God that is Omnipotent and Omniscient?

[nitecrawlur]

I had a brief discussion on this topic in other threads, but I think it is a deep enough subject to deserve its own discussion all together.

Christianity claims that its God is omnipotent (is capable of anything) except when it interferes with Him going against his own nature as a God. That idea alone is a contradiction since even if there is one thing he is incapable of, that would nullify the fact of him being omnipotent.

Being an omnipotent being would mean that it was also omniscient (all knowing/ knows everything) which would include knowing the future.

To my understanding, God wants us to have faith on our own free will. That's a good idea, but what about God's Plan :scratch: ? Certainly if there is a plan in place, then most everything is already decided. At least the major events that play important roles in the execution of this plan anyway. But free will is but an illusion if you believe that God is omnipotent and obviously, by default, omniscient and I'll explain why.

To be both omnipotent and omniscient, God would have known that Adam and Eve were going to sin and eat from the tree. And before that, why did God create the talking snake to tempt them in the first place? Sounds like a set-up and the first key event in his master plan. Poor Adam and Eve didn't stand a chance. So my point here is, why would God even attempt to give them a chance in the Garden of Eden if he knew that they would sin forcing their eviction from the Garden? Free will was an illusion here, I guess. And now to my next topic on this biblical contradiction.

Jesus was sacrificed by God to absolve humanity from "original sin". Now, there are two things I would like to address here. The first being that an omnipotent God should've been able to forgive sin without bloodshed since he is omnipotent. But I have learned that to not do that would be against the nature of a God and He would be going against his own nature if He did. Ok, so cross out omnipotent as a possibility for this God since he is incapable of doing something. Why can something/someone who is capable of anything be incapable of something at the same time? :thumbsup:

The second thing I would like to address on the Jesus topic is that if God is omniscient (knows everything) then he should've known that Jesus would've had to have died in the future (dating back to the Adam and Eve incident of "original sin"). So why not sacrifice him a decade or two right after the Adam and Eve era? That would have saved a lot of non-believers their lives between the times of Adam and Eve and Jesus' crucifiction. Again, must be part of his plan, right? :confused:

We all know that the God from the Old Testiment was a far cry from being merciful. So He, being omniscient, knew that Christ had to die to absolve us of our sins. But he held off on that event. Why not save all those lives by either, exercising his omipotence and simply forgiving, or exercising his omniscience by sacrificing Jesus at an earlier time?

So, to sum it all up, He cannot be omnipotent as He has to abide by rules (can't go against his nature as a God). If He is, indeed, omniscient then that would take away any free will that we think we may have as fate has already decided for us.

[NewGuy101]

Christianity claims that its God is omnipotent (is capable of anything) except when it interferes with Him going against his own nature as a God. That idea alone is a contradiction since even if there is one thing he is incapable of, that would nullify the fact of him being omnipotent.

How is it a contradiction? God is all powerful and can do anything except violate his own nature hence omniponent. The bible itself states God cannot LIE! I don't see the contradiction especially when the laws of logic are a part of his own nature.



To my understanding, God wants us to have faith on our own free will. That's a good idea, but what about God's Plan :scratch: ? Certainly if there is a plan in place, then most everything is already decided. At least the major events that play important roles in the execution of this plan anyway. But free will is but an illusion if you believe that God is omnipotent and obviously, by default, omniscient and I'll explain why.I agree, hence why I'm a calvinist. I wouldn't it call it an illusion however, I would say that our will concides with God's will. In other words as Saint Augustine stated we cannot go against our greatest desire, God controls our desires but ultimately we do what we want.


Jesus was sacrificed by God to absolve humanity from "original sin". Now, there are two things I would like to address here. The first being that an omnipotent God should've been able to forgive sin without bloodshed since he is omnipotent. But I have learned that to not do that would be against the nature of a God and He would be going against his own nature if He did. Ok, so cross out omnipotent as a possibility for this God since he is incapable of doing something. Why can something/someone who is capable of anything be incapable of something at the same time? :thumbsup: I dont even understand your logic here. You are still applying the fallcy of ominponent means doing absolutely anything. That's wrong, not only that but it wouldn't even be worth discussing since it would be illogical and unbiblical. If you want to keep applying your own definition of omniponent then by all means do so but you will be not be talking about our God but some that you made up.

