“It is used by all sentient rational beings to know and understand reality. It does not depend on who they are, or where they exist.”
If they’re using the same method that man does, which is pure speculation, then they are making the same basic assumptions.
“If phenomena that carry a probability of being true that is zero is a limitation, then that is a good thing.”
Being true, and being demonstrable by the scientific method are not the same thing. To say otherwise is hubris.
“Not of some key elements; it’s a plan, or symbolic representation of the key elements of a thing.”
It may represent all the key elements, or it may not. The definition of a blueprint does not imply that it represents every key element.
“Webster’s: “2a : a statement expressing the essential nature of something”
2c : a product of defining.”
I’m glad Webster’s agrees with me, they don’t mention anything about a blueprint either. They mention a description (”a statement expressing”), exactly as I said. If you want a description of the essential nature of a deity, and it is beyond the scope of human knowledge to know the essential nature of such a thing, then naturally, the definition must come from the deity, not from man. Any other definition would, by necessity be imcomplete and insufficient.
“Deities are sentient rational beings, else they are inanimate objects like the sun, or moon. There is no other possibility.”
Again, this is anthropomorphism, trying to assign qualities of man to deity. We only have a very limited ability to know the nature of sentient, rational beings, since we only have a very limited variety of them to observe. So, you are essentially saying that God must be like us, which is anthropomorphic.
Yes it does.
"I’m glad Webster’s agrees with me"
No, they don't. You said your god defined himself and I pointed out that he could not have, because one must exist before they define themselves. Note 2c, which you just posted to me: "2c : a product of defining."
"the definition must come from the deity, not from man."
Description, not definition. Point out where your deity described himself as being supernatural.
"We only have a very limited ability to know the nature of sentient, rational beings, since we only have a very limited variety of them to observe"
Limited is relative, nevertheless the limits are not sufficient to prevent them from being known, understood and being made.
"you are essentially saying that God must be like us, which is anthropomorphic."
Which god? Muhumed's character?