“Omniscient” means “infinite knowledge, awareness, understanding, insight or perception.” It is also used to pertain to universality and completeness of the mentioned attributes. However, both words have different meanings. These attributes were assumed by believers due to lifted phrases in holy texts and classical religious teachings. Furthermore, often both terms are used as an attribute of a Creator or a supreme being. the ability to conceive of a thing does not equate to it's existence in actuality.There are many similarities between “omniscient” and “omnipotent.” In looking at these terms, both words contain the prefix “omni.” “Omni” is Latin for “all” or “infinite.”īoth words also function as adjectives and nouns.
these logical contradictions exist because the concepts of omni-etc. you have not in fact made the two interchangeable. The only way for this scenario to approach being correct is for the words to lose their meaning entirely, but then you have only dissolved the concepts of their meaning. others see it the other way, but at no time is the discrepency resolved in this scenario. it just means that to some it is a square, which is a wholely different structure than a circle. Saying some people see it as a square and others see it as a circle does not make them one and the same. a square is categorically NOT a circle, and vice versa. These are concepts which are defined by their physical cheracteristics. it is the equivalent of taking your toys and going home. Saying that god can do it anyway does not remove the logical contradiction, it is just an assertion that logic is not useful when talking about god. God actually making a rock he can't lift is a logical contradiciton so long as he is described as being omnipotent. The only way to avoid the contradiciton is through word play that gives the appearance of a proof, but is actually playing outside the rules. The problem of the stone that god can't lift is a valid logical contradiciton. Omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence are all words that describe a fictional state. (being able to calculate the future through amazing predictive skills) Omnipotence is the most powerful of these options. This might constitute an immediate knowledge of all things, but does not necessarily mean a complete knowledge of the past or the future, though it could be interpreted that way. He knows if you've been bad or good." Omnipotence means the ability to exercise complete control of everything, any time. It seems to me that omni-present when defined in the context of god was meant to convey an in-ability to hide from him. "You can't get away with that, god knows everything, and he is everywhere." It's the old santa dodge. "He knows when you are sleeping, he knows when you're awake. If on the other hand the "presence" described is not attributed to a physical body, or way to interact with the world beyond being nebulously "present" this would be a very useless power. If it means being able to effect things with a physical body no matter where they are, like a body that stands in a space time nexus, moving nowhere, but able to interact in all locations, this gives a pretty broad application of physical interaction with the world.
The question becomes what does "presence" mean in this example. Being everywhere should give you an approximation of omniscience, though you would have to figure out the future, instead of knowing it ahead of time.
The very vast majority of the things you would know would be well beyond your ability to intercede, providing there is no way to become omnipotent through knowledge. Knowing everything but not being able to do anything about it is of little use. Omnipresence is being "present" everywhere, or actually being everything. Omniscience is knowing all that was is or will be. Omnipotence is the ability to execute control over any environment at any time, or all of it at once.
0 kommentar(er)