The second thing I would like to address on the Jesus topic is that if God is omniscient (knows everything) then he should've known that Jesus would've had to have died in the future (dating back to the Adam and Eve incident of "original sin"). So why not sacrifice him a decade or two right after the Adam and Eve era? That would have saved a lot of non-believers their lives between the times of Adam and Eve and Jesus' crucifiction. Again, must be part of his plan, right? You are seeing what's best based on your own temporal view. He knows whats best, he is after all God.


We all know that the God from the Old Testiment was a far cry from being merciful. So He, being omniscient, knew that Christ had to die to absolve us of our sins. But he held off on that event. Why not save all those lives by either, exercising his omipotence and simply forgiving, or exercising his omniscience by sacrificing Jesus at an earlier time?
Again using your own standard of ethics to judge God. If you understand God correctly and the sinfullness of man you would know that we all deserve horrible deaths and to be in hell worse than what occured in the OT. God can give his grace as he pleases in however form and he would still be merciful considering we deserve the worse punishment in the world.
So, to sum it all up, He cannot be omnipotent as He has to abide by rules (can't go against his nature as a God).If you wanna go by your own definition of omniponent sure, that would make an illogical God. Our God is logical hence he is omniponent and omniscient.

If He is, indeed, omniscient then that would take away any free will that we think we may have as fate has already decided for us.Indeed but we still do what we desire.

[nitecrawlur]

How is it a contradiction? God is all powerful and can do anything except violate his own nature hence omniponent. The bible itself states God cannot LIE! I don't see the contradiction especially when the laws of logic are a part of his own nature.


om·nip·o·tent
adj. Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force

His power is not unlimited if he cannot change his nature. Keep in mind, what is sometimes seen as nature is actually habit.

I was taught that God was above logic, so how can logic be in his nature?


I agree, hence why I'm a calvinist. I wouldn't it call it an illusion however, I would say that our will concides with God's will. In other words as Saint Augustine stated we cannot go against our greatest desire, God controls our desires but ultimately we do what we want.



Our will coincides with God's will? A lot of people use that excuse to do horrible things, such as Rev. Paul. That's ironic. And why are you accusing him of not being Christian. If you didn't know him, how can you judge him. All youhave to go on is what he said and lived by which indicates Christianity.


I dont even understand your logic here. You are still applying the fallcy of ominponent means doing absolutely anything. That's wrong, not only that but it wouldn't even be worth discussing since it would be illogical and unbiblical. If you want to keep applying your own definition of omniponent then by all means do so but you will be not be talking about our God but some that you made up.


om·nip·o·tent
adj. Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force

That is not "my" definition, that is websters dictionary. Perhaps it is you who is making up definitions. And I am referring to your God.


You are seeing what's best based on your own temporal view. He knows whats best, he is after all God.
Again using your own standard of ethics to judge God. If you understand God correctly and the sinfullness of man you would know that we all deserve horrible deaths and to be in hell worse than what occured in the OT. God can give his grace as he pleases in however form and he would still be merciful considering we deserve the worse punishment in the world.


We deserve the worse punishment in the world? It must be nice worshiping a God who constantly reminds you that you are not good enough. You must enjoy living in guilt. I do not deserve the worse punishment in the world just because my symbolic ancestors (Adam and Eve) ate from a magical tree because a snake told them to.


If you wanna go by your own definition of omniponent sure, that would make an illogical God. Our God is logical hence he is omniponent and omniscient.


Again, it is not my definition. And your God (the one in the Bible anyway) is not logical. He is prejudice and unfair and therefore unfit in the role of "god".

[NewGuy101]

om·nip·o·tent
adj. Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force

His power is not unlimited if he cannot change his nature. Keep in mind, what is sometimes seen as nature is actually habit.
Words in the dictionary are only defined as the most common use of the word.



I was taught that God was above logic, so how can logic be in his nature?
Who ever taught you that is wrong.




Our will coincides with God's will? A lot of people use that excuse to do horrible things, such as Rev. Paul. That's ironic. And why are you accusing him of not being Christian. If you didn't know him, how can you judge him. All youhave to go on is what he said and lived by which indicates Christianity.You say "horrible things." Again you are being in consitant with your own worldview. Secondly I am "judging him" because he has the incorrect form of "Christianity."




om·nip·o·tent
adj. Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force

That is not "my" definition, that is websters dictionary. Perhaps it is you who is making up definitions. And I am referring to your God.
Again common use of the word vs philosophical use of the word. Remember every field has its own language.




