ok youre fucking moving goalposts now

yes desiring someone to come to you freely is a desire

you literally are saying that it is a desire

than saying it isnt in the same sentence

yes
but you have yet to prove that desire implies potentiality in this context

i already have shown that

your example was nosensical

lemme restate

material jew

see if u can think of just one more

just one other example

needs a material god

p1: desire means that theres a state of affairs that someone can *potentially* be in or out of accord with

@Otto ye come in here with irrelevant bs

lmao

no

Ignore him and stick to the point with spergerger

otto just spergs on me about me being jewish, materialistic, and ignores any point thats made

also
are u unironically conflating gods desires with the desires of man?

or just doesnt grasp it

@Joywolf Ignore him and stick to the point with spergerger

@Spergerger two things

1: youd have to make an argument for there being a difference between the two
2: then youd have to show what is the *same* about them that makes them both a desire
3: then youd have to show that the difference takes away concern of potentiality

3 things

so unless you can make this distinction, im inclined to think of them as the same for all intents and purposes

So you are more less concerned that God has behaviors with the materialistic world, effectively denying his divinity.

are you asking me whether gods nature and mans nature are different?, really?

@Enkrum no nothing about this has to do with materialism

@Spergerger read what i wrote

Clarify your argument, because I was not here for most of it.

obviously theyre different in a hypothetical sense @Spergerger

but

"but"

"hypothetical"

when we use words to describe god, you cant say it means something different for god without explaining what the difference is

and why you use the same word at all

which means they share something in common

So you’re making a case on the inexplicable nature of God?

@Enkrum this is a continuation of last nights debate with blueroad. The question is, if god has desires, which necessitates potentiality by the definition of desire (as explained above) than how can he be Pure actuality

man has desires in this way because he is not omnipotent obviously so there is potential for him to be out of accordance with his desires
god does not have this for obvious reasons
the example you gave made no sense
you have yet to give a coherent example

I’m fairly certain Thomas Aquinas explained this in his thesis.