On the omniscience of God

[Lon]

That's as far as you got before making your first error. Knowing every possible move does not imply knowing every move that will be made and thus it is not omniscience.

Nor then, by extension, Omnicompetent if you follow the links and logic.

Having the ability to stop anything doesn't imply either a need, a requirement nor even the willingness to do so.

Again, this does not mean omnicompetent then? Does Open Theism mean in the context of omnicompetent, He cannot lose unless He is competent to allow such? How is this not all-powerful, all-knowledgeable, and sovereign over the game?

Further, God doesn't always get what He desires, which falls outside the analogy but definitely does explode your hypothesis.

Have you read Hilston (and other's) expiation of God's Will as Prescriptive and Decretive (if such is pertinent to discussion)? I believe it acquiesces, if not entirely that God's Will (Prescriptive) can allow sovereignly man to Fall. His Decretive desire? No, but Prescription and omnicompetent mean He has the remedy nontheless. Such would mean that these ideas aren't in contest, but the derivative ideas we take away after that. Omnicompetence is so close as to extrapolate the other omnis logically in and of itself if the logic follows.

I see how you've made errors that led you to make the connection.


Except that they don't. It's question begging. You are presuming definitions that are at question in order to make the argument.

I've posted an argument for it above for it. Is it sound?

Scripture is replete that God is all-powerful. "Nothing can thwart Thee, Nothing is impossible," etc. Scripture is so clear that God is omnipotent, that it is one attributed omni no theologian worth their salt can thwart. Sorry. Follow logically: If God is all-powerful (Colossians 1:16-20), He has to know literally all that is capable of challenging this power (omniscience). Why? Because He could not claim Almighty except to know that He is Almighty against any happenstance. Omnicompetence implies that He already knows, it already concedes the Omni's by assertion! (yes it does, you need to think more about the implications of logic, it necessarily does). Why? Omnicompetence means literally completely-able (implied) to win and never lose for one. To never be surprised by a move, else He isn't omnicompetent. Open Theism concedes the omnis by the admission. There are many theology and philosophy sites that prove this much better, but the logic isn't escapable: If one omni, necessarily all omnis. Some philosophy websites and Epicurus tried to say God couldn't have them all by incorrectly and with logical flaws to say if God was all-powerful, then why does evil exist etc. Freewill theists argue against these easily enough as untrue. Logically, if one omni, then logically all omnis else a person doesn't mean 'omni.'

One instance of objection: "Can God sin?" No "Then He is not all powerful." Incorrect. Sin isn't something to do with power. Faulty concept. While sinful men wield power, it isn't 'sin' that gives them that power. Rather power is abused, meaning sin is subservient (looking for a better term) to power, or uses power, is not power itself, nor an indicator of power.

I've seen no way out of the implication of one omni meaning all omnis without a fallacy in conception.

 

[SwordOfTruth]

I've seen no way out of the implication of one omni meaning all omnis without a fallacy in conception.

Ok a simple example. A god that is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent could be either good or bad. None of the former Omni's dictate that the god would be Omni-benevolent or whatever the opposite is. That god could be one or the other or a mix of both.

Now let's consider the Onipotent angle. Your claim is that an all-powerful being can do literally anything, there is nothing at all that can oppose his power. So what of love? Can an all-powerful being, by means of power and force, make someone love him? I submit that the answer is NO.
Even with all the power in the universe, you could not by power and potency make someone love you. This is why love is a universal force that transends most other things. A god would have to be benevolent in order for someone else to love them. If you can't guarantee that your god is Omni-benevolent (via your hypothisis) then you can't guarantee that he is Omni-potent for if god can not make someone love him, then that is something he does NOT have the power to do. Love can not be forced.

 

[Idolater]

ChatGPT: What did Vincent of Lerins say about heresy and heretics, Scripture and Scripture interpretation, and how to know whether an interpretation of Scripture is true or false?