So what?
----
Instead of complaining about how unwatchable it is, you could, in good faith, watch it and address what was said.
I tried. It was painful. I've given good faith on many other of your videos.
Appeal to incredulity is a logical fallacy.
I rarely use it, see it very often from Open Theists. "You idiot!" or something like. "That's ridiculous" or dare I say " Philosophical nonsense," from his own lips. In most schools of debate it is relegated quickly to school yard banter and childishness. I Corinthians 13:11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
However, unlike the above, I simply said "conjecture." I've been on TOL 25 years. It is a value statement, not the fallacy you believe.
Let me be very quick on this, however: I appreciate you much much more. At times I think you take jabs, but rarely with me, and when they are eschewed, you have a mind that is very good. Your education was first rate, and you do think well. In fact, you are one of the people who have helped me grasp that Open Theists aren't shallow. ▲ Whenever I've seen Open Theists excited about winning debates or at least perceive themselves to, and then call another an idiot, etc. ▲ I arrogantly thought I was an adult among children. The sincerity of those who look at arguments and come up with thoughtful rebuttal or alternative has shown me the maturity of deeper thought and wrestling with God, that must occur with any one sincere about their faith and walk with the Savior and I appreciate seeing the image of God in another.
Are you talking about the video? Or Isaiah 41?
Isaiah
You still aren't seeing it. Blinded by your own paradigm.
If God is omniscient, knows everything, why does He need them to present their case? Why does He need them to bring forth their strong reasons?
I don't see the bible as relationally as most Open Theists likely do. It is a one-direction book, God to man. Nobody in Isaiah 'wrote back.' He didn't need them to present their case, 'they' needed to present their case, but because of the stark difference, there, He already blocked that off. It was rhetorical.
Wouldn't He already know their case? Wouldn't He already know their strong reasons?
Yes!
The passage is not consistent with the view that God is "Omniscient."
Say bye bye to your strongest prooftext for it!
And again, you're missing the point.
Again, this passage doesn't make sense in light of the doctrine of omniscience.
Yes, God can know all things knowable. That does not include knowledge that doesn't exist. Including a person's thoughts.
"Do you love me?" "Lord you know
all things, you know I love you." There are Open Theists that strongly disagree with you. You know this, right?
If a person doesn't have a thought about something, God cannot know what that thought is.
It also includes things God willingly ignores.
For example, God does not need to know every gruesome detail about child rape, or murder, or other heinous sin. He can (iow, is free to) turn away from such things.
This is your queasy imposed on God, because specifically, you (and I)cannot handle such. I can appreciate it, but I've been through so much atrocity in my young life. Remember the knife? At eight I had pushed it in about a quarter inch and it hurt so bad. I like you, thought God couldn't watch or for me, didn't watch. I was wrong, as are you. God is not queasy. His intense love for us will not leave us alone. He is with us at all times. He doesn't put His hands over His eyes when we are going through a tough time because love is stronger than horror.
And again, missing the point.
Once again, this misses the bigger picture provided by the context, which at this point I'm having a hard time thinking you're not intentionally ignoring.
Sometimes you have to spell it out. Unlike God, I cannot read minds. I have a good mind and love puzzles, but time doesn't always allow. We've both got a life. I heard that the chapter and verse divisions of the Bible came from a circuit preacher and that they thought perhaps he did it on the back of his horse between churches. Being a truck driver, you might appreciate that, but I know you don't do TOL when you are in the truck.
No! It has nothing to do with them being or not being gods!
It does. Realize He is lifting Himself up as Author at that point. There is implied contention with God and the simple intimation is "You aren't me but you need me!"
It's not some great contest of skills God is having, trying to show How great He is!
Yes, it is. It isn't that a few men are saying "I am God" or "Better than God" but it is a contrast, done purposefully to show them the need for relationship. James says something similar:
James 4:13 Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”—
James 4:14 yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes.
James 4:15 Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.”
One idea in Open Theism is that we are 'independent' of God. In I get strong pushback on my thoughts concerning
Colossians 1:16-20 and John 15:5 Without Me, you can do nothing. Yet these scriptures are very clear that we cannot even breath without God. It makes the most sense, since God 'spoke' and creation came into existence and 'breathed' life into the first man. Literally, not just to the disciples as I've seen it relegated, literally none of us can do even one little thing (nothing) 'without Him.'
Go back and watch both of the videos here.
Are these the first two again? I watched them, or are these different?
----
Yes, and this discussion is about that post.
Do try to keep up, Lon.
There are several hours to keep up with. I much prefer your synopsis, but will walk a mile or two.
The author of Isaiah 40-48 didn't stop near the end of chapter 41 to give a lesson on how much knowledge God has.
What is the narrative talking about? What is the purpose for God saying all these things?
God is infinite, yes, we agree.
This is rooted in Platonic thought, not scripture.
It is ALSO scripture. "There is no other god beside me." "Without Him 'nothing' exists that exists (anywhere, any time)."
Try starting from Scripture, rather than pagan Greek philosophers.
Even the heavens (creation) Paul tells us, reveals God Romans 1:20. It means if it is true, it is God's no matter where it lay. I'll even go a step further, While I don't agree with everything a Greek says, I appreciate their contribution to society and believe they got quite a lot right, demonstrably. Perfect? By no means, but I'd rather be Greek than Roman, if I lived back then.
The entire passage of Isaiah 40-48 shows one such limitation. You'd know that if you stopped forcing your a priori assumption of "Omniscience" onto the text!
It isn't forced. He knows, by the last line, the outcome of all actions given in passive form. It is the marked difference there.
Another is John 8:58 Before Abraham
was, I
Am. Jesus is a better grammarian than you or I will ever be. It means as much as He is involved with us, inside of time, He is
infinitely away from it, by necessity. There are very many scriptures that say God is infinite, without restraint. While I acquiesce qualifications with Open Theism, I do not acquiesce imposition. I'm not sure Open Theists grasp what infinite means, or whether they understand it as a logical necessity and scriptural given
Only within the paradigm that holds that God is Omniscient.
Then it is worth pondering if so dramatically different (I agree, it is).
God is infinitely creative.
Ah, so no new song if you know what infinite means.
He can create a new butterfly, write a new song, and think a new thought. That's part of His being "infinite!"
It is, but with me: God is 'already' infinite, not 'becoming infinite.'
Says the one who claims "God is infinite" but forgets that that includes God's creativity.
Supra
Again! Missing the point!
I appreciate this but sometimes think of it as a plea for help and doing just a teensy bit of extra mile for me
Appreciate you too! -Lon