Sunday, May 26, 2013

Open Theism Omniscience proven: Refuting Matt Slick

Now I disagree with most of Open Theism such as YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit) changing His mind or regretting a decision as He is Omniscient & Omnipotent,  Lets refute Matt Slick's(Calvinist by the way, clearly rejects The Holy Spirit) article:

he writes,


11. "Since God is not restricted by time, and since He is omnipresent, then the future is a present reality with God.

  1. Remember, since God created the universe and time, He is not restricted to time or by time."
      Agreed.

B. Also, time is irrelevant to God's nature and existence since God has existed before time existed."

Here lies the fundamental error, The future cannot be a present reality as it is what it is... The Future, it doesn't exist yet. it certainly is a Possibility and YHWH with His Omniscience knows what can(key word) happen and make it happen, but the future doesn't exist until it happens, just like the past no longer exists but are only a recollection(Things of . the future is only set in stone if we are preplanned, however this is Unbiblical as Free Will is a Fact in The Bible,



Joshua 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve ; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.
1 Kings 18:21 And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions ? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him . And the people answered him not a word.
Deu 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life , that both thou and thy seed may live:


 it is therefore as much as a Logical Impossibility for something to exist and not exist at the same time as it is for the future to be known, it can be predicted, but it still doesn't exist, Time is Linear, Future is down the line, hasn't happened, if it was happening we would be there, it doesn't exist yet, this is the basis of Time, Change, when something changes it is no longer how it used to be, if it is no longer how it used to be then that former event no longer exists, likewise if something is a square it is a square, it CAN turn into a circle, but that event doesn't exist yet, if it did then it would be there.



So logically Matt Slick is refuted by the fact that the future doesn't exist yet. thus YHWH is Omniscient without knowing what will happen, as since the future does not exist yet, 


There's nothing to know! 

16 comments:

  1. I agree with you, but the question is, why do so many people think that God is outside of time? Why is it such a persistent belief. A simular belief is that we can theoretically go back and forward in time. Is it sci-fi movies that have created this thinking. Or misconceptions of what Einstein's relativity means?

    Time is not a thing. You can't go out and buy a bucket full of time. It is merely the word we use to describe sequence and a succession of events - this happened, then that happened etc etc.

    The Bible doesn't say anywhere that God is outside of time. So why do some Christians hold so strongly to it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I agree with you, but the question is, why do so many people think that God is outside of time? "

      I think because as YHWH is naturally without Time(as He started Time, Time started to exist via Infinite Regression being impossible, YHWH isn't successive, He just is) and by this they Assume that He's like this EVERYWHERE, when this is false, as in order for YHWH to commune with His Creation which He created in Time, He needs to be Successive as well, thus YHWH is In Time, He doesn't need Time/to change/success to exist as He is who He is(The Father, and The Son, and The Holy Spirit)

      Delete
  2. "Now I disagree with most of Open Theism such as YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit) changing His mind or regretting a decision as He is Omniscience..."

    What about biblical passages that clearly state he regrets something? You follow Calvin's interpretation that the Bible is just blowing smoke up our butts in those passages? Like in the flood story, God "regretted" having made mankind on the earth. There are plenty such passages all throughout the historical books of the Old Testament. Does the Bible blow smoke up our butts? If not, Open Theism must be right.

    "The Bible doesn't say anywhere that God is outside of time. So why do some Christians hold so strongly to it?" It comes from Aquinas I think.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it's Interpolation, I don't deny Interpolation, Bible(Canon/Collection) isn't Inerrant, Scripture(God's Word) is.

      For example the one in Exodus is an interpolation, YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit) doesn't needed Moses to relent anger to change His mind, the ultimate solution to a problem is knowable, since it is knowable and YHWH knows everything as knowledge can only , then He knows the solution, no need for Moses.

      Interpolations are good though, why? because when a text Contradicts a Majority of the Text/Authors Intent, whether false of not, it must be dismissed.

      if there's 100 books agreeing on something and one sentence contradicts it, logically we dismiss the sentence not apart of the Historical Narrative.

      Therefore it Authenticates the Majority of whatever it contradicts, as Original, which means no one could have made up Scripture, that YHWH(The Father and The Son and The Holy Spirit) is Truth

      Delete
    2. Rafael,

      Well, if you're Ok with positing interpolations without manuscript evidence, so am I. But I'd go the other route. If you can find any passage suggesting that God exhaustively knows the future, its interpolation. If you can find any passage suggesting that God doesn't have emotions, its interpolation. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you are going to claim every passage that suggests Open Theism is interpolations, then I'll claim every passage that suggests anything other than Open Theism is interpolation.

      BTW, your claim that God is that unchangeable only works if you drop the Trinity. The Trinity requires God to change, because if he's got multiple personality disorder then obviously he is very changeable.

      Delete
    3. "Well, if you're Ok with positing interpolations without manuscript evidence,"

      Actually the evidence is Literary Criticism, which requires Logic, Logically something against what the Text is about(YHWH Loves us, wants us to be Saved, Never condemns Innocent) is not an authors intent/what text is about, has to be dismissed, manuscript evidence or not, but say 1 Samuel 15:3, you can't use manuscript to disprove it, as The Bible is a Collection of text, who's to say it wasn't pieced together?

      So you have to use Literary Criticism, which dismisses the text as interpolation.

      "If you are going to claim every passage that suggests Open Theism is interpolations, then I'll claim every passage that suggests anything other than Open Theism is interpolation."

      Only if you have a Majority of text is it valid and true, if the Majority says YHWH is Good.Love we must take that over the very very small minority(which makes it obvious interpolation)

      "BTW, your claim that God is that unchangeable only works if you drop the Trinity. The Trinity requires God to change, because if he's got multiple personality disorder then obviously he is very changeable."

      No multiple personality disorder, He's 3 Persons/Minds, not 3 Personalites. He's 3 Persons yet One Being, Also is not interchangable, as since they are God(YHWH), they must be All Agreeing, so no conflict, Jesus Christ says it,

      John 5:18-24, 18For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.

      19Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.20“For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and the Father will show Him greater works than these, so that you will marvel.21“For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes.22“For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son,23so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

      24“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

      Delete
    4. "Only if you have a Majority of text is it valid and true..."

      THe majority of the Tanakh clearly represents God as having emotions, as having form (despite being an incorporeal spirit). The majority of the Tanakh (i.e. Old Testament) also presents God and as having the ability to think which includes the ability to receive new information with it. A being who could never receive new information, who always knew everything could not think: thinking is the processing of new information. That's why we hear phrases like "Your prayer has come up before me" not "I always knew this." The fact is the passages that speak of God as being omniscient are in the minority. They need not be ignored, however, since they can be interpreted to mean he is relatively omniscient (i.e. compared to any lesser being, which means any other being, he seems to know it all) rather than absolutely omniscient. To be absolutely omniscient would be to be like a rock, incapable of thinking, since thought IS by definition the processing of new data. If you ascribe absolute omniscience to God you are saying he has no thoughts, yet He says "My thoughts are higher than your thoughts" (or do you consider that one an interpolation too?).

      Delete
    5. To know all and thus be incapable of thinking would be like being a giant computer hard-drive that stores all the knowledge that is possible, but with no thinking mechanism since thinking requires time and new data both, as thinking is a sequential processing of new data for the purpose of drawing new conclusion: something a storage device that already knows it all would not need to do.

      Delete
  3. The problem is they think of time as an existence rather than a mental concept, which is just wrong. Unfortunately the Apocalypse reinforces this false notion by saying "Time shall be no more." But surely its intended with some poetic license! Time is just a concept of how to count and order events; its just linear progression; its a mental concept that will always exist because it has to, and it had to always exist as long as even one rational being existed. Time has always existed, therefore, in God's head. And since time is a concept in God's head, it will always exist; it can't end. And he can't be "outside of time" any more than he can be outside his own mental framework.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Without Time all Science, History and Thinking(Which is, Successive) is nonexistent.

      Delete
    2. Which means without time God couldn't think. If time only began when God created the world then he would have been incapable of thought prior to creating....and that obviously makes no sense.

      Delete
  4. Hi Rafael. You can delete this comment, as I am just using it to touch base with you. I replied to your comments on my blog.

    I noticed that you commented on an older post, as well as the latest one. Just so you know, due to spam, I have comment moderation set on for any post older than 5 days. I never edit out respectable objections. On the contrary, I have no reason to hide from the truth. I just really dislike spam! :-) Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
  5. How can a deity be omniscient and still not know the future. Does that that not disqualify omniscience.

    You aid "Omniscience knows what can(key word) happen and make it happen," but that is not the definition of omniscience. Omniscience is defined as the capacity to know everything that there is to know. So if god knows what can happen then it will happen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly, and there's nothing to know about The Future, it doesn't exist yet, asking to know the future is like asking, can something exist and not exist at the same time, it's logically impossible/inconcievable.

      Damn those time travel movies/cartoons, they had me brainwashed to thinking the future is in existence now.

      Delete
    2. So god is then not omniscient. :) Glad you agree

      Delete