There is no Omnipotence Paradox

Your claim was that because one is not omniscient that basic logic does not apply.

Ad Hom.

Ok .. so what

My opinion on the issue of predetermination makes no difference to logical conclusion that if everything is predetermined then God is not omnipotent.

Your rambling and avoiding the topic is the only grey thing here.

If everything is not predetermined then God can not know everything that will happen in the future with absolute certainty.

 

Link back to this alleged Ad Hom. If you fail to do so, then I will be forced to report you for altering the quote function as well as making false claims.

 

You claim here that if one is not omiscient or omnipotent that one can not determine how an omnipotent being will respond in a predetermined world. (Predetermination is the conversation after all)

Ad hom.

If everything is predetermined then all responses are known in advance.

The being will respond exactly what is predetermined.

If the being responds differently then what is predetermined then predetermination does not exist.

If predetermination does not exist then God does not know all things that will happen in the future.

 

Wrong. A statement of FACT is not an ad hom.

Hypothetical and subsequently a showing of uncertainty.

Conclusion based on a hypothetical unproven point.

Another hypothetical and subsequent showing of uncertainty leading to a conclusion based on a hypothetical unproven point.

Another hypothetical and subsequent showing of uncertainty leading to a conclusion based on a hypothetical unproven point.

Meaningless and proves nothing.

 

ROFL .. positing a hypothetical does not show uncertainty.

The "if/then" statment is the common sytax of logic.

If A is true then B is true is the claim

If A (If everything is predetermined) is true then B (all responses are known in advance) is true.

If you think there is uncertainty in this claim then you must show this uncertainty (that B is not true when A is true).

And you cant.

 

Does it PROVE the point that you are attempting to make? No? Should you say yes it proves the point, then you again are admitting that the logic proves the existence of God. Otherwise, all you have is a fairy tale disguised as a 'logical conclusion' which conclusion is based on a hypothetical unproven point. Where is the objective empirical evidence to support the logical conclusion?

 

Not sure what you are rambling about here .. we are not talking about proving the existence of God.

The paradox is related to the nature of God not as to the existence of God.

The point has been proven by deductive logic.

Predetermination means everything is known in advance. If everything in the future is known in advance there can not be changes to this future.

If the future is predicted/preordained .. and that future changes then the prediction is wrong and the future was not actually preordained and everything was not known in advance.

Either everything is known in advance or it is not. There is no middle ground, no grey.

 

The "nature of God" cannot be proven without the proven existence of God.

The point has not been PROVEN. By any means that are available to you or others.

Your last three paragraphs above are a redundant recap of what you have already claimed and have not proven. Where is the objective empirical evidence to support your claim?

 

The existence of God is assumed .. why are you still rambling on about proving it ?

Emperical evidence is not needed to support the claim:

Either everything is known in advance or it is not.

If you think there is a third option then give it.

 

An assumption or presumption is not a FACT. Prove the presumption to be factual, then you can prove the nature of that thing presumed.

More presumption. Are you now saying that if someone merely presumes something then there is no longer any need to prove the existence of that something? If you are, then you have already defeated all of the arguments of the atheists and other non-theists with regard to the existence of God. Now, since you claim to be a Christian, convince all of those atheists and non-theists that a presumption of the existence of God subverts the need of objective empirical evidence that God exists.

You see, presumptions are subjective in nature. They are not factual. The nature of something that is recognized as being subjective cannot be proven to exist. Once it exists, then it is no longer subjective and the nature of it can be determined.
"na·ture (nchr)
n.
1. The material world and its phenomena.
2. The forces and processes that produce and control all the phenomena of the material world: the laws of nature.
3. The world of living things and the outdoors: the beauties of nature.
4. A primitive state of existence, untouched and uninfluenced by civilization or artificiality: couldn't tolerate city life anymore and went back to nature.
5. Theology Humankind's natural state as distinguished from the state of grace.
6. A kind or sort: confidences of a personal nature.
7. The essential characteristics and qualities of a person or thing: "She was only strong and sweet and in her nature when she was really deep in trouble" (Gertrude Stein).
8. The fundamental character or disposition of a person; temperament: "Strange natures made a brotherhood of ill" (Percy Bysshe Shelley).
9. The natural or real aspect of a person, place, or thing. See Synonyms at disposition.
10. The processes and functions of the body."

