Sentences with phrase «omniscient then»

Tiggy said, on October 15th, 2009 at 10:24 pm Well if he was omniscient then he wouldn't have been a human being.

- «God» became angry at the world - «God» created Jesus (either as his son or as himself)- «God» has Jesus tortured and killed (and I've heard the argument that that wasn't the intention, but if a god is omnipotent and omniscient then, nothing is an accident.

@lewcypher, «If this Jesus fellow was truly a god incarnate, omnipotent and omniscient then it would have known that the whole Noah flood story was just fiction.»

If this Jesus fellow was truly a god incarnate, omnipotent and omniscient then it would have known that the whole Noah flood story was just fiction.

Not exact matches

If God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent — The Alpha and Omega — then He is indeed love.

The underlying supposition is a God that created us knowing we were sinners and disbelievers (He is omniscient and omnipotent), and then punishing us eternally for creating us that way.

If God is omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent, etc then the amount of knowledge required to be aware and know something like the magnitude of the possibilities I brought up would be immense, much more in line with the characteristics attributed to God.

If god is omniscient (all knowing), then everything is predestined.

If god changes the future, then He is not omniscient.

Christianity — the belief of «nothing created an omnipotent, omniscient, being out of nothing just to then create the entire universe out of nothing for a specific creature he created from dirt on a specific planet».

My response: If god is omniscient, if the future can be known, then the future is set.

If god is omniscient, if the future can be known, then Satan is only doing what he must do.

If your god is omniscient (all knowing), then free will is an illusion.

Your god sends a piece of himself to earth in human form, knowing in advance (omniscient and all) that he'll live, be crucified, die, then he would resurrect himself in human form, then bugger off to heaven to rejoin himself.

Besides, why would an omnipotent, omniscient being create an entire universe, fill it with his children and then condemn them to burn forever for not believing in him, when he has seen fit to utter not a single word to any of them?

Consider this... if your «god» actually exists, and is as omniscient as you think it is, then it will know that your «just in case» belief is phony, and then you're toast.

you believe in an omniscient god who knows whether we will accept jeebus as a savior, but then punishes them for eternity if they do not believe in him.

If the future can be known, and god can know this future, then god is omniscient.

If god knows what He will do in the future and because He is Omnipotent, does something else, then He is not omniscient.

If god