• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

God's Omniscience

Well, I did specify that I was talking about the bible.
Perhaps the parts that deal with man's misconceptions about God and religion? For example, when Jesus rebukes the Scribes and Pharisess in Matthew 23, the observance of the ten commandments, following the golden rule, the notion that the Sabbath (religion in general) was created for man, not the other way around, that God does not dwell in a house built by hands, and whatnot.
 
The Judeao Christian God is all powerful and also consistent with His nature. There's lot's of thinks He can't do - like lie, fail a task

If you're going to talk about God as portrayed in the Bible, those examples you named don't always work. God can lie, as he told Adam he would surely die if he ate the fruit. Adam didn't die, he lived on to raise a family. God can fail, as he is always correcting errors in ways like flooding the world or destroying entire towns. Also, an obscure passage about "chariots of iron" comes to mind.
 
Originally Posted by BJQ87 :
To add to this- God can "create contradictions with impunity" as belz put it, but can only do so if this action does not conflict with his nature.


Isn't that a limitation in and of itself ?

God almighty being of his nature is a limitation of power? i do not think so. It is a limitation, but i didnt say mere limatation, i said limitation of power.
 
Adam didn't die
simply wrong, Adam did die...he would have lived eternally on the earth otherwise.

God can fail, as he is always correcting errors in ways like flooding the world or destroying entire towns.

those are not his errors, they are human errors. He created humans fully knowing they would error, and that he would flood the world, yet he did it anyways according to his purpose.

in the example given from Isaiah it says (in my nkjv) "calamity" instead of evil.

and the story with the chariots, it says "They could not" instead of "He could not"

if your going to put bible verses up on here it might be best to use a kjv or nkjv....or perhaps niv. They are more accurate translations than whatever one was used for those scriptures.
 
simply wrong, Adam did die...he would have lived eternally on the earth otherwise.



those are not his errors, they are human errors. He created humans fully knowing they would error, and that he would flood the world, yet he did it anyways according to his purpose.

in the example given from Isaiah it says (in my nkjv) "calamity" instead of evil.

and the story with the chariots, it says "They could not" instead of "He could not"

if your going to put bible verses up on here it might be best to use a kjv or nkjv....or perhaps niv. They are more accurate translations than whatever one was used for those scriptures.

I may as well argue with the Brothers Grimm about the true story of Rapunzel.
 
simply wrong, Adam did die...he would have lived eternally on the earth otherwise.

Irrelevant. God said "you will surely die," suggesting immediacy. If God had meant that Adam would die later on, he would have said "you will become mortal."
 
Irrelevant. God said "you will surely die," suggesting immediacy. If God had meant that Adam would die later on, he would have said "you will become mortal."

surely suggests immediacy? How bout no? Surely suggests authority and surety.
 
"Omniscience," "Omnipotence," I make the same mistake too, sometimes. Stupid Latin derivitives. Three years of Latin in high school and I can't remember "to be able" was "potior."
Yah I thought it said omnimpotence, for which I suppose you take Vaticagra.
 
simply wrong, Adam did die...he would have lived eternally on the earth otherwise.
Uh huh. And they would have never had children (having never discovered original sin) and there would only be two people on earth today. But then, if God had planned it all along that man would spread out, then He set a trap for Adam and Eve in the garden, and with omniscient certainty that they would fall for it. By doing so, He robbed them of immortality, showing that He is a backstabbing, scheming, thief, to add to his other crimes. Why would you worship such a duplicitious creature?

Because I can't worship such a creature, I am much happier by understanding that the evidence for such a hideous being is completely lacking. But if you choose to continue to believe in this nightmare, you have my sympathy.
 
He robbed them of immortality

I'm sure it is so sad to recieve a blessing and end up not keeping it because of your mistakes, but the blessing comes from the Lord, the rejection of it comes from Satan. Or would you rather blame your mistakes on God as you believe they should? If you choose to continue to believe in this nightmare, you have my sympathy.

And they would have never had children (having never discovered original sin) and there would only be two people on earth today.

I dont think we can conclude that...God created the reproductive organs as objects of sin? Sex is not a sin, though when corrupted and/or adulterous, it is.
 
I dont think we can conclude that...God created the reproductive organs as objects of sin? Sex is not a sin, though when corrupted and/or adulterous, it is.
Why then were they compelled to cover their reproductive organs once they had eaten from the tree of knowledge? Perhaps it is not a sin, just "dirty".

And backing up a little bit, in Genesis, the Lord commanded Adam to tend the garden. At no point did he mention the Adam and his offspring should tend the garden. Childbirth was only mentioned after their fall from grace.
 
I'm sure it is so sad to recieve a blessing and end up not keeping it because of your mistakes, but the blessing comes from the Lord, the rejection of it comes from Satan. Or would you rather blame your mistakes on God as you believe they should? If you choose to continue to believe in this nightmare, you have my sympathy.

Still, God lied and the snake told the truth. That'll show you.
 
Because heaven and hell are very much like a tree which, has its roots planted here on earth.
Verily, because they both have leaves.

No, wait. They don't.

Because they convert carbon dioxide to oxygen?

Nah, that can't be it.

Because there is no evidence for trees?

Not that, either.

Because...

I give up, Iacchus. Why are heaven and hell like a tree?
 

Back
Top Bottom