• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

PureX

Veteran Member
Well, what are the logical problems with my arguments again?
As follows ...
To know everything that means spanning infinity.
I think it would be impossible for such a being to exist.
No, it is possible, because you are not sure.
If you are perfectly sure, only then it is impossible in your opinion.
This is correct, because assumed probability is not certainty, and without certainty, all possibilities remain viable (regardless of presumed probability).

However, the reverse is also true: that possibility does not equal probability, nor certitude. That 'all there is to know' is a closed set of information is not known. That any entity can possess the set of 'all there is to know' (omniscience) is also not known. So knowing these two facts does not validate either condition. The only condition it validates is that we don't know. And that, therefor, all the possibilities remain viable.

I don't "believe in" God because I am not omniscient, and therefor cannot possibly know that such a God exists. On the other hand, because I am not omniscient, I cannot know that such a God does not exist, either. So for me, the possibility of such a God existing remains open and available for me to hope and trust as being true, if I so choose, unless and until I can somehow know, otherwise. Or for me to trust and hope as being untrue unless and until I can somehow come to know otherwise. I "believe in" neither of these option. But I choose to hope and trust in the former, as opposed to the latter.
 
Last edited:

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
There are whole books on how you can logically prove things - here's one for free: Critical Thinking (pdf). You could, for example, use categorical logic or truth-functional logic, but what you can't use is unsupported assertion and waffle, which is all that was in your original post.

That word "waffle" has reminded me of the court scene:
Let me illustrate:

Inane videos also have no place in logical arguments.... :rolleyes:
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
So for me, the possibility of such a God existing remains open
It is an understandable situation because we do not live in Paradise yet. This means,
that there is satan.
The satan was not created by God of Love, because only Holy Lucifer was created by Love.
Because satan was not created by Love, he is god himself (false God). Hence, there are two gods fight going on on Earth. That is why it is not Paradise yet.

 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
PLEASE TELL ME ABOUT THE INFINITE LOOPS, THAT YOU HAVE MENTIONED.
Knowing everything would include knowing you know everything but then you'd have to know you know everything, and then the know you know you know everything and so on ad infinitum.

The Omnipresent Being stores information directly in nature.
What are you basing that assertion on? I'm just talking about what is technically possible, not what actually does or doesn't exist.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Knowing everything would include knowing you know everything but then you'd have to know you know everything, and then the know you know you know everything and so on ad infinitum.
Consider seven Millennium Prize PRoblem. In my logical opinion, I know the answer to every one of the problems. And I know, I have these answers, and what they are correct in my opinion.
No loop here. Now, if there would be 1000000 Millennium Prize Problems, then in my personal opinion, I would have calculated all the answers. So, again, no problem with an infinite loop.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
What are you basing that assertion on? I'm just talking about what is technically possible, not what actually does or doesn't exist.
The Omnipresent Being stores information directly in nature. For example, if I live a Bible in a closed room. Then during 10 years, the Bible will hold its position. So, there is no need to remember the position of the Bible, all I have to do is open the room and see the position of the Bible. But God is a time-traveler like Dr. Who from series of fantastic aliens. So, God can travel backward in time for 10 years, open the room, and see the position of the Bible.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
What I learnt when human science machine owner controller by man's human consciousness lovingly gas burnt irradiated my brain. Human adult sister female.

Mother human sister human daughter human who trusted and loved him.

Whilst his sick mind gets irradiated by being just a human himself whilst I suffer his lying cosmic mother abomination space zero themes.

By machine used experiments his new life partner I have human sex with robots. One worse sexual being than his bible.

Mother maths his evil mother theme...science his unholy baby.

As new sink holes formed my feedback female gave me a vision as if I landed personally on a space floor.

As I live inside a heavens water mass body.

Not infinite not space not radiation background and none of his satanisms.

Whilst he theories he coerced tells grand stories by his ego about how he nearly knows it all. He created sink holes new holes.

Yet he claims this wisdom satanic by nearly having completely nuclear removed earths mass back to his holy status mother space empty maths theme.

Mr lying I am a big egotist..just human.
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
Ignorance presupposes knowledge for without knowledge there cannot be ignorance which is lack of knowledge.

Darkness presupposes light for if light did not exist darkness could not be imagined.

Now imperfection implies a Perfect One for without Perfection imperfection could not be realised.
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
The Omnipresent Being stores information directly in nature.
Where would the Omnipresent Being be "stored"? Where would their knowledge of where/when to look for each piece of information be stored?

A library implicitly contains all of the information within all of it's books but nobody can effectively access that information without some kind of index system to identify what information is in which book.

The fundamental issue is that "everything" will always consist of more than just the raw data of what is in the universe.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Where would the Omnipresent Being be "stored"?
Nature is the Information. God is well alive 10 years ago, now, and 10 years in the future. God is here and on Mars. God has no need to store information. The 4-dimensional (space+time) Nature itself is Informative enough.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Consider seven Millennium Prize PRoblem. In my logical opinion, I know the answer to every one of the problems. And I know, I have these answers, and what they are correct in my opinion.
No loop here. Now, if there would be 1000000 Millennium Prize Problems, then in my personal opinion, I would have calculated all the answers. So, again, no problem with an infinite loop.