We deserve the worse punishment in the world? It must be nice worshiping a God who constantly reminds you that you are not good enough. You must enjoy living in guilt. I do not deserve the worse punishment in the world just because my symbolic ancestors (Adam and Eve) ate from a magical tree because a snake told them to.
First if all, he doesn't have to remind me, I remind myself. I think,do, have done horrible things. I deserve death but by Grace he saved me. Seconldy, this shows me how much you misunderstand theology and you press your ethics on scripture which you continually deny exist. When adam and eve sinned, all of humanity sinned. We are all guilty.

Again, it is not my definition. And your God (the one in the Bible anyway) is not logical. He is prejudice and unfair and therefore unfit in the role of "god".
Its the common use of the word, things are a lot more complicated than that. Seconldly you are using "prejudice" "unfair" seems like you have an ethical standard against God. You are again being inconsistant.

BTW you call the Christian God illogical? You cannot even rationlize the laws of logic with your own naturalistic world view.

[nitecrawlur]

Words in the dictionary are only defined as the most common use of the word.

So if words have no absolute definition, how can the Bible which uses these words?


Who ever taught you that is wrong.


Again, you CHOOSE not to accept others opinions. You call my teacher "wrong" which, even though I think so as well, you are in no place to say he was. You are intolerent of others opinions on translation of scripture.


You say "horrible things." Again you are being in consitant with your own worldview. Secondly I am "judging him" because he has the incorrect form of "Christianity."


Well, I'm glad I'm consistant. And I agree he did practice negative form of Christianity.


Again common use of the word vs philosophical use of the word. Remember every field has its own language.


Again, words without absolute definition? How can anything be guarenteed to be interpreted correctly? Everyone must make their own conlusions (opinions) since there is no universal concurrence on its (The Bible) "true" interpretation.


First if all, he doesn't have to remind me, I remind myself. I think,do, have done horrible things. I deserve death but by Grace he saved me. Seconldy, this shows me how much you misunderstand theology and you press your ethics on scripture which you continually deny exist. When adam and eve sinned, all of humanity sinned. We are all guilty.
Its the common use of the word, things are a lot more complicated than that. Seconldly you are using "prejudice" "unfair" seems like you have an ethical standard against God. You are again being inconsistant.

I don't deny ethics exist. I deny that absolute ethics exist.

When I say God is prejudice and unfair, I am expressing my subjective moral view. I am consistant since I have argued this from beginning yet when I mention ethics you think I am referring to those that are absolute (which don't exist).


BTW you call the Christian God illogical? You cannot even rationlize the laws of logic with your own naturalistic world view.


If I do indeed have a naturalistic world view, which I can understand what influenced you to make that conclusion, nothing in nature can go against logic. Logic is the base on which all is existing. You cannot be religous and totally logical since most of religion goes against logic, like a supernatural mega-daddy "poofing" everything into existence from nothing......ok. :thumbsup:

[nitecrawlur]

If God is omniscient, and He does, indeed, KNOW what will happen, then there would be no need to interfere. However, Christians do claim to hear from God, see angels sent from God and confess to seeing miracles. Miracles are performed by God. So He does, according to Christians, interfere with our lives. Again, if He is omniscient, and KNOWS what will happen, then why interfere? Unless what He KNOWS will happen requires Him to interfere. But if He didn't interfere than what He KNOWS will happen would not happen if He didn't interfere. Then what we have here is a God who only is aware of what MAY happen and would require him to act to make what He wants happen, come true. Which would canel any definate knowledge and would make Him not omniscient. And if He is not omniscient, then He is, also, not omnipotent. I would consider this a connection between what God KNOWS and what actually happens when He interferes.

[Hentenza]

Tell me nitecrawur, did God create a rock so heavy that He could not lift it?

[nitecrawlur]

Tell me nitecrawur, did God create a rock so heavy that He could not lift it?

This, again, seems like an evasive manuver. The creator must first exist in order make the created.

[Hentenza]

This, again, seems like an evasive manuver. The creator must first exist in order make the created.

Nope, since it goes directly to the question of God's omnipotence.

BTW-Are we discussing God's omnipotence or His existence?

[nitecrawlur]

Nope, since it goes directly to the question of God's omnipotence.


LOL! OK if you can provide evidence He created the rock, I will tell you if it was too heavy for Him to lift. You're trying to show me another contradicting statement right? God would've known before if the rock was too heavy, but no matter how heavy it was He could lift it because He is omnipotent, right?

BTW-Are we discussing God's omnipotence or His existence?
In the last post, I was addressing His omniscience. The omnipotence was a by product of what the topic was.