Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Respond YES or NO. Simple question.
Once you realize why you reject my question, you will then know why I reject yours.
Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Respond YES or NO. Simple question.
Once you realize why you reject my question, you will then know why I reject yours.
Those two questions are in no way similar.
The question is obviously loaded -- a lose-lose no matter how I answer.
If I say "no", then God isn't God. I lose.
If I say "yes", then God knew Adam and Eve would sin.
This isn't my first rodeo...
So let me get this straight. You feel that God can neither be omniscient, nor not omniscient. Yet you still believe in him. Can you honestly see no problem with that?
The question is obviously loaded -- a lose-lose no matter how I answer.
If I say "no", then God isn't God. I lose.
If I say "yes", then God knew Adam and Eve would sin.
This isn't my first rodeo...
LOL
I was totally right.
This is the exact point that is trying to be made. Do you not see the problem with this, or do you just choose to ignore this problem?
But this is not like the previous question because it's a faulty question to begin with since the word stop means you must have some point started.
Where as the problem YOU have with this question is that the answer you might give would prove his point.
Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
He doesn't want a debate about it, and by definition, his motives are exactly what defines a loaded question.
The question is obviously loaded -- a lose-lose no matter how I answer.
If I say "no", then God isn't God. I lose.
If I say "yes", then God knew Adam and Eve would sin. I lose
This isn't my first rodeo...
Because you don't like the answers you get doesn't make it a loaded question.
You clearly don't like the implication of that question and the answers. How do you explain it, care to expand on HOW it is a faulty question and how you would explain god's all knowing or not all knowing to reflect what you believe from the bible and about your god.
The implication is that God either knows, or doesn't know the future -- that is clearly a false conclusion.
A better question, and one I'm willing to answer, is "did God know Adam and Eve would sin?" because it doesn't assume God either knows, or doesn't know every future happening.... it only deals with that one account.
Let me ask, would any of you be willing to talk about the answer to that question?
The implication is that God either knows, or doesn't know the future -- that is clearly a false conclusion.
A better question, and one I'm willing to answer, is "did God know Adam and Eve would sin?" because it doesn't assume God either knows, or doesn't know every future happening.... it only deals with that one account.
Let me ask, would any of you be willing to talk about the answer to that question?
Go ahead answer the question "did God know Adam and Eve would sin?"
Yes go ahead and answer that then - did God know, or not know, whether or not Adam and the rib-woman would sin?
A better question, and one I'm willing to answer, is "did God know Adam and Eve would sin?" because it doesn't assume God either knows, or doesn't know every future happening.... it only deals with that one account.
I am not seeing an answer in that post.
The answer is "no" he didn't know (in the sense of foreknowing, not ignorance) they'd sin.
Therefore, he can rightly punish them for sinning.... if he knew they'd sin, but created them anyway, he can't rightly punish them.
So your god isn't all knowing, thus we ended up with the answer to the first question "Is or is not god all knowing?"
Which you gave us the response of
"If I say "no", then God isn't God. I lose."
If you can't fix MY car, does that mean you can't fix "any" cars?
No.
But unlike that not knowing one thing DOES mean you don't know everything.
No.
But unlike that not knowing one thing DOES mean you don't know everything.
A better analogy would be
If you can't fix MY car, does that mean you can fix ALL cars? well of course not since you can't fix my car, and my car is party of "ALL".
Not using knowledge, doesn't mean you don't have it.
C'mon, when are you going start being honest?
God does know everything but chooses to not know certain things?
I think all these turn into god not knowing everything. Even if god could know everything but chooses to not know certain things this in fact makes it so god doesn't know everything.