What if God had a beginning?

[Rachel20]

Well the reason for pointing out that deception and unknown unknowns is a problem is because omniscience and omnipotence are impossible. So if omniscience is impossible, and God is required to be omniscient by definition, then God is impossible.

That might be a valid argument, but can't be sound unless you can prove there are unknown unknowns. But if you can prove that, then they aren't unknown unknowns

 

[JohnClay]

Sure, but if we're no longer talking about an omniscient God, then we're no longer talking about the Christian's definition of God.

God could still be omniscient - about his created universe....
Perhaps there exist other realities - rather than God's reality with an eternal trinity being the only one that could possibly exist...
If God has no access to these then concerning these realities he isn't omniscient....

So it isn't exactly fitting the Christian definition of God but in other ways it could be very close....

 

[JohnClay]

Well the reason for pointing out that deception and unknown unknowns is a problem is because omniscience and omnipotence are impossible.

No I'd say that within a simulation, omniscience and omnipotence is pretty straight-forward - like a hacker with a game of Minecraft. This doesn't mean that the player is omnipotent and omniscient about the world outside the game....

 

[Moral Orel]

That might be a valid argument, but can't be sound unless you can prove there are unknown unknowns.

I actually did in a thread once a long time ago and people tried to solve the problem the same way you did. Here it is in a nutshell.

If there is something you are completely unaware of, then you are unaware that you are unaware of it. That's the unknown unknown. I don't have to prove that there is a thing out there that you are unaware of, I have to prove that you can't confirm whether there is or isn't a thing out there that you are unaware of.

As an example, Chris Columbus was unaware of North America when he set out for India. It was impossible for him to know that he didn't know North America existed.

 

[Moral Orel]

No I'd say that within a simulation, omniscience and omnipotence is pretty straight-forward - like a hacker with a game of Minecraft. This doesn't mean that the player is omnipotent and omniscient about the world outside the game....

I think you're watering down the term "omniscient" and "omnipotent" to the point of meaninglessness. You can't be "omniscient and omnipotent" in a limited scale. Consider the following sentence:

The ball is red.

You and I are both omniscient - about that sentence. We both know every character and symbol in that sentence, so we're omniscient - about that sentence. Omniscience carries a greater meaning than simply knowing everything about one thing.

 

[Rachel20]

God could still be omniscient - about his created universe....
Perhaps their exist other realities - rather than God's reality with an eternal trinity being the only one that could possibly exist...
If God has no access to these so concerning those he isn't omniscient....

Sure, but then you're no longer talking about the Christian God or the Christian definition of omniscience.

 

[JohnClay]

I think you're watering down the term "omniscient" and "omnipotent" to the point of meaninglessness. You can't be "omniscient and omnipotent" in a limited scale.

Omniscience carries a greater meaning than simply knowing everything about one thing

No I think it makes sense that it can mean you are capable of knowing and doing everything within a creation... that is why the hacker within a Minecraft game has "god-like" powers... what is "meaningless" about that?

In the case of the Christian God, his omniscience and omnipotence would concern our limited universe (and perhaps his infinite self).

Note related terms are "perfect information" or "complete information". These are talking about a domain rather than saying they know about every particle in the universe, etc.

 

[Rachel20]

If there is something you are completely unaware of, then you are unaware that you are unaware of it. That's the unknown unknown. I don't have to prove that there is a thing out there that you are unaware of, I have to prove that you can't confirm whether there is or isn't a thing out there that you are unaware of.

I define omniscience as being all-knowing such that there is nothing one is unaware of.

 

[Moral Orel]

No I think it makes sense that it can mean you are capable of knowing and doing everything within a creation... that is why the hacker within a Minecraft game has "god-like" powers... what is "meaningless" about that?

In the case of the Christian God, his omniscience and omnipotence would concern our limited universe (and perhaps his infinite self).

You and I know everything about the sentence I created "The ball is red" so we are omniscient about that sentence. Which is silly and is why we don't use omniscience the way you're proposing.

Omniscience means knowing everything about everything there is. It doesn't mean knowing everything about one thing.

Note related terms are "perfect information" or "complete information". These are talking about a domain rather than saying they know about every particle in the universe, etc.

And in the case of omniscience we are only talking about perfect information and complete information about the totality of existence. The totality of existence is the domain in question.

 

[Moral Orel]

I define omniscience as being all-knowing such that there is nothing one is unaware of.

Then as I've argued that it is impossible to be aware that there is nothing you are unaware of, it is impossible for any being to be omniscient. If God must be omniscient, then he cannot be.

