Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,925 Year: 4,182/9,624 Month: 1,053/974 Week: 12/368 Day: 12/11 Hour: 1/2


EvC Forum ⇒ Social and Religious Issues ⇒ Bible Study ⇒

The omniscience of god?

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
Author Topic:   The omniscience of god?
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5271 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009

Normal Thread Display
Message 42 of 70 (531374)
10-17-2009 12:38 PM 		Reply to: Message 41 by jaywill
10-17-2009 10:58 AM

Re:
In this case all He knows about the person only goes to accumulate an infallible and indisputable record of that persons sins to which he will have to answer to God in judgment.
​
So this particular god is not omniscient. QED.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by jaywill, posted 10-17-2009 10:58 AM jaywill has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by jaywill, posted 10-18-2009 4:37 PM Blzebub has not replied
  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5271 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009

Normal Thread Display
Message 43 of 70 (531375)
10-17-2009 12:40 PM 		Reply to: Message 39 by purpledawn
10-17-2009 8:17 AM

Re: PaRDeS
You're right in Message 22 when you show that God is capable of changing his mind. Some claim that God doesn't change his mind, but that also goes against the idea of a merciful god that the NT writers presented. To be merciful, one has to be able to change their mind. Since God can change his mind, he doesn't fit the current idea of omniscience.
​
QED times two. Thanks guys, nice discussion.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by purpledawn, posted 10-17-2009 8:17 AM purpledawn has not replied
  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5271 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009

Normal Thread Display
Message 50 of 70 (531751)
10-19-2009 4:16 PM 		Reply to: Message 45 by jaywill
10-18-2009 4:48 PM

Re: a few glitches
The Atheist has a need to convince herself that any supposed God has no need to exist or do anything.
​
This atheist has no such need. There are many other preposterous possibilities which fall into the same category as the existence of a god. Invisible pink unicorns, etc.
​
It is not surprising that some sinners would seek refuge in this kind of philosophy. Some of us rather look to God's salvation and purpose to discover how He has made plans to reconcile sinners to Himself.
​
There's a phenomenon, in the UK at least, of convicted criminals who are serving long prison sentences suddenly converting to christianity, as if it was a good thing. The cynic in me is not impressed!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by jaywill, posted 10-18-2009 4:48 PM jaywill has not replied
  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5271 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009

Normal Thread Display
Message 53 of 70 (531900)
10-20-2009 12:04 PM 		Reply to: Message 52 by jaywill
10-20-2009 9:48 AM

Re: a few glitches
But, when I hear complaints like this, speghetti monters, unicorns, lepercons, for some reason they don't impress me too much. They come off as efforts to force absurdity upon a soberly and realistic, even historically founded rational belief , ie. that of God.
​
The whole point which you have somehow missed, is that belief in god is nowadays absurd and irrational. You might as well believe in the FSM as any god.
​
The historical basis for the god-belief is well-documented, but so is belief in a flat earth, the sun and stars orbiting the earth, dare I say it - the creation myth, and so on.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by jaywill, posted 10-20-2009 9:48 AM jaywill has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by jaywill, posted 10-20-2009 2:57 PM Blzebub has replied
  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5271 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009

Normal Thread Display
Message 55 of 70 (531945)
10-20-2009 3:40 PM 		Reply to: Message 54 by jaywill
10-20-2009 2:57 PM

Re: a few glitches
That is the argumemt that to believe in God, especially "nowdays," is obsolete. The popularized books by Dawkins and Hitchens that belief in God is outdated rationally are not good philosophical arguments according to some scholars for whom debate of this type is their life long discipline.
​
This looks a bit like "appeal to anonymous authority"!
​
What is it about "nowadays" which makes my faith in Christ and God obsolete. Do you have some new rigorous mathematical formula the proves without a shadow of doubt the non-existence of God?
​
Nowadays we know what causes earthquakes, floods, plagues of locusts, boils, etc. We no longer need to view these as supernatural events, as might have seemed logical in Bronze-Age times. You cannot prove a negative, but you can say "there is no evidence".
This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by jaywill, posted 10-20-2009 2:57 PM jaywill has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by jaywill, posted 10-20-2009 6:59 PM Blzebub has not replied
  
Blzebub 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5271 days)
Posts: 129
Joined: 10-10-2009

Normal Thread Display
Message 63 of 70 (532130)
10-21-2009 12:58 PM 		Reply to: Message 61 by jaywill
10-21-2009 10:01 AM

The point here, I think, is that God is teaching that He will not look inside the house to see who or what kind of person is inside. It is enough that He sees the blood on the outside.
​
But if "The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good", the there's no need for god to "look" anywhere.
​
Of course God knew. He is giving Cain opportunity to confess. No glitch here, I think.
​
An omniscient being would already know that Cain wouldn't confess.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by jaywill, posted 10-21-2009 10:01 AM jaywill has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by jaywill, posted 10-21-2009 8:45 PM Blzebub has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Prev12
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024