unlimited paradox: can an unlimited entity, limit itself?

The ultimate in "ultimate reality" is actually what renders all your statements mere conjecture. Ultimately ultimate reality is unknowable while I observe that observable reality, while it may not constitute all reality is at least something we have experience of and can therefore make objective statements about.

Also, and I'm sorry to keep harping on this, if God equals reality your statement equates to "there is no reality without reality" which is a tautology.

There is no reality without Ultimate Reality, and this is not a tautology. Your "tautology" assertion is not an argument. When you keep doing things like say "god" instead of "God" until I rebuke you several times, or in the current case say "reality" instead of "The Ultimate Reality", it leads me to believe that you are not engaging me honestly. I would appreciate if you respected what it is I am talking about. Your mistake in this case is the same as before in that God is to god what Ultimate Reality is to reality.

Your observation that we can't really know God is correct, but who is telling you otherwise? This observation is backed by sound theology and even scripture. In other words, you are only agreeing with what is accepted.

If you want an objectively true statement, it is better to come to terms with reality than to knowingly prefer delusion. The God I speak of is simply reality free of all corruption it is Perfect Reality. 

And it should be obvious that conceptions of God are limitations imposed on God, limitations that can at most be true, but not Ultimately True.

Well clearly I have indulged you too far. From now on I will say what I mean and if I am unclear you can ask what I mean and I will try to explain, but until I know what your terms actually mean I am done using them.

So to be clear since I do not believe in any god God or GOD I use the term god(s). This is a stand in for whatever god concept you subscribe to so you may, if you like, pretend that I used your preferred term instead.

When I say reality (as opposed to observable or testable reality) I am referring to everything that exists. If I use the words testable or observable before hand you will know that I am only referring to what humans and can confirm (or as close to as we are able) as existing.

When I say the truth (as opposed to verifiable or accepted truth) I am referring to all true facts about reality. If I use the words verifiable or accepted before hand you will know that I am only referring to what humans can confirm (or as close as we are able) as true.

Reality and truth are not interchangeable. Reality refers to things that exist and truth refers to facts about that existence.

Actually the more you say about this proposed ultimate reality the less I think it has to do with actual reality. For example at one point you claimed ultimate reality is free of corruption. If corruption exists at all then reality cannot be free of it. The same goes for ultimate truth. If there are things that are true then those things are a part of the truth. You claimed at one point that you only meant eternal truth and I am uncertain how you as a finite being could ever confirm or deny that anything was eternal. We could never measure anything eternal unless we were eternal and we are not.

Respecting you will have to be enough as I'm not sure how to respect a non entity like a belief or idea. I can consider an idea but respect is for individuals. Please do not conflate my rejection of your beliefs as a personal attack. I am not rejecting you, only any claims you make that you are unable or unwilling to demonstrate.

So what? Theology and scripture are not a good pathway to truth. In fact the scriptures you subscribe to are not the only scriptures. Indeed why should I give more weight to the scriptures you accept than to Hindu or buhdist scriptures?

I agree completely. What we disagree on is what actually constitutes reality.

Do you have any questions?

Not at all, Ibthink it is incredibly silly that you don't believe in The Truth while simultaniously claiming to believe in reality.

I think you don't understand what you are saying.

And I think you don't understand what I am saying. I do believe that there is truth but I see no reason to believe that anything is eternal until it can be demonstrated (which as I mentioned it cannot) so if you only mean eternal truth then I specifically do not believe in this ultimate truth you are proposing. 

So in other words, you are saying that impermanence is The Ultimate Truth?

I am saying that as finite beings even if something were eternal we could not verify it and so any claim that anything is eternal must perforce be mere conjecture.

Have you asked for a word check on ultimate, 

And whats ultimate ultimate times 2

I certainly have not received one.

I think an unlimited being would have the power to refrain itself. And the power to remove that self imposed control.

I think boiling things down to binary states removed from context is shown historically to lead to falsehoods of one tree branch or another.

Physical/energy cannot be created nor destroyed ergo eternally existent. Minimal brainer.

And the above transposes or translate as occupied space cannot be created nor destroyed.

Finite = integral wholeness

Infinite = lack of integrity

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

.....................................................................................................

..........................SPACE(>*<)  i  (>*<)SPACE...............................

......................................................................................................

I think it would be able to as to in one of my beliefs at least. An overview of this belief is that all of reality/existence is the manifestation of an infinite consciousness/intelligence ("source"). Pantheism would be an appropriate comparison. However, saying infinite needs a little clarification. Let's say you couldn't die... would your consciousness be infinite? Or what it be limited to your consciousness / imaginations' end? That is what i believe this source is... an undying consciousness. I don't think it has any single identity however. Instead of being a "who" it's an "it." Everything has happened and is known within this source... it has infinite intelligence. 

If this is the kind of entity we are talking about than it limits itself all the time for the players and events that it already knows can manifest and exist. Think about an infinite stretch of sand. For there to be a sandcastle one would have to make it / the source of the sand manifests it in order for it to be physically existent. However, even if it is not created in any way... it still exists within the sand. Everything exists in the sand... it just needs to be made to be actualized. I believe that this is the same with this source. All these events, you and everything already exists within this source. And what this source is doing is manifesting these events for them to be actualized and experience. Going from incorporeal to corporeal to have a limited time before the sandcastle collapses and becomes the infinite stretch of sand again. 

In this specific scenario, this unlimited source is limiting itself all the time. Bc as an unlimited source it is everything. Therefore, all stories and events are known simultaneously. For these events and stories to actually play their role they need to be individualized and manifest into the physical for a limited time to be actualized and experience. 

do unlimited things exist? isnt God unlimited as is usually thought? is he only maximal? if so can it be measured as if finite?