 

[JohnClay]

You and I know everything about the sentence I created "The ball is red" so we are omniscient about that sentence. Which is silly and is why we don't use omniscience the way you're proposing.

I seem to be unable to explain how a hacker could be said to be omniscient and omnipotent within a game of Minecraft... people who are more knowledgeable about possible simulations seem to understand what I'm saying...

And in the case of omniscience we are only talking about perfect information and complete information about the totality of existence. The totality of existence is the domain in question.

I'm talking about individual games like Minecraft. In a similar way complete or perfect knowledge is usually within a limited domain.
That's how I'm using the words. The definition of words can evolve.
What about "near-omniscience" and "near-omnipotence"? Or "domain-specific" omnipotence or omniscience...

 

[Rachel20]

Then as I've argued that it is impossible to be aware that there is nothing you are unaware of, it is impossible for any being to be omniscient. If God must be omniscient, then he cannot be.

You're arguing that God can't know what he doesn't know. And I'm arguing that if he knows all that there is to know, he is de facto omniscient.

 

[Moral Orel]

I'm talking about individual games like Minecraft. In a similar way complete or perfect knowledge is within a limited domain.
That's how I'm using the words. The definition of words can evolve.
What about "near-omniscience" and "near-omnipotence"? Or "domain-specific" omnipotence or omniscience...

Why do you insist on using the omni words? Language is subjective, sure, but we agree on word usages for practical reasons. Changing definitions the way you propose makes the words so broad that they're worthless.

 

[JohnClay]

Then as I've argued that it is impossible to be aware that there is nothing you are unaware of, it is impossible for any being to be omniscient. If God must be omniscient, then he cannot be.

In this thread you said: (post #18)
Anselm's Second Ontological Argument

"Perhaps omnipotence and omniscience is attainable over time. Say we build a robot..."
​

So you're saying your thought experiment involving omniscience is logically impossible?

 

[public hermit]

Then as I've argued that it is impossible to be aware that there is nothing you are unaware of, it is impossible for any being to be omniscient. If God must be omniscient, then he cannot be.

That is a a subtle argument. I had not heard that approach before, and I really like it. However, it does not work for God as understood by classical Christian theism.

God is the omniscient and knows all that can be known. How? Everything that exists is either uncreated (God) or created ex nihilo (everything else). God knows God's self and God knows all that God created, so there is no possible unknown unknown for God under those conditions. God knows all that can be known.

 

[Moral Orel]

You're arguing that God can't know what he doesn't know. And I'm arguing that if he knows all that there is to know, he is de facto omniscient.

No that's not what I'm arguing. Your confusion on what my point is is understandable, it's a very weird concept that I had to read about ten times before I got the distinction.

Let's look back at Chris Columbus as an analogy with things we do know. There are two things Chris didn't know. He didn't know North America existed and he didn't know that he didn't know North America existed. I'm arguing that the latter is unavoidable whether the former is true or not.

I'm not claiming there is a thing which is undetectable to God, I'm arguing that He doesn't know there isn't a thing which is undetectable to God.

 

[Moral Orel]

In this thread you said: (post #18)
Anselm's Second Ontological Argument
"Perhaps omnipotence and omniscience is attainable over time. Say we build a robot..."
So you're saying your thought experiment involving omniscience is logically impossible?

Yes. But I accepted them for the sake of argument to make my point.

 

[Moral Orel]

That is a a subtle argument. I had not heard that approach before, and I really like it. However, it does not work for God as understood by classical Christian theism.

God is the omniscient and knows all that can be known. How? Everything that exists is either uncreated (God) or created ex nihilo (everything else). God knows God's self and God knows all that God created, so there is no possible unknown unknown for God under those conditions. God knows all that can be known.

That only works if God knows that everything that exists is either Him or things which He has created. How does He know this is not a false dichotomy?

 

[JohnClay]

So you're saying your thought experiment involving omniscience is logically impossible?

Yes. But I accepted them for the sake of argument to make my point.

You kept on insisting that that thought experiment made sense over and over.... even though it was logically impossible?

 

[JohnClay]

Why do you insist on using the omni words? Language is subjective, sure, but we agree on word usages for practical reasons. Changing definitions the way you propose makes the words so broad that they're worthless.

Well I'm talking about the god-like ability of a Minecraft hacker being able know and do about anything in the game. What are better terms to describe their ability to know and do just about everything? Perfect or complete knowledge could be relevant... and most people understand why I used the omni- terms.
What if I say "omnipotent within the simulation" and "omniscient within the simulation"?