"This is what im talking about just flat out dishonesty if you think hilarious tag teaming bashing comes before any of you guys stating you simply don't understand and a request for rephrasing Was applied first is just not truthful"

Wait. Just. A. Minute.

As I recall, I DID ask you for a restatement:

"I'll try to be a bit gentler that chimp. Due to the contradictory nature of your op, it is impossible to give a productive response. Please, revise your OP."- Le Me, Sun, 08/07/2016 - 18:39

What is your major malfunction, Numbnuts!?

Your second comment was just as bad as the original. That's not clarification.

@ Andrewcgs

"I did not mean metaphysical i meant metaphorical but i will repost it....CORRECTION! I meant bith i was asking if metaphorical and metaphysical concepts of god is possible"

This is a good example of how your posts become hard to understand.
You start by saying that you didn't mean metaphysical, that's good. But then you write "....CORRECTION!"
What does that mean? Are you correcting the previous sentence or do you mean that it was the correction? I have no idea if the next sentence is intended to be a restatement of the previous or not.

Then you continue with: "I meant bith i was asking..."
bith is obviously a typo, but what did you mean? I'm guessing you meant "but", however then the sentence doesn't even make sense to me:

"I meant but i was asking if metaphorical and metaphysical concepts of god is possible"

If this was what you actually wanted to ask, why did you not write that? All this is very confusing and hard to interpret. If you want honest replies, we first have to understand your questions... true?

Because right now my HONEST answer is: I don't understand what you are trying to say.

If your question is "are metaphorical and metaphysical concepts of god possible?"
Then: Yes, of course they are! It is only limited by the imagination of the individual.
Anyone can use any metaphor for god that they like, and anyone can add any metaphysics that they like to the world around them.

You added 1 word, it's a spam word salad now.

Andrewcgs: "I do understand they are not all metaphorical examples , i was trying to explain both not but metaphorical and metaphysical. that there multiple ways of a belief in god can work and i think many people put them in the same box of structure."

OK. Do you understand that a statement like "God is an alien" or God is a superhuman" are not metaphysical either? They are just simple claims that god is a living being in physical form. An argument such as God being the First Cause or Prime Mover are metaphysical arguments.

In a post below this one you state you will use better writing. I advise that you also be more clear as to what you are asserting. This is a debate forum and we will argue about the devilish details. An argument is only as valid as it's first premise.

If in your original post you had not used the words metaphorical ( later edited to include metaphysical) and simply stated "Could God be an alien?" it would have been an entirely different conversation.

The only thing you (finally) explained was what your OP meant. As for what kind of fools you take us for, I. Do. Not. Give. A. Shit.

I haven't put you in a box regarding religious view points. Me being a trans humanist, I've had several people claim I worship technology as a god. So I can sort of see where your coming from.

Andrewcgs - "administration on this site obviously sees what i am posting and doesn't have any problems with my material and the way i conduct myself is apparently appropriate"

Posting an incoherent mess then claiming that users who don't understand you are dishonest, only makes you look like a jerk; I don't think it violates any rules.