Omniscience, Omnipotence, the Fall & Logical Contradictions.

I could make an absolutely irrefutable rebuttal to your post but I don't wanna.As I mentioned earlier in the thread, that's the Bart Simpson Defense. You can make any wild-ass claim you want as long as you add the disclaimer that you choose not to do it.The reason that a claim of omnipotence has to be held to high standards is because it's an absolute claim. Omni means omni, not sorta omni.

God doesn't lie but He creates liars? I'm underwhelmed by the distinction.If I write a computer program that writes bad cheques, that's okay then?

Did you see the smiley face on my post?
It was tongue in cheek.

God never directly created evil. He created potential evil. Evil never became actual until it was chosen. If your robot has the power of choice programmed into it and it directly makes that choice, you are only responsible for creating choice...not actual evil. And even if you could be accused of such, your accusers have no power or ability to judge you since they all are of no higher moral character.

Ok now I am confused.So what your saying is that your god is not omnipotent or omniscient. Is that correct?

So your God set us all up to fail?Or rather he set up one guy and one girl to fail, and when they failed (which he could foresee, because he is, in fact, omniscient), he sentenced the rest of humanity - in their untold billions - to death and the possibility/probability of everlasting damnation.have I got that right?Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

I never look up there. I'm not used to all the fancy features on this forum. I'm new here. It was like that when I got here.

So if you give a baby a bottle of poison, whatever happens is a result of his choices.... Sounds like you're scrambling to absolve your god of any kind of responsibility. Omnipotent but irresponsible doesn't sound like a good combination to me. How is accepting responsibility for you own actions not "higher" morally than not accepting responsibility?

I never said that He was not all knowing and I never said that He was not all powerful. Edited by Phat, : edited

Not exactly. At best, you could successfully argue that God set Lucifer up to choose to become Satan.I have not brought Adam & Eve into it. The issue, if there is one, is not about the fairness or unfairness of the Biblical God dealing with humanity. The issue is about current adults (those of us involved in this discussion) arguing whether or not we need to defend our individual right to accept the authority or reject the authority of a Creator Spirit and defend the alleged right of a defeated spirit. We are arguing my hypothetical as I presented it. Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Lets clarify your terms.Who is "the baby"? We are all adults here.What is "the poison"?

Bill Cosby used to say to his kids on TV, "I brought you into this world and I can take you out." As long as the Creator/Father has that attitude, we're all his babies. Anything that has consequences. Why should God get the credit for giving us opportunites and then take no responsibility for the consequences?

Choice has consequences. Is freedom of choice "poison"?

When you create choices, you are at least partially responsible for the consequences of those choices, no matter who else makes the actual choice. If you give a baby a bottle of poison, he may choose to drink it or he may choose to give it to his friend or he may choose to play with the blocks instead. But a responsible person wouldn't give him that choice. By giving him that "free will", you automatically become responsible.

quote:

---

Not exactly. At best, you could successfully argue that God set Lucifer up to choose to become Satan.

---

Well, the truth would be, in that case, that God deliberately arranged that choice, leaving no alternative, making the whole idea of calling it rebellion silly. If Lucifer was doing God's will, then how can it be rebellion?You could avoid the dilemma by losing omniscience, so that God could not know that Lucifer would rebel - it still comes down to an implausible mistake on God's part but omnipotence is not infallibility. If you lose omnipotence as well your theology just about becomes viable.