Prophecy and the God of the Cosmological View

Sorry. I didn't understand your answer.
I just wanted to know if you think prophecy is possible with God defined as a necessity of reality?

Why not? The prophet himself understands that God is the necessity of reality who does not need a cause to exist. For him, this is a known fact and not just a hypothesis or possibility like we have.

Why not? Because the prophet has an experience of God, he speaks to Him! But according to the cosmological view, it is impossible for there to be an experience of the object "God."

Only Moses spoke to God, everyone else did not.

But it is enough that one person did it to prove that a test of God is possible.

Yosef, are you reading what I'm answering you? It seems like you're not.

Moses asked to see God, but God told him that man shall not see me and live. In other words, it is an impossible attempt to see God. And your whole question is beside the point.

I don't think it falls. You pointed to a special experience (to see God) that is impossible, but it is enough that there is one possible experience (to talk to God) to confirm my question.

In this sense, everyone has an experience with God, because God created the world. And there is nothing special about a prophet.
Then your question applies to everything. How is it possible that God created the world? A question that does not and cannot have a serious answer.

All or nothing.

In your opinion, the question does apply to everything. In my opinion, and I think any reasonable person would agree, when you talk about someone you have experience of that person, when you see someone's work you don't have experience (in the classic sense of the word) of that person.

@Miki
I do read. But I think I didn't ask correctly because I don't see a connection between my question and your answer.
Here is my argument, please can you vote, so you disagree?
Claim A: The cosmological evidence proves that there is an object called "God"
Claim B: This object, since the necessity of obedience = does not need a reason, is beyond human experience.
Claim C: The biblical God is not beyond human experience (because He revealed Himself, and spoke to prophets, etc.)
Conclusion: The cosmological God cannot be the biblical God

You asked correctly and I have already answered. The mistake is in claim B. He does not need a cause. Regardless of experience. I am only claiming that things that are not in our experience do not have to be subject to the principle of causality. But things that are in our experience may also be causeless. For example, if this experience involves only an abstract interaction, such as with God. In such an experience, it is impossible to get an impression of whether or not we are dealing with someone who is the necessity of reality.
Think of a situation in which I met creature X and it became clear to me from my experience (the devil knows how) that he is the necessity of reality. Is this an oxymoron? Does everything in my experience have to be contingent? Of course not.
I repeat myself over and over again, and I see no point in continuing.

There is no point in continuing, I understood you correctly.
Thank you very much