 

I agree. However, the omnipotence issue feeds into the problem of evil. If God hates evil, and is omni-benevolent, and is omnipotent, then why doesn't he just remove evil? A Christian might say if God removed evil, there would be no free will. Then since God is omnipotent, why can't he just remove evil without violating free will. He can do all things right?

The response? It depends.

Sometimes a word is meant to represent something that is real, sometimes it is only meant to represent an idea of something. E.g. If I say tree, I can mean trees that exist now, trees that have existed in the past and present, or all trees that will or have ever existed, or all trees that are possible given this universe (includes real trees), or all trees that are possible in any possible universe what could have possibly existed.

I could also mean tree as in the idea of a tree. Many of the ideas of trees are impossible, e.g. money tree. These only exist in the realm of ideas and are or were not real or possible. Trees in the world of ideas could include both real and possible trees, and impossible trees.


When the bible says that God can do all things, it is saying that God can perform all actions. Does it mean actions as in actions that are real and possible, or does it mean actions as in actions in the world of ideas (which can include both real and fictional actions)?


If the bible means actions as in real actions, then all it is saying is that God can perform all actions which are real or can be done. So it does not necessarily mean that God can perform all imaginable actions (actions in the world of ideas). Maybe there are no fictional actions, all actions can be done, and all actions in the world of ideas are also in the realm of reality and possibility but the bible doesn't say. So there may be fictional actions God cannot do that only exist in the world of ideas. The bible only says that God can do real or possible actions.

If the bible means actions in the world of ideas, then it is saying that God can do all imaginable actions. This means that Since God can do all actions in the realm of ideas of actions, then all actions in the realm of ideas are also in the realm of actuality and possibility (since they can be done by God). Therefore God can do all imaginable actions, including break the rules of logic, making a stone he can't lift, and destroying evil without violating free will.

However when the bible says that God can do all things, it doesn't say say whether it means actions as in real or possible actions, or actions as in imaginable actions and actions in the realm of ideas. So the bible cannot be disproved from this front.

 

God can do all things. If He wanted to remove all evil, He would. He doesn't want to. Both man's will and evil are necessary in God's plan for man. So, the response is not, 'it depends'. The response is always that God is omnipotent, omniscience, and omnipresent.

Quantrill

 

What a Joke ..

Either something true or false.

The statment "If something is true, it can not be false" is not presumption.

One who denies such an obvious truth is a troll

 

Question:

If everything is Predestined, is it possible to change the future ?

 

There's a whole slew of Christians who do believe in predestination.

LOL, I could see one like you trying to debate that with them! They'd have your head spinning.

Seriously, go find some Christians like that online. Find you a Calvinism vs Arminianism forum.

You will find these friendly chats with atheists quite tame by comparison.

 

This is a despicable post and you, sir, are without honor.

 

LOL My new sig!

 

And of course there are Calvinists who eat these types of Christians for lunch on those Calvinism vs. Arminianism forums I mentioned.

Calvinists are the smart Christians and they won't be found on a religion forum debating the non-elect.

Calvinists know their Bible and they know their logic.

And I bet it would take one or two posts from a Calvinist to convert any Christian on this forum to Calvinism.

I might convert to Calvinism for that very purpose. Once I convert them, you can bet we won't be hearing from them again.

 

You have to know the future to be able to change the future. And neither you or I know the future, so we opeate on the immediate.

From God's view, no. The future will hold what He wants. For example, the prophecies in the Bible that are yet to be fulfilled, you cannot change it. It will occur. Nothing can stop it. Its the little bit of future the Christian knows. And it will happen.

Quantrill

 

So there is no free will.

 

Depends on what you mean by 'thing'. Do you mean a real thing or an imaginable thing?

God does not hate evil if God is including evil in his plan when he doesn't have to.

 

Not very logical on your part. Once you convert to Calvinism, then we won't be hearing from you anymore, and that would prevent you from converting any Christian on this forum.

 

Yeah! I like that. help spread the word for me. If you can't beat them, join them or at least praise them and fly their screen-name like a political promotion campaign.

 

Man has a will. But I have always said man does not have free will. God is the only One Who has free will.

But, man will live and die by his decisions. His will is involved.

Quantrill

 

Is that the very best that you can do? How pathetic.