Omni

[Resha Caner]

What are you talking about? I said two bodies controlled by two separate minds! I don’t understand why aren’t you getting this.

My point is, in theory you can have multiple people with their own separate minds and bodies and still be equally capable.

You appear a bit worked up. If you think I'm missing something, maybe you could point me to the post where you said "two bodies controlled by two separate minds" so we can get this all cleared up. Because, I thought I had agreed you have a point.

Are you also saying that even with the accumulation of more and more Omni properties, you can never see reaching a point where it would be impossible to differentiate two beings?

 

[Ken-1122]

Are you also saying that even with the accumulation of more and more Omni properties, you can never see reaching a point where it would be impossible to differentiate two beings?

As mentioned before; with the exception of "omnipresence" I don't see why this would be the case. If you believe this could result; please explain why.

Ken

 

[Resha Caner]

As mentioned before; with the exception of "omnipresence" I don't see why this would be the case. If you believe this could result; please explain why.

That depends on the context in which you ask the question. Are you allowing (just for the sake of discussion) that beings are only distinguished by differences of the mind? Or are you maintaining there are other criteria for distinguishing them?

 

[Ken-1122]

That depends on the context in which you ask the question. Are you allowing (just for the sake of discussion) that beings are only distinguished by differences of the mind? Or are you maintaining there are other criteria for distinguishing them?

I am maintaining that there are other criteria for distinguishing them.

K

 

[elopez]

Based on the discussions here I can see, depending on how one defines the terms, that there are several possibilities.

As omniscience to know literally everything, and omnipresence as present everywhere. It seems there could exist two omniscient beings who know the same "everything." And there could be two beings both present everywhere simultaneously.

Could that mean two omniscient, omnipresent beings could exist too?

 

[elopez]

Also, I'm beginning to think the answer is "yes" all around, depending on how you're defining "beings"..... you know?

 

[Resha Caner]

I am maintaining that there are other criteria for distinguishing them.

Hopefully you realize that allowing my definition "for the sake of discussion" means we both understand you're not agreeing to my definition, you're just putting aside your objections for the moment to see where the conversation goes. But, OK.

 

[Resha Caner]

Also, I'm beginning to think the answer is "yes" all around, depending on how you're defining "beings"..... you know?

Indeed, I do know that.

 

[elopez]

Indeed, I do know that.

The Father, Son, and Spirit were equal in omni attributes, though they were different 'persons' or as we said perhaps 'beings.'

 

[Ken-1122]

Hopefully you realize that allowing my definition "for the sake of discussion" means we both understand you're not agreeing to my definition, you're just putting aside your objections for the moment to see where the conversation goes. But, OK.

Again; why would multiple people accumulating more and more Omni properties, eventually get them to the point of it being impossible to distinguish them from one another?

Ken

 

[Resha Caner]

The Father, Son, and Spirit were equal in omni attributes, though they were different 'persons' or as we said perhaps 'beings.'

I don't know that I would agree with that.

It would first require that said being agrees with your definitions and agrees they possess those traits before you could start making conclusions.

Until then we're just discussing different possible beings.

 

[Resha Caner]

Again; why would multiple people accumulating more and more Omni properties, eventually get them to the point of it being impossible to distinguish them from one another?

It doesn't follow from your conditions, but from mine. If you'll not agree to a discussion of my conditions, I can't demonstrate that result.

 

[elopez]

I don't know that I would agree with that.

It would first require that said being agrees with your definitions and agrees they possess those traits before you could start making conclusions.

Until then we're just discussing different possible beings.

The doctrine of The Trinity states all three persons are Co equal in every attribute. Each person is God so each person is equally omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. Each person is eternal.

You don't agree with that?

 

[Resha Caner]

The doctrine of The Trinity states all three persons are Co equal in every attribute. Each person is God so each person is equally omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. Each person is eternal.

You don't agree with that?

The only creed I'm aware of that uses the term "coequal" is the Athanasian, and it never uses any omni words. Therefore, as best I know, that is your conclusion rather than an explicit part of the doctrine.

[edit] Oops. Let me correct that. The Athanasian creed does call all 3 persons "almighty" in the English translation, which in the original Latin was omnipotens.

