite easy -- and expected even -- for a creator to be "outside of its creation." In fact, the idea that God is "inside of its creation" doesn't work at all, because as the creator and maintainer of everything, being
inside of anything means that God has "outside boundaries" and therefore has "limitations."
God cannot be "omni/all" and have limitations.
The reason that this idea must be questioned, is that for "
anything to be
outside of the universe" -- which is by definition "everything that exists" -- is quite impossible; especially its creator (for the reasons just explained, and to argue otherwise is to become dizzy from running around in linguistic circles.)
The idea that "
the name of God is
so Holy that it is
ineffable" is
not because God
is Holy, but because "to name God"
is impossible.
This is what makes God "Holy." This cryptic way of referring to God is not a mystical thing at all really, it just simply means that there are no words to adequately accomplish the task.
Now, all of these things are not errors in our thinking so much as illustrations of the limits of our language. To ponder God is an excellent thing to do, but for God to be what we all instinctively believe God to be, no limits can be placed upon the concept. Language by nature defines. Definitions are limitations, e.g., not that, but this.
Humans have pondered God for millennia, and "Omni/All" may be the best that we can ever do, and even then, to fully expound upon such a theology we inevitably run into serious problems somewhere along the way.
As long as we are dependent upon language to conceive of "God," we are just shadowboxing within the limits of our language -- which will, unfortunately, always be the case when it comes to "God."
As Wiggenstein said, "What we cannot speak of we must pass over in silence." This is not a mystical motto concerning God; this is a self-explanatory statement regarding language itself.
While we cannot ever adequately "talk about God," the important thing is to never stop "pondering God"!!! And the most successful at this will do so in silence.
~Beth