Irrelevant waffle. This is nowhere near knowing everything and doesn't address the problems raised.

The Omnipresent Being stores information directly in nature. For example, if I live a Bible in a closed room. Then during 10 years, the Bible will hold its position. So, there is no need to remember the position of the Bible, all I have to do is open the room and see the position of the Bible. But God is a time-traveler like Dr. Who from series of fantastic aliens. So, God can travel backward in time for 10 years, open the room, and see the position of the Bible.

This is silly. If the information isn't in your own mind, then you don't know it. Being able to find something out is not the same thing as knowledge. There is also the problem of an omniscient being would also have to know everything about itself, (including what it was going to do, so it could have no free will) which also leads to an infinite regress of storage.

None of this, of course, is really relevant because you haven't produced anything remotely like a logical argument for an omniscient being in the first place.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
There is also the problem of an omniscient being would also have to know everything about itself, (including what it was going to do, so it could have no free will)

God is Absolute Freedom. Hence, starting from His Freedom, the restrictions on our freedom and restrictions on our animals, are being built up. Freedom is the free act within God's Laws. For example, you are not free to fly like a bird (if you have not airplane). The satan is slavery itself. The sin is not a free deed, it is the deed of satan's slave.

This is nowhere near knowing everything and doesn't address the problems raised.

The problem of omniscience: "how would the omniscient being know that
there was nothing he didn't know?"
Perhaps, there is an infinite amount of conjectures, problems, and tasks.
But we can select some 10 or more problems into a set.
Consider any finite set of problems, for example, 1000. The God has solved
them all. Hence His effectiveness is 100%. And hence this percentage
does not depend on the choice of set, then the God must know all (infinite)
knowledge. God is Spirit (Concept of Love is God and God is Love),
and not a machine. Hence, He can have an infinite IQ.

Nature is the Information. God is well alive 10 years ago, now, and 10 years in the future. God is here and on Mars. God has no need to store information. The 4-dimensional (space+time) Nature itself is Informative enough.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
God is Absolute Freedom. Hence, starting from His Freedom, the restrictions on our freedom and restrictions on our animals, are being built up. Freedom is the free act within God's Laws. For example, you are not free to fly like a bird (if you have not airplane). The satan is slavery itself. The sin is not a free deed, it is the deed of satan's slave.



The problem of omniscience: "how would the omniscient being know that
there was nothing he didn't know?"
Perhaps, there is an infinite amount of conjectures, problems, and tasks.
But we can select some 10 or more problems into a set.
Consider any finite set of problems, for example, 1000. The God has solved
them all. Hence His effectiveness is 100%. And hence this percentage
does not depend on the choice of set, then the God must know all (infinite)
knowledge. God is Spirit (Concept of Love is God and God is Love),
and not a machine. Hence, He can have an infinite IQ.

Nature is the Information. God is well alive 10 years ago, now, and 10 years in the future. God is here and on Mars. God has no need to store information. The 4-dimensional (space+time) Nature itself is Informative enough.

Just repeating the same nonsense and waffle is not going to turn it into a logical argument. Your original attempt to prove an omniscient being was a joke and none of this waffle addresses the actual problems with knowing everything (including everything about itself).
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
Nature is the Information. God is well alive 10 years ago, now, and 10 years in the future. God is here and on Mars. God has no need to store information. The 4-dimensional (space+time) Nature itself is Informative enough.
That's faith, not logic. Your inability to put the former aside makes this entire discussion pointless.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
the actual problems with knowing everything (including everything about itself).
For example, I know all seven Millennium Prize Problems, and I know much about myself. I know:
1. Solutions to the problems.
2. that I have legs, head, brain, etc.

No infinite loop here. And even if there is a loop, it does not mean, that I do not exist.
 

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
For example, I know all seven Millennium Prize Problems, and I know much about myself. I know:
1. Solutions to the problems.
2. that I have legs, head, brain, etc.

No infinite loop here. And even if there is a loop, it does not mean, that I do not exist.

Why are you just repeating the same irrelevant waffle? Try reading what has been said and thinking about it.

None of this changes the fact that your attempt to prove the existence of a omniscient being was nothing remotely like a proof.

You failed in your initial attempt and now you're ignoring the problems inherent in the concept and just repeating irrelevant waffle about subsets of knowledge that do not involve said problems.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Why are you just repeating the same irrelevant waffle? Try reading what has been said and thinking about it.

None of this changes the fact that your attempt to prove the existence of a omniscient being was nothing remotely like a proof.

You failed in your initial attempt and now you're ignoring the problems inherent in the concept and just repeating irrelevant waffle about subsets of knowledge that do not involve said problems.
Translation, please?
I suggest the following translation: "ratiocinator does not like your idea. Point." No more information can be extracted from this waffle.
 
Top