God is not omniscient

Originally posted by bbarr
Well, that's an argument, but it certainly isn't deductively valid. I have a sculpture made in the image of the Buddha, but my sculpture doesn't possess any of the cognitive faculties of the Buddha.

Is his deductive argument invalid because there is a difference between "image" (an outward appearance) and omniscience (a state of consciousness that has no appearance)?

Originally posted by kirksey957
Is his deductive argument invalid because there is a difference between "image" (an outward appearance) and omniscience (a state of consciousness that has no appearance)?

Not quite. Two properties may be different, but if possession of one entails possession of the latter, then one can construct a valid deductive argument of the form presented above. The problem with the argument given is that the property "made in God's image" entails nothing concering the possession of God's cognitive capacities(unless other, very tendentious auxilliary assumptions are granted). Simply put, X can be made in Y's image without it being the case that Y has the cognitive capacities of X (as the Buddha sculpture example illustrates).

Originally posted by stocken
Reading about deductive arguments from a link supplied by Hal (http://www.logicalfallacies.info/index.html), I shall now attempt to show you that God is not omniscient:

a) Humans are made in Gods image
b) Humans are not omniscient
Therefore:
c) God is not omniscient

That's a deductive argument, right? If the premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Yes?

Besides the swapping of omniscience with omnipotence, there is the problem of humans being made in the image of God. Specifically, the man (Adam) was made in the image of God, i.e, body, soul and spirit. Man in the fallen state comes up a part short.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Man in the fallen state comes up a part short.

Which part? I thought that the essential internal difference between pre-fall Adam and post-fall Adam was that he lost his naivete regarding good and evil. If anything, that difference seems like an instance of becoming more like God (as God himself claims in Genesis).

Originally posted by bbarr
Which part? I thought that the essential internal difference between pre-fall Adam and post-fall Adam was that he lost his naivete regarding good and evil. If anything, that difference seems like an instance of becoming more like God (as God himself claims in Genesis).

The spirit part. Since the fall, man has been born spiritually dead, soul intact.

Originally posted by stocken
So the error I made was not in the deductiveness of the argument, but in failing to understand what it means to be in someone's image? 🙂

This is fun.

You're in someone's shadow - not their image 😉

😀 I'll move if you'll kill your first-born son - Then you can work on your tan

Originally posted by widget
You're in someone's shadow - not their image 😉

😀 I'll move if you'll kill your first-born son - Then you can work on your tan

The hash is killing you.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The spirit part. Since the fall, man has been born spiritually dead, soul intact.

Oh, O.K. Forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference between spirit and soul?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The hash is killing you.

Actually, Freaky, I believe religion kills many more people than any physical addiction 😞

So, what have I learned from starting this thread?

1) To be made in someone's image is not the same as to inherit all the properties of that someone (it's more like you're a bleak reflection of the same).
2) Omniscient is not to be all powerful but to be infinitely wise and knowing (http://dict.die.net/omniscient/).
3) The word I was looking for is omnipotent (which apparently God is also) 😀
4) My boolean logic skills is that of a 5th grade mathstudent.

Yup. It's another one of my brilliant displays of inferior knowledge and logic skills, and I feel great. 🙁😕😳😞

Originally posted by bbarr
Oh, O.K. Forgive my ignorance, but what is the difference between spirit and soul?

The soul is the mind. Both are immaterial, as far as we can measure the same presently.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
The soul is the mind. Both are immaterial, as far as we can measure the same presently.

O.K., and what is the spirit? Suppose that, for instance, God decided to switch our spirits. What sort of difference would we be able to discern, on the basis of introspection, following such a switch? I understand the use of the term 'soul' to refer to mind, as this is how all the modern philosophers use the term. I am unclear about what is left over after you account for the body and the mind of a person.

Originally posted by frogstomp
Nope , omniscient means infinitely wise and knowlege isn't the same as wisdom.

Literally, it means "all-knowing". I don't think "scire" necessarily has the connotation of wisdom. So it's a question of definition.

Originally posted by bbarr
O.K., and what is the spirit? Suppose that, for instance, God decided to switch our spirits. What sort of difference would we be able to discern, on the basis of introspection, following such a switch? I understand the use of the term 'soul' to refer to mind, as this is how all the modern philosophers use the term. I am unclear about what is left over after you account for the body and the mind of a person.

Three in the morning there, and you want to get into this?

"The Word of God is alive and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing assunder of the soul and the spirit, and of the joints and the marrow, and is a critic of thoughts and intents of the heart."
Hebrews 4:12

The pattern of God's likeness is replicated in man, at the moment of salvation, at which time a human spirit is created. We are born dichotomous, body formed in the womb, soul imparted at birth. Until regenerated, upon acceptance of salvation via the saving work of Jesus Christ on the cross, we remain cut off from God: no affinity.

Regeneration is accomplished through the work of the Holy Spirit, who first stands in as substitute spirit, and, at positive volition toward the Gospel message, creates a human spirit for which God to permanently indwell.

The soul remains the battleground, regardless of spiritual status, experientially 'duking it out' with the sin nature, resident within the body.

Originally posted by stocken
3) The word I was looking for is omnipotent (which apparently God is also) 😀

You definition was "to be in control of everything in time and space". I would argue that it would be possible to be omnipotent without being in control of everything in time and space. If you were omnipotent, you would be able to be in control, but you might choose not to control everything.

4) My boolean logic skills is that of a 5th grade mathstudent.

To be honest, I think it wasn't part of the official curriculum, our math teacher just decided to teach it anyway. We didn't take it up again until grade 12 or 13. But it seems quite basic to me, so I think it's a good idea to teach it early.

Yup. It's another one of my brilliant displays of inferior knowledge and logic skills, and I feel great. 🙁😕😳😞

Na-nana-nanaaa-na 😛