I'm not denying it may be true. I'm simply not agreeing to your conclusion without further explanation.

I would consider you and I equal in terms of our civil rights, but that doesn't mean we share the same abilities. So, one needs to clarify the context of the term used.

 

[Ken-1122]

It doesn't follow from your conditions, but from mine. If you'll not agree to a discussion of my conditions, I can't demonstrate that result.

Okay, if we assume your position that beings are only distinguished by differences of the mind, (if your position entails more please explain) and we assume multiple beings are capable of all things; as long as these beings have free will, it seems to me they will still have individual preferences, after all; having preferences does not mean weakness, it simply means you are not a machine.

Ken

 

[Resha Caner]

Okay, if we assume your position that beings are only distinguished by differences of the mind, (if your position entails more please explain) and we assume multiple beings are capable of all things; as long as these beings have free will, it seems to me they will still have individual preferences, after all; having preferences does not mean weakness, it simply means you are not a machine.

I was saying a preference is a weakness. The chocolate/vanilla example is trivial, and therefore probably obscures the point.

On a larger scale, if someone making a decision to fill a job prefers their son for the job even though other candidates have better skills, I would say they made a mistake, which is inconsistent with an omni being. Now, if there is some perfect purpose in giving a job to a person whose skills are lesser, then it is not really a preference to give them a job. It is a fulfillment of that perfect purpose.

 

[elopez]

The only creed I'm aware of that uses the term "coequal" is the Athanasian, and it never uses any omni words. Therefore, as best I know, that is your conclusion rather than an explicit part of the doctrine.

[edit] Oops. Let me correct that. The Athanasian creed does call all 3 persons "almighty" in the English translation, which in the original Latin was omnipotens.

It's not just my conclusion. I am unaware of any creed that believes otherwise. The Trinity says all three persons are each identical in essence and nature. I even think the Fourth Latern Council used the term "co-equal."

I'm not denying it may be true. I'm simply not agreeing to your conclusion without further explanation.

The Trinity states there are three persons in one God. If God is three persons, each is God. If each is God, and God has all 3 omni's, then each person has all 3 omni's.

The conclusion is evident and explicit enough in the statement, "God is three persons."

I would consider you and I equal in terms of our civil rights, but that doesn't mean we share the same abilities. So, one needs to clarify the context of the term used.

Does the Father have any less omniscience than the Spirit, or is any "less" or does "not have the same" eternalness?

 

[Ken-1122]

I was saying a preference is a weakness. The chocolate/vanilla example is trivial, and therefore probably obscures the point.

On a larger scale, if someone making a decision to fill a job prefers their son for the job even though other candidates have better skills, I would say they made a mistake, which is inconsistent with an omni being.

In your scenario, preferences is not the weakness/mistake; unfair actions are.
The reason it is a mistake is because he was unfair about his decision making. you can have preferences without being unfair about it.

Ken

 

[TillICollapse]

I was saying a preference is a weakness. The chocolate/vanilla example is trivial, and therefore probably obscures the point.

On a larger scale, if someone making a decision to fill a job prefers their son for the job even though other candidates have better skills, I would say they made a mistake, which is inconsistent with an omni being. Now, if there is some perfect purpose in giving a job to a person whose skills are lesser, then it is not really a preference to give them a job. It is a fulfillment of that perfect purpose.

Are you equating omni qualities with our concepts of morality ?

IOW ... how are you defining "perfect" ?

 

[Resha Caner]

Does the Father have any less omniscience than the Spirit, or is any "less" or does "not have the same" eternalness?

Stuff like that has always been a question. Theologians got their shorts in enough of a bunch over whether the Spirit proceeds from the Father alone or the Father and the Son that it split the church.

Another big debate has been over Jesus' nature. Did he always appeal to the Father because he temporarily put himself in that condition or because he is always in that condition?

The Athanasian Creed makes a few things clear, such as that all 3 are eternal, but it doesn't go through a laundry list of omni-properties, discussing each one ... and it's a pretty long creed.

I didn't intend this thread to be a specific debate about the Trinity. Whatever the case, I think God has what is needed to get the job done.