Does omnipotence not imply infinite power?

Sha'irullah · Dec 11, 2013

nazz said:
There is something deeply disconcerting hearing the term "kiddo" applied to man in his late 50's. Unless you are about 80 or 90 yourself?

I overuse that word I think, along with others

As for the rest of your post I'm sure it must make some sense to you but I could not make heads or tails of it. But I will address this part:

Discussing causalities and the nature of existence is as confusing as it gets and I have found no way to simplify it sadly.

un·lim·it·ed (

n-l

m

-t

d) adj.

1. Having no restrictions or controls: an unlimited travel ticket.
2. Having or seeming to have no boundaries; infinite: an unlimited horizon.
3. Without qualification or exception; absolute: unlimited self-confidence.

Just because you find the word infinite used in the dictionary doe snot mean anything because infinite has a lot more components to it than a definition. It is an entire concept.

But infinite is applicable to unlimited since infinite has no limits since it loops but eternity has no limits either and it is not infinite. This serves no purpose since the same word can be used to define many things.

Have you not ever heard of unlimited broadband internet? Are you denying the creation of the internet?

nazz · Dec 11, 2013

sojourner said:
It certainly makes sense from a more panentheistic perspective. If God is all, if God is life, if God is Being, itself, then God knows all that there exists to know. God is everywhere there is existence. God is all-powerful, because God is all power. The concepts work when we're speaking of God as universal, but not so much when we speak of God as particular.

I'm not sure it makes sense even from that perspective. I just used this example in the other thread. Imagine what it is like to observe an object from all possible perspectives. IOW, an infinite number of perspectives. Now I can imagine a being having the ability to look at any one of those but not all of them at the same time. Because there is no limit to the "all" and to be infinitely conscious does not compute for me.

sojourner · Dec 11, 2013

How could God be present everywhere at the same time? The bible says he has a place where he resides, and so he could not be at any other place at the same time. Thus we read at 1 Kings 8:43 that the heavens are God’s “established place of dwelling.” Also, we are told at Hebrews 9:24 that “Christ entered . . . into heaven itself, now to appear before the person of God for us.”

Yet, Psalm 139 wonders, "where can I flee from your presence?

If one person goes to a particular place and finds God, that means that no one else, at that particular moment, can have access to God, unless they're in the same physical location. When two sports team pray in the huddle, in which huddle is God found? God is certainly more than particularity. God is also universality.

sojourner · Dec 11, 2013

I would say he was in a different dimension... the spiritual dimension

Our universe is a physical dimension.

Yet we engage in our universe in patently non-physical activities and circumstances. How can that be, if this universe is only physical?

Skwim · Dec 11, 2013

Jayhawker Soule said:
There is a distinction between:

inherent omniscience - the ability to know anything that one chooses to know and can be known.

total omniscience - actually knowing everything that can be known.

This is an interesting difference, but do you see it as theologically meaningful?

As I see it, a god who can know anything he wants to, and a god who has that knowledge already in store are not functionally different. To me it's kind of interesting, but not a hair not worth splitting. Maybe it's because I don't see it as having any effect on the notion of freewill. Whether a god actually knows what one will do, or simply can know what one will do doesn't change the inevitability of the act. :shrug:

What can be known wouldn't be any different than what is known. They would have to be the same.

sojourner · Dec 11, 2013

God is omnipotent on the basis of his actions towards the universe. Nobody can have infinite power because power is not infinite nor capable of it, you cannot be powerful before there is nothing. Power behaves much like a verb, without causality there is no power.

If God is infinite, and God is all power, then power is infinite.

Sha'irullah · Dec 11, 2013

sojourner said:
If God is infinite, and God is all power, then power is infinite.

You are applying omnipotence to god before he even expressed power. So power still cannot be infinite. VERB! Remember when i said omnipotence is based upon causality? Omnipotence is not a title based upon nothing because if that was the case I could declare myself omnipotent and not do anything to prove it.

nazz · Dec 11, 2013

Skwim said:
This is an interesting difference, but do you see it as theologically meaningful?

As I see it, a god who can know anything he wants to, and a god who has that knowledge already in store are not functionally different. To me it's kind of interesting, but not a hair not worth splitting. Maybe it's because I don't see it as having any effect on the notion of freewill. Whether a god actually knows what one will do, or simply can know what one will do doesn't change the inevitability of the act. What can be known wouldn't be any different than what is known. They would have to be the same.

As I understand it the difference is between being able to access all information and being eternally aware of all the information simultaneously.

Pegg · Dec 11, 2013

Awoon said:
Well provide a map.

maps are associated with physicality

metaphysical is the opposite to physical.

Sha'irullah · Dec 11, 2013

Pegg said:
How could God be present everywhere at the same time?

If you are a panendeist it is quite easily.

