Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: James C. Bennett; TXnMA; MHGinTN; Alamo-Girl; betty boop
All that's merely been done here is the substitution of one paradox with another.

That which is timeless cannot observe or partake in time; likewise that which is omniscient cannot be omnipotent—i.e. an omniscient deity cannot change its mind, ergo is not omnipotent.

808 posted on 01/23/2011 11:30:11 AM PST by kosta50 ("Spirit of Spirit...give me over to immortal birth so that I may be born again" -- Mithral prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 804 | View Replies ]


To: kosta50; Alamo-Girl; James C. Bennett; TXnMA; MHGinTN; xzins
That which is timeless cannot observe or partake in time; likewise that which is omniscient cannot be omnipotent—i.e. an omniscient deity cannot change its mind, ergo is not omnipotent.

It seems to me you cannot subject God to the Law of the Excluded Middle. That would be to commit a category error.

We are made in His image, not the other way around. The image cannot dictate terms to the "original" of which it is an image.

Try as you might, you cannot reduce God to human categories without grossly misrepresenting the divine nature.

Or so it seems to me, FWIW.

Plus how do you know "for a fact" that "That which is timeless cannot observe or partake in time?" You are unavoidably in time; you cannot step out of it. So how do you know what a timeless Being knows, or does, in what for Him is an eternal Now that you do not sense at all?

Thanks so much for writing, kosta!

810 posted on 01/23/2011 12:03:51 PM PST by betty boop (Seek truth and beauty together; you will never find them apart. — F. M. Cornford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 808 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson