Speed of light

[Logician]

Let's say God is omniscent.  If this is the case, he knows he's omniscent.  However, conser where he would go if he wanted to confirm his omniscence.  About the only place he could go is his own authority.  However, it's possible, as far as he knows, that somebody is *tricking* him into thinking that he's omniscent.  The case where he is *actually* omniscent and the case where he only *thinks* he's omniscent would be indestinguishable to God, which means he can't know whether he's actually omniscent or not, which means that there's something he doesn't know with certainty, which means he's not omniscent.  So, an omniscent god (for that matter, any omniscent being) cannot exist as omniscence itself indroduces contradictions.

In other words, God cannot exist because He doesn't fit into your realm of logic reasoning.

Then give me logic by which I can conclude that God is not a contradction.

Actually, you'd be doing me a favor.

What if "omniscient" is a term we developed to understand a concept and not something the Lord bothers to contemplate?

Why would an all-knowing, all-powerful being need to confirm His omniscience?

Because if he was omniscent, he'd know that he can't know for sure that he's omniscent unless he can prove it. He could be being "tricked" into thinking he's omniscent. Of course, if he's not truely omniscent, he might not know that he could be being tricked into thinking he is omniscent.

Your argument acts like it believes God has nothing better to do than to observe His own naval all day!

Actually, the argument can be worded without the need for contemplation, but I think this way is clearer.

Sorry, but IMO this argument is just as pointless as the "making a rock He can't lift" argument.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[nebula]

Because if he was omniscent, he'd know that he can't know for sure that he's omniscent unless he can prove it.  He could be being "tricked" into thinking he's omniscent.  Of course, if he's not truely omniscent, he might not know that he could be being tricked into thinking he is omniscent.

I wish there was an easy way to explain to you just how absurd this reasoning is!

How about this -

Can you find the terms "omniscient" or "all-knowing" anywhere in the Bible?

I sure can't!

You see, these are terms that some theologian somewhere in time decided to use to describe his understanding of God.

Christians just adopted the term because - hey, why not? Sounds good!

So, in essence, you are arguing against something that the Lord never said about Himself.

So, if you want to develop a logic argument against God's existance, why not use something that is recorded as Him having actually said? For instance:

"The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth, 7 keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children's children to the third and the fourth generation."

(Ex. 34:6,7)

But as far as where the concept of why someone would call God "omniscient," consider this:

Isaiah 40:12-17

12 Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand,

And marked off the heavens by the span,

And calculated the dust of the earth by the measure,

And weighed the mountains in a balance And the hills in a pair of scales?

13 Who has directed the Spirit of the LORD,

Or as His counselor has informed Him?

14 With whom did He consult and {who} gave Him understanding?

And {who} taught Him in the path of justice and taught Him knowledge

And informed Him of the way of understanding?

15 Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket,

And are regarded as a speck of dust on the scales;

Behold, He lifts up the islands like fine dust.

16 Even Lebanon is not enough to burn,

Nor its beasts enough for a burnt offering.

17 All the nations are as nothing before Him,

They are regarded by Him as less than nothing and meaningless.

Does this to you sound like someone who needs to prove anything?

[Logician]

Because if he was omniscent, he'd know that he can't know for sure that he's omniscent unless he can prove it.  He could be being "tricked" into thinking he's omniscent.  Of course, if he's not truely omniscent, he might not know that he could be being tricked into thinking he is omniscent.

I wish there was an easy way to explain to you just how absurd this reasoning is!

How about this -

Can you find the terms "omniscient" or "all-knowing" anywhere in the Bible?

I sure can't!

The closest thing I've found is Psalms 147:5. There certainly may be something closer to stating that God is "all-knowing" or "omniscent," though. I'll see if I can't find something better.

Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.

You see, these are terms that some theologian somewhere in time decided to use to describe his understanding of God.

Christians just adopted the term because - hey, why not?  Sounds good!

So, in essence, you are arguing against something that the Lord never said about Himself.

So, are you saying God isn't omniscent?

Are you willing to accept that there's something God doesn't know?

Whatever the case, every Christian I've ever encountered would say that God is omniscent. So, even if the Bible does not explicitly state that God is omniscent, I'd say it's a core belief to Christianity.

So, if you want to develop a logic argument against God's existance, why not use something that is recorded as Him having actually said?  For instance:

"The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth, 7 keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children's children to the third and the fourth generation."

(Ex. 34:6,7)

Alright. Based on that and Ezekial, chapter 18, the Bible contradicts itself.

You might claim that things changed between the two passages, but the Bible also states that God is unchanging.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 states that God "breathed" or "spoke" the scriptures.

If God's word contradicts itself, then he lied in either the first one or the second one.

So, if God exists, then he is a charlitan.

But as far as where the concept of why someone would call God "omniscient," consider this:

Isaiah 40:12-17

12 Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand,

And marked off the heavens by the span,

And calculated  the dust of the earth by the measure,

And weighed the mountains in a balance And the hills in a pair of scales?

13 Who has directed the Spirit of the LORD,

Or as His counselor has informed Him?

14 With whom did He consult and {who} gave Him understanding?

And {who} taught Him in the path of justice and taught Him knowledge

And informed Him of the way of understanding?

15 Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket,

And are regarded as a speck of dust on the scales;

Behold, He lifts up the islands like fine dust.