Also have you not heard of the Holy Ghost?

sojourner · Dec 11, 2013

nazz said:
There is something deeply disconcerting hearing the term "kiddo" applied to man in his late 50's. Unless you are about 80 or 90 yourself?

As for the rest of your post I'm sure it must make some sense to you but I could not make heads or tails of it. But I will address this part:

un·lim·it·ed (

n-l

m

-t

d) adj.

1. Having no restrictions or controls: an unlimited travel ticket.
2. Having or seeming to have no boundaries; infinite: an unlimited horizon.
3. Without qualification or exception; absolute: unlimited self-confidence.

Conceptualizing God pushes the limits of what we are capable of understanding and conceptualizing. So we use ridiculous terms like "omni," "infinite," "universal" as a means of describing that cloud beyond the horizon that we will never be able to grasp and understand. Trying to number the grains of sand in the ocean or the stars is futile. Trying to quantify God is, likewise a waste of time.

sojourner · Dec 11, 2013

nazz said:
I'm not sure it makes sense even from that perspective. I just used this example in the other thread. Imagine what it is like to observe an object from all possible perspectives. IOW, an infinite number of perspectives. Now I can imagine a being having the ability to look at any one of those but not all of them at the same time. Because there is no limit to the "all" and to be infinitely conscious does not compute for me.

God doesn't have consciousness. God is consciousness. Therefore, since God is infinite, so is consciousness. However, we, as particular individuals, are finite, so our ability to hold all consciousness is limited. That's why you can't imagine it.

nazz · Dec 11, 2013

sojourner said:
Conceptualizing God pushes the limits of what we are capable of understanding and conceptualizing. So we use ridiculous terms like "omni," "infinite," "universal" as a means of describing that cloud beyond the horizon that we will never be able to grasp and understand. Trying to number the grains of sand in the ocean or the stars is futile. Trying to quantify God is, likewise a waste of time.

Well I agree. I shy away from quantifying or qualifying deity. I can only justly speak of God from the perspective of my own experience. But I think people do mean specific things when they speak of the omni-qualities of God.

Awoon · Dec 11, 2013

Pegg said:
maps are associated with physicality

metaphysical is the opposite to physical.

So no map to find God? Excellent.

sojourner · Dec 11, 2013

Sterling Archer said:
You are applying omnipotence to god before he even expressed power. So power still cannot be infinite. VERB! Remember when i said omnipotence is based upon causality? Omnipotence is not a title based upon nothing because if that was the case I could declare myself omnipotent and not do anything to prove it.

With God, there simply is no "before." God is expression of power -- in all times and places. God never declared God's self omnipotent. God simply creates (verb).

nazz · Dec 11, 2013

sojourner said:
God doesn't have consciousness. God is consciousness. Therefore, since God is infinite, so is consciousness. However, we, as particular individuals, are finite, so our ability to hold all consciousness is limited. That's why you can't imagine it.

Hard to put into words what I am trying to say. But I am talking about the subjective experience of consciousness here. Is it possible that a subject, in this case a deity, could have an infinite number of simultaneous conscious experiences?

Not sure if that makes it any clearer.

sojourner · Dec 11, 2013

Awoon said:
So no map to find God? Excellent.

Why do we need a map? We're already where God is, since God is omnipresent. All we need is the Vatican-approved, Joel Osteen-endorsed, Joseph Smith-prophesied star that says, "You are here."

sojourner · Dec 11, 2013

nazz said:
Hard to put into words what I am trying to say. But I am talking about the subjective experience of consciousness here. Is it possible that a subject, in this case a deity, could have an infinite number of simultaneous conscious experiences?

Not sure if that makes it any clearer.

For me, it makes no sense because there is no such thing as *a* deity; there is only Deity. God is universal and not particular. There is no such thing as "subjective experience" for a universality.

Sha'irullah · Dec 11, 2013

sojourner said:
With God, there simply is no "before." God is expression of power -- in all times and places. God never declared God's self omnipotent. God simply creates (verb).

I agree with this fully though, it is just that at some point god would have to have expressed this power for the first time or else you go into an infinite regress. I can be wrong though because I am not well versed on the multiverse theory at all so god may be able to be defined as infinite in expression of all things.

nazz · Dec 11, 2013

sojourner said:
For me, it makes no sense because there is no such thing as *a* deity; there is only Deity. God is universal and not particular. There is no such thing as "subjective experience" for a universality.

OK, that makes sense to me. What I'm saying would not apply to your view then.

Does omnipotence not imply infinite power?

رسول الآلهة

Doubting Thomas

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Veteran Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

رسول الآلهة

Doubting Thomas

Jehovah our God is One

رسول الآلهة

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Doubting Thomas

Well-Known Member

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Doubting Thomas

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

رسول الآلهة

Doubting Thomas