Omnidoctrines

OK, I'll bite, let's take first--
1. Omnipotent
It is actually the foundation of the post I started called, Can God do anything.
Professors point:
Is God limited? If the answer is in any way yes--then He is NOT omnipotent. For example, one of the posts in that thread said God could not save an unreprentent soul.
As many in the class agreed with this, then the point is made--God is no longer OMNIPOTENT.
Can God perform some act that is cruel, mean or non-just? If the answer is no, then God is omnipotent.
My main argument here was that God is limited--but only self-limited. God chooses to be limited in those areas (and many more that were brought up), so God is the one placing the limitation. As one who chooses to self-limit--I believe God can change His mind any time he chooses to, hence, he is Omnipotent in that he can even change the rules.
Omniscient--Professor's argument (since this school and my own denomination do not adhere to predestination): If God is omniscient, why pray? Doesn't he already know what we are saying? If God is Omniscient, why would the Bible say he changed his mind when Moses prayed to Him? If he already knew that MOses would pray and He already knew he would change his mind, did he really change it--meaning the Bible is not accurate. (mind you this took the professor days to say--I just said it in a paragraph). This also gets into the debate between foreknowledge and predestination. If God knows who is going to hell, and he COULD stop it (omnipotent), then he is deliberately sending his own children to hell, something the Bible says specifically he doesn't want--so to believe that he is omniscient suggests that he knows they are going to hell, but can't stop it--problems with omnipotent now.
My argument--God may know all, but allows free will to run its course. To presume that God must "play by our rules" is to place Him within His creation rather than above it.
3. Omnipresent--PRofessors arguments were frankly weak here and I don't remember them, but they swayed a lot of people. I believe that God is present everywhere. I don't like the image of spirit, doesn't work for me, but God is as a type of light that can go through anything. We might not can see light itself, but it's presence can be felt eveywhere.
Wish I could do better, but it's been a while.
That's was the Reader's Digest version--hope I did it some justice. Notice however, the professor is a conservative Christian man, he simply wanted us to think. He's a great guy--true beleiver.
Tommy

Thank you herev for responding to my request.

And you had some good answers, although I believe all people will eventually be in Heaven. So everything God means to happen will happen, including his will that none perish.

The Bible also shows that God can perform something that is defined as cruel or mean by our standards, although he performs them for specific purposes. The Bible even goes as far as saying that God is a creator of evil, but (I believe) for the purposes of chastening.
Isa 45:7I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

butxifxnot said:

herev, so are you for the omnidoctrines of God? you did a great job of just stating the arguments; how do you stand?

Click to expand...

100%

HomeBound said:

Thank you herev for responding to my request.

And you had some good answers, although I believe all people will eventually be in Heaven. So everything God means to happen will happen, including his will that none perish.

The Bible also shows that God can perform something that is defined as cruel or mean by our standards, although he performs them for specific purposes. The Bible even goes as far as saying that God is a creator of evil, but (I believe) for the purposes of chastening.
Isa 45:7I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Click to expand...

you're welcome

Hi Tommy,

I agree with you. There is a great difference between what God cannot do and what He chooses not to do. It is almost funny if you think about it. The created trying to determine the scope of the Creator? LOL! No wonder there are so many opinions!

If you use the OMNIs as your picture of God you are not going to see Him at all. God has shown us a perfect and exact image of Himself in the person of Jesus Christ His only begotten Son. If you use Jesus as your picture of God, then you will see and understand God perfectly and in the way in which God wants you to see and understand Him.
The OMNI factors were an invention of the Roman and Greek mystery religions in an effort to make God unknowable. They thought that a God that you could know and understand could not be a very powerful God. But we can know God perfectly well in Jesus.
Praise His Name!

Tractor1 said:

I don't dispute the fact that God has given men their senses that can give true and accurate information regarding those things God would have man recognize, but reason isn't sufficient in and of itself apart from God's final truth set forth in His Word, the Bible.

Click to expand...

Nothing is sufficient in and of itself. God did not write the Bible. He communicated with humans who had for years misunderstood Him. Do you think that their misunderstanding disappeared immediately? I hope you don't because even after ministering with Jesus for 3 years His disciples did not lose their misunderstandings of Him. God's final truth is not set forth in the Bible. It is only reflected in the Bible. Whatever men gleaned from God had to be processed by their human minds before it was set to writing. Funny how we think that when men speak on God's behalf they are fallible, but if they wrote thousands of years ago they were infallible.

butxifxnot said:

yes. thank you, but we know that the word of God is infallible, while reason can be. be very careful.