16 Even Lebanon is not enough to burn,

Nor its beasts  enough for a burnt offering.

17 All the nations are as nothing before Him,

They are regarded by Him as less than nothing and meaningless.

Ok, so what you (or, at least the scripture above) are saying is that he knows everything about the universe because he created it, but there's no way for even God to know whether or not there are things outside of his knowledge?

Does this to you sound like someone who needs to prove anything?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok.... then he doesn't need to prove anything because he already knows everything including the fact that he knows everything. However, he may only think he knows everything because a greater being is making him think he knows everything. So, he can't know whether or not he actually knows everything. Therefore there's something he doesn't know, which means that he doesn't know everything.

[spiritman]

Because if he was omniscent, he'd know that he can't know for sure that he's omniscent unless he can prove it.

[nebula]

Ok.... then he doesn't need to prove anything because he already knows everything including the fact that he knows everything.  However, he may only think he knows everything because a greater being is making him think he knows everything.  So, he can't know whether or not he actually knows everything.  Therefore there's something he doesn't know, which means that he doesn't know everything.

It's funny, really.

In the other thread, you refuse to nail down the concepts of "mathematics' and "time" the way you've nailed down the term "omniscient"!

Really, if there is a One who created the universe and the Earth and human intelligence, what could our intellects compare to this? If He knows what is what the current status of the planets being formed in inside the Orion nebula as well as what star just exploded inside the Sombrero galaxy and knows "when a sparrow falls" and "the number of hairs on your head", don't you think He deserves to be called "all-knowing" by us who can't even remember where we left our car keys?

Your argument is like trying to tackle a Calculus level 6 question and solve it with Algebra 101 principles!

[Logician]

Ok.... then he doesn't need to prove anything because he already knows everything including the fact that he knows everything.  However, he may only think he knows everything because a greater being is making him think he knows everything.  So, he can't know whether or not he actually knows everything.  Therefore there's something he doesn't know, which means that he doesn't know everything.

It's funny, really.

In the other thread, you refuse to nail down the concepts of "mathematics' and "time" the way you've nailed down the term "omniscient"!

Well, there's really only 1 definition of omniscient. I've assumed we all agreed on what it means as I can't really think of another definition.

Having total knowledge; knowing everything: an omniscient deity; the omniscient narrator.

Is that definition acceptable to you?

And, would you agree that "all-knowing" is synonymous with "omniscient?"

Really, if there is a One who created the universe and the Earth and human intelligence, what could our intellects compare to this?  If He knows what is what the current status of the planets being formed in inside the Orion nebula as well as what star just exploded inside the Sombrero galaxy and knows "when a sparrow falls" and "the number of hairs on your head", don't you think He deserves to be called "all-knowing" by us who can't even remember where we left our car keys?

Actually no. The fact that he knows what the current status of the planets being formed in the Orion nebula as well as what star just exploded inside the Sombrero galaxy (BTW... I don't believe there is a galaxy by that name... I don't know. It's possible one exists.) and knows "when a sparrow falls" etc... does not in any way affirm that God is all-knowing.

Your argument is like trying to tackle a Calculus level 6 question and solve it with Algebra 101 principles!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Math really doesn't work that way. If the math you have is insufficient to solve a problem, you'll know it at some point along trying to solve it. Usually, if you don't have the math required to solve a problem, the problem isn't getting the right answer, but knowing where to start.

And, calculus generally only goes up to calculus 3.

But, anyway, it seems like the argument you're making is that we're not smart/wise enough to use logic effectively on a God who is infinitely wiser than us?

I don't see how that would invalidate the logic. In fact, the logic works precisely because of the omniscience.

[Logician]

You know God didn't put everything in the Bible, sometimes he just allows us to use our common sense.  For example The word Bible is not in the Bible, but I read one, everyday.  No where in the scripture can you find the word Trinity, but in several passages the way that God describes himself, or others Describe him, the word Trinity is a good discription... and I believe that his word omniscent is cut out of the same cloth.

So now the dog can quit chasing it's tail........

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Then are you saying God isn't omniscient and we just made that assumption based on the inferrences made in the Bible?

[nebula]

as well as what star just exploded inside the Sombrero galaxy (BTW... I don't believe there is a galaxy by that name... 

Here: The Sombrero Galaxy

[Kabowd]

This is off topic, but I've always wondered: if an airplane is traveling faster than the speed of light, and turns it's headlights on...will the beams shoot out? Or stay directly in front of the lightsource?

[Logician]

as well as what star just exploded inside the Sombrero galaxy (BTW... I don't believe there is a galaxy by that name... 

Here: The Sombrero Galaxy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL. Ok, then. I stand corrected.

This is off topic, but I've always wondered: if an airplane is traveling faster than the speed of light, and turns it's headlights on...will the beams shoot out? Or stay directly in front of the lightsource?

Actually, nothing can travel faster than light. (There may be exceptions, but for the sake of simplicity, we'll ignore them for now.) However, if something could go faster than light, it would actually depend on who was trying to see if the plane was outrunning the light.

To the people onboard the plane, the light would be going ahead of them. (In other words, they would not be outrunning the light.)

To the people on the ground watching the plane, the plane would be outrunning the light.

I could go into the details of why this is so, but I don't have time now.