The Book of Revelation: Mystery Or Profitable?
- Thread starter Arial
- Start date
Duh. The problem is when you take concepts/attributes that originated with pagan deities, and apply them to God as if they describe Him.
Saying it doesn't make it so, and I have presented plenty of evidence from scripture to the contrary.
In other words, you're saying that God could not be God if he was not omniscient?
So therefore, God could not be God if he did not know about you, Arial, for His entire existence?
You make yourself into a necessary being, which is blasphemy. GOD is the only Necessary Being. Not you.
Jesus is God.
Jesus does not know the day nor the hour of His own return.
Therefore He cannot know everything.
So yes, I can honestly say, with scripture backing me up, that God is not omniscient.
IT'S ENTIRELY RELEVANT!
It's practically the main reason Augustine introduced the concept that God is omniscient into Christian theology that you believe it today!
Wrong. Covenants and sacrifices are not what we are talking about. Ergo, not relevant to this discussion about God's attributes.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
No, He doesn't declare Himself to be omniscient.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
If Abraham's faith was not of the quality God desired, then he would not (there's that "would do" part that you just denied) have been able to raise his hand against Isaac.
Why wouldn't it be?
Saying it doesn't make it so.
He won't. Or do you, as Clete said, put more faith in God because of what He CANNOT do, than what He CAN do?
Men are also said to be "all knowing." Yes, human beings.
Because God is capable of doing just that.
As I said, you have more faith in God because of what He cannot do, rather than what He CAN do.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
Brilliant post!
The part about Ariel making herself into a contingent being will go over her head. She won't understand what you're talking about at all.
glorydaz
Well-known member
My goodness. What a wonderful mutual admiration society. 
Being God, Jesus was able to hold the entire world together AND KNOW the time of His return IN HIS DEITY. He chose, in His humanity, to not know everything. Being God is not something that was lost when Jesus walked among us as God manifest in the flesh.
Being God, Jesus was able to hold the entire world together AND KNOW the time of His return IN HIS DEITY. He chose, in His humanity, to not know everything. Being God is not something that was lost when Jesus walked among us as God manifest in the flesh.
I don't think God the Father has even made the decision yet on when Jesus should return, and thus, Jesus cannot know it yet, because it hasn't been decided.
God is free to decide when Christ will return.
Its frequency of use is directly proportional to the frequency of unsubstantiated claims being made in this forum.
That's a laugh since the contingent being argument was made first by Bob Enyart only months before his death (i.e. several months ago).As brilliant as you guys are you should be able to come up with something new.
It's one of the most eloquent arguments against Augustinian doctrine that can be made because it uses the very same Aristotelian premises that are used to supposedly establish classical divine sovereignty. In other words, it forces the Augustinian to choose which Aristotelian philosophy to throw over board, either one of which deconstructs the entire philosophical construct of Augustinian theology (i.e. the Classical understanding of the "Omni" doctrines). It's proof that its false - PROOF! If the word "proof" has any meaning at all, that argument is what it looks like. In short, no God that actually exists can be omniscient AND sovereign. Oops!
Clete
glorydaz
Well-known member
Nice. You actually made a point that makes sense.
A point that, if true, would mean that God is not omniscient! At least not in the Classical sense of the term.
Actually, He made it a few years ago in 2019, the earliest I could find at least:
Really?!Actually, He made it a few years ago in 2019, the earliest I could find at least:
I was just listening to a recording of his where he talked about it and called it a "new argument". I thought I was listened to something relatively recent but it must have been an older one.
Regardless, its certainly not an old argument.
in absentia ... you are correct.
Why would anyone want to do that who views scripture from a different perspective? Just so they can be insulted?
Did you realize that pretertism and and futurism are inventions of the Jesuits? Just thought I'd tell you as I reject both of those ways of understanding prophecy. I'm a historicist which was the only way of understanding before and during the Reformation.
Francisco Ribera - Wikipedia
To avoid confirmation bias.
Getting a second opinion allows you to have confidence that your beliefs are correct, rather than just assuming they are and having a greater chance that they're wrong.
It also might give you a different perspective on something you might be struggling with, solving an issue that your current views cannot resolve.
It has the added benefit of keeping you intellectually honest.
If you feel insulted by someone's position, maybe it's because you've set yourself up to be insulted.
I'm never insulted by someone else's position. Why should I be insulted by what they believe? That's ridiculous. It appears as though you are though or you wouldn't despise people whose beliefs are different than yours.
At least Clete admits he despises me.
I believe and my firm position is that you are in the top ten most stupid people to ever post on TOL.
Insulted yet?