Click to expand...

I hope that when you say "word of God" you are referring to Jesus Christ. Nothing with the imprint of man is infallible, and books certainly cannot be infallible. Infallibility is a condition of intelligent beings.

statrei said:

Nothing is sufficient in and of itself. God did not write the Bible. He communicated with humans who had for years misunderstood Him. Do you think that their misunderstanding disappeared immediately? I hope you don't because even after ministering with Jesus for 3 years His disciples did not lose their misunderstandings of Him. God's final truth is not set forth in the Bible. It is only reflected in the Bible. Whatever men gleaned from God had to be processed by their human minds before it was set to writing. Funny how we think that when men speak on God's behalf they are fallible, but if they wrote thousands of years ago they were infallible.

Click to expand...

For those of us who beleive in verbal, plenary inspiriation, Scripture is sufficient in and of itself. (2 Timothy 3:15-17) not only suggest the neccessity of Scripture in discerning God's will, but its adequacy in "making me wise" (15) and "equipping me for every good work" (16-17). This suggests to me that it isn't necessary for God to give me extra-Biblical revelation to know His will. Necessary being the operative term, since God is sovereign and may do anything to direct my life.

In Christ,
Tracey

Tractor1 said:

For those of us who beleive in verbal, plenary inspiriation, Scripture is sufficient in and of itself. (2 Timothy 3:15-17) not only suggest the neccessity of Scripture in discerning God's will, but its adequacy in "making me wise" (15) and "equipping me for every good work" (16-17). This suggests to me that it isn't necessary for God to give me extra-Biblical revelation to know His will. Necessary being the operative term, since God is sovereign and may do anything to direct my life.

In Christ,
Tracey

Click to expand...

Wow. Both powerful and true. Amen!

Ainesis said:

Wow. Both powerful and true. Amen!

Click to expand...

I second that.

One thing that facts cannot derail is a belief. Beliefs do not have to be supported by facts. In addition, the devil is often in the details. I doubt God would dictate a book and include in if incorrect views on cosmology. He knows exactly how the universe functions. But if someone believes that there is nothing I can do.

If I can weight in... I agree with Didaskalos's sentiments. God is revealed in Jesus Christ. We don't need deceptive philosophies - he as the revealer of the Father is enough.

I believe that saying that God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent is thoroughly UNbiblical, and actually denies the God of the Bible. It is attempting to take a philosophical view of the living God, and rejects the way he has revealed himself.

Here's why:

God is not omnipresent. To say he is denies the incarnation. Is Jesus spacially everywhere? Of course not - he's a man. His rule and influence is absolute, and we know him by the Spirit, but he is not thinly spread throughout the universe. He is at the (spatially located) right hand of the Father in (spatially located) heaven. Maybe the Spirit is closest to omnipresent, but we're still then stuck with passages like John 1:32.

God is not omnipotent. Can he do everything? Well, he can't make a stone so heavy he can't lift it. Ok, so can he do everything that's logically possible? Well, he can't sin. So maybe he can do anything logically possible that is within his nature? Yes. But so can a stapler. Is God like a stapler? No. Why don't we just say what the Bible says - that God can do what he wants? Why must we go further than that?

God is not omniscient? Jesus does not know the date of his return - Matthew 24:36. He is willing to submit to the Father's perfect knowledge about the right time to send him back - just as he was and is willing to submit to his Father in all things. Are we willing to write off Genesis 18:20-21, Psalm 14:2, and so on?

When using the omni's are we talking about the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or all three? But the three have different knowledge. They are in different places. They do different things - the Son can't suddenly start taking on the Father's role. Yet they are united as one in purpose and action.

Thanks for listening,

Pete.

Lotar said:

Who doesn't believe God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient?

Click to expand...

Open theists. At least on the omniscient part.

Pote said:

If I can weight in... I agree with Didaskalos's sentiments. God is revealed in Jesus Christ. We don't need deceptive philosophies - he as the revealer of the Father is enough.

I believe that saying that God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent is thoroughly UNbiblical, and actually denies the God of the Bible. It is attempting to take a philosophical view of the living God, and rejects the way he has revealed himself.

Here's why:

God is not omnipresent. To say he is denies the incarnation. Is Jesus spacially everywhere? Of course not - he's a man. His rule and influence is absolute, and we know him by the Spirit, but he is not thinly spread throughout the universe. He is at the (spatially located) right hand of the Father in (spatially located) heaven. Maybe the Spirit is closest to omnipresent, but we're still then stuck with passages like John 1:32.

God is not omnipotent. Can he do everything? Well, he can't make a stone so heavy he can't lift it. Ok, so can he do everything that's logically possible? Well, he can't sin. So maybe he can do anything logically possible that is within his nature? Yes. But so can a stapler. Is God like a stapler? No. Why don't we just say what the Bible says - that God can do what he wants? Why must we go further than that?

God is not omniscient? Jesus does not know the date of his return - Matthew 24:36. He is willing to submit to the Father's perfect knowledge about the right time to send him back - just as he was and is willing to submit to his Father in all things. Are we willing to write off Genesis 18:20-21, Psalm 14:2, and so on?

When using the omni's are we talking about the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or all three? But the three have different knowledge. They are in different places. They do different things - the Son can't suddenly start taking on the Father's role. Yet they are united as one in purpose and action.

Thanks for listening,

Pete.

Click to expand...

Pete, thanks for the input--you have obviously thought this out with great insight (you remind me of my theology professor)
However, could it be that: When Jesus, the 2nd person of the Trinity was here, the 1st person of the Trinity was in Heaven, and his Spirit, the third person was pervasive in all the creation? In considering God as omnipresent, aren't we, by necessity talking of all three, since the three are one?
As to Omnipotent, you again make a good argument, but I would say God can do anything, it simply is not sin if He does it. CAn he make a rock...Yes, He could, then he would change to be able to lift it, then the circle would start over--if he wanted.
And Omniscient, Jesus did not know the date of the return, but Jesus said the Father did--again, since in asking if God can do anything and the three are one, God knew then, and he knows know when the return will be.
I like your thinking--very critical and logical, but What if God doesn't follow our logic?
Just food for thought, no need to even answer if you choose not to.
Good answers!
Tommy

Pote said:

If I can weight in... I agree with Didaskalos's sentiments. God is revealed in Jesus Christ. We don't need deceptive philosophies - he as the revealer of the Father is enough.

I believe that saying that God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent is thoroughly UNbiblical, and actually denies the God of the Bible. It is attempting to take a philosophical view of the living God, and rejects the way he has revealed himself.

Here's why:

God is not omnipresent. To say he is denies the incarnation. Is Jesus spacially everywhere? Of course not - he's a man. His rule and influence is absolute, and we know him by the Spirit, but he is not thinly spread throughout the universe. He is at the (spatially located) right hand of the Father in (spatially located) heaven. Maybe the Spirit is closest to omnipresent, but we're still then stuck with passages like John 1:32.

God is not omnipotent. Can he do everything? Well, he can't make a stone so heavy he can't lift it. Ok, so can he do everything that's logically possible? Well, he can't sin. So maybe he can do anything logically possible that is within his nature? Yes. But so can a stapler. Is God like a stapler? No. Why don't we just say what the Bible says - that God can do what he wants? Why must we go further than that?

God is not omniscient? Jesus does not know the date of his return - Matthew 24:36. He is willing to submit to the Father's perfect knowledge about the right time to send him back - just as he was and is willing to submit to his Father in all things. Are we willing to write off Genesis 18:20-21, Psalm 14:2, and so on?

When using the omni's are we talking about the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit, or all three? But the three have different knowledge. They are in different places. They do different things - the Son can't suddenly start taking on the Father's role. Yet they are united as one in purpose and action.

Thanks for listening,

Pete.

Click to expand...

I pretty much disagree with your entire post. You're picking different instances of God to support your claims, as will I.

1 While Jesus isn't everywhere, God is. (God is omnipresent)

2 God can create a rock that while he was Jesus, wouldn't be able to move it. (God is omnipotent)

3 While Jesus doesn't know the date of his return, God does.(God is omniscient)

HomeBound said:

I pretty much disagree with your entire post. You're picking different instances of God to support your claims, as will I.

1 While Jesus isn't everywhere, God is. (God is omnipresent)

2 God can create a rock that while he was Jesus, wouldn't be able to move it. (God is omnipotent)

3 While Jesus doesn't know the date of his return, God does.(God is omniscient)

Click to expand...

You are essentially saying that Jesus is not an exact image of God, and that we need some other source to show us who and what God is?
When we see Jesus, we see the Father.

didaskalos said:

You are essentially saying that Jesus is not an exact image of God, and that we need some other source to show up who and what God is?
When we see Jesus, we see the Father.

Click to expand...

That's not what I'm saying at all. What is being shown in my post is that, the Jesus that was seen during his stay here in the world, was God limited by the flesh. While The true essence of God is not limited by the flesh.