Do you believe that omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience are essential attributes of God? In other words that one who claims to be God but is not all powerful, all-knowing, and everywhere present is lying?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The greatest error on bb
- Thread starter Luke2427
- Start date
- Status
Do you believe that omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience are essential attributes of God? In other words that one who claims to be God but is not all powerful, all-knowing, and everywhere present is lying?
I’ll take your answer (dance) as, “Yes, you reject the premise”, big surprise there!!!
It didn’t take long for you to go full circle did it??? You speak of “reason” but you are right on track with your typical MO of simply avoiding “*logical reason” (*see below) to avoid a conclusion in your replies. In effect, we are right back to defining how “how” “God is Sovereign”.
You will desperately settle for nothing less regarding responsibility than T + F = T, which is logically false buddy! All you will EVER be able to offer is an invalid argument regarding this issue. I doubt you even understand the meaning or consequences of such reasoning, but I do, and it directly points to either your critical thinking skills or your values regarding the “truth” as being serious messed up…you logically remove truth from the nature of God all for the motive of holding to a screwed up made-man deterministic doctrine!
Luke, you’re constantly merely attempting to evade the argument using various fallacious means involving weaseling to suggest there are “unstated premises”; what you are doing is fallaciously rejecting “all” premises by refusing to categorize claims so that a conclusion cannot be presented as true based on the premises. In doing so you avoid truth.
I’m simply asking for you to establish sound premises for a philosophically logical argument to begin…to allow for categorical claims. A categorical claim says something about classes “or categories” of things. Any true claim (not an evasive claim) must result in putting description or classes upon the subject and predicate in a premise in the form of terms.
Again, it is fallacy in its purist form to evade, by whatever means, categorizing claims and establishing terms and it is absolutely ridiculously ignorant to suggest one is “logically arguing” without EVER doing so! - Yet, it is very apparent to me this is your favorite MO in what you think is “debate” or “philosophical argument” – BTW, that is why I have tried (several times) to explain what an “argument” is and what it isn’t “PHILOSOPHICALLY” speaking!
On a side not maybe this (from the beginning of the first chapter from a college textbook in Basic Logic and Critical Thinking Skills) will help explain to you what a philosophical argument is: http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0073386677/610543/Moore9e_ch01.pdf
Your answer, once again, is to reject the premises and begins with:
For CRYING OUR LOUD that is not an “argument” philosophically speaking and it is a very ignorant and immature way to debate!!!
Above, I simply asked for you answer T or F or if you would reject the "simplistic" premise.
My previous argument before that cuts to the chase of defining “whatever responsibility (cause)” and God’s judgment in Truth, but you are now evading establishing terms regarding the origin of the “cause”.
Does God judge “whatever” (evil) that He causes or does God judge “whatever” (evil) man causes? The “evil” God judges in truth must have an origin regarding God justly holding His creature accountable for his responsibility for causing that evil!!!
A premise involves a claim which must have two parts; a subject term and a predicate term. Take a “standard form categorical claim”, for example: (A) All ________ are _________, (B) No __________ are __________. Phrases that go into the blanks are called terms.
You attempt to endlessly reject any term rather than establish premises and seem to think that is some kind of valid way of argument or some kind of logic.
You can’t go about to avoid establishing terms and even begin a philosophical argument; “arguing” without doing so is like what children do, it is fussing and fight and often thought of as an “argument”, but that IS NOT THE KIND OF “ARGUMENT” I AM “TRYING” TO GET AT! I am trying to address using “logic” scientifically or IOW’s “philosophically” (*Logic: The branch of philosophy concerned with whether the reasons presented for a claim, if these reasons were true, would justify accepting the claim). When say, let’s be “logical”, I am referring to the “GOALS” of using the tools of philosophy which are formulated to draw out the “TRUTH” in an “argument”. Philosophy also deals with rhetoric and fallacies but using these methods to “argue” with are not the ETHICAL GOALS of debate!
Refusing to define terms is the kind of “philosophical goals” Bill Clinton would use to “avoid the TRUTH”. Bill Clinton does not use philosophy ETHICALLY! When debating, Christians should be concerning themselves with the goals of drawing out the TRUTH not in how to avoid it. I seriously hope it is that you simply do not recognize the value of applying the “proper ethics” in debate because I do not want to believe that you are just merely discarding these values!
That said, let’s try again:
God’s judgment involves holding man responsible for… A or B?
A: Man’s choices to do evil
B: God’s choices to do evil
As believers can we agree on this claim which must be necessarily true: All of God’s Judgments are involving holding man responsible for “his” actions in “TRUTH”.
???
All causes are judged by God in Truth.
All God’s judgments are Just.
Therefore, all causes are Justly judged by God in Truth.
Luke, I challenge you to give me a categorized syllogism (a valid logical argument) which demonstrates God can Justly judge his creatures in Truth for the evil in which “they” do while maintaining that God has pre-determinately fixed the causes’ unchangeable origin and thereby the creatures choice.
I am not ignoring this post. I'll get to it but it is so long that I will address it later when I have time.
I am about to leave to go to an association men's meeting in a few minutes.
Luke, who is it that revealed to us that God wrestled Jacob and lost? Who was it that told us that Jesus did not know the exact day and hour he would return, and did not know who touched him in Luke 8:45?
I believe the word of God. When Jesus said he did not know the day and hour he would return, I believe him. I do not care what any other person says or thinks. This is not difficult language to understand. When the scriptures say God wrestled Jacob and Jacob prevailed, I believe it. I do not understand why God would tell us these things unless they were absolutely true and he wanted us to know them.
I don't start out with a preconceived idea and then force scripture into it. I try to understand scripture properly and then form my views from that.
So no.
You don't believe that the omni attributes are essential to God being God.
He can stop being all powerful forever if he so chooses.
He can stop knowing all thing for the rest of eternity and be no more intelligent than you or me.
There is no point discussing this further.
You do not believe in the same God that most of us Christians believe in. We are talking about two different Gods.
The God of Christian theology is by his very IMMUTABLE nature omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient.
The one thing God CANNOT do is not be God.
Your God can not be God whenever he chooses. That is a different God altogether.
God "allowed" jacob to win in order to be able to do what he really wanted, to break His spirit and rename him...
Jesus was limited while on Earth,as He was in the physical body of a Man, and he willingly took on the limitations of the flesh, as He allowed Himself to "not know" the time the Father knew!
Jesu knows ALL that the father knows once again, as he received back the fullness of the Glory that was veiled while here on the earth!
You can insult me all you want, I believe what the scriptures say.
It is the word of God that tells us Jacob prevailed in the wrestling match with God.
It is the word of God that tells us Jesus did not know the exact day and hour he would return.
It is the word of God that tells us Jesus did not know who touched him in Luke 8.
Your problem is not with me, your problem is that you do not believe the word of God.
It is the word of God that tells us Jacob prevailed in the wrestling match with God.
It is the word of God that tells us Jesus did not know the exact day and hour he would return.
It is the word of God that tells us Jesus did not know who touched him in Luke 8.
Your problem is not with me, your problem is that you do not believe the word of God.
Your problem is that you do not "rightly divide the Word of God!"
How do you rightly divide the question, "Who touched me?"
Luk 8:43 And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any,
44 Came behind him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched.
45 And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me.
Again, Jesus in the Incarnation faced a voluntary humbling of himself, willing to endure/live/experience things a humans do, while still remaining fully God!
He chose to grow in grace and knowledge , so he had decided that he did not need to know that return date at the time, but knows it now once, as he is not himdered by frail physical body any more, but raised in a gloried one and has fullness of His glory again!
To be fair that could be a leading question made to garner a specific response. I use these with my kids. I will hear one of them in the kitchen, see a mess and ask "how did this mess get here"? I know all along how, and who made it.
Jesus limited Himself by coming to earth, while being a Human being, so he had to grow in knowledge/grace before God and man!
He always was fully God, yet could not know sometimes, be tired/hungry etc in all things he experienced it as we do, but did not sin!
I understand, but I think that is refuted by Jesus's next statement when he said,
46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me.
I believe this statement makes it clear that Jesus was truly asking a serious question in verse 45. He knew someone touched him because virtue had gone out of him, but he did not know who touched him. I do not believe Jesus would mislead and pretend not to know something when he did know.
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is another question that shows Jesus was not omniscient.
Mar 9:20 And they brought him unto him: and when he saw him, straightway the spirit tare him; and he fell on the ground, and wallowed foaming.
21 And he asked his father, How long is it ago since this came unto him? And he said, Of a child.
Mar 9:20 And they brought him unto him: and when he saw him, straightway the spirit tare him; and he fell on the ground, and wallowed foaming.
21 And he asked his father, How long is it ago since this came unto him? And he said, Of a child.
convicted1
Guest
I have been following this thread somewhat, lurking in the shadows, hesitant to comment, because I can see where both sides of the argument are coming from. Not that I agree with both sides, but I do see where, and why, they take their stand in regards to what they see as logical and illogical. Here is how I see this.
Whenever you look at the things that God has done, such as turn Moses' staff into a serpent, Aaron's rod budding, Peter walking on the water, Peter looking at the crippled man at the gate called Beautiful, and telling him to rise up, etc. Now, to the natural man, all of these things look illogical. But, when you look at them through the spiritual eyes, eyes annointed by the Holy Ghost, you can see how logical they really are. Anything that God does, is logical, whether we see it as such, or not. What I am trying to say is that when God moves, and anoints anything, even an ass to talk, Jesus stating that if the people would hold their peace, the rocks would cry out, etc., that these things are logical, because God empowered them to do these things. I think this verse goes along with the theme of this thread:
1 Cor. 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
It is when we try to see with the wrong set of eyes, we tend to not see what God is really conveying to us through His written Word.
Whenever you look at the things that God has done, such as turn Moses' staff into a serpent, Aaron's rod budding, Peter walking on the water, Peter looking at the crippled man at the gate called Beautiful, and telling him to rise up, etc. Now, to the natural man, all of these things look illogical. But, when you look at them through the spiritual eyes, eyes annointed by the Holy Ghost, you can see how logical they really are. Anything that God does, is logical, whether we see it as such, or not. What I am trying to say is that when God moves, and anoints anything, even an ass to talk, Jesus stating that if the people would hold their peace, the rocks would cry out, etc., that these things are logical, because God empowered them to do these things. I think this verse goes along with the theme of this thread:
1 Cor. 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
It is when we try to see with the wrong set of eyes, we tend to not see what God is really conveying to us through His written Word.
Last edited by a moderator:
psalms109:31
Active Member
Deuteronomy 30 :
11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.
No matter how logical things may be to me and you, but to those who have no faith in it and the person who said it, it is not there.
That is why Jesus said believe in me He hasn't told us a what, but a who.
Then we listen and learn truth, logic from Him.
11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.
No matter how logical things may be to me and you, but to those who have no faith in it and the person who said it, it is not there.
That is why Jesus said believe in me He hasn't told us a what, but a who.
Then we listen and learn truth, logic from Him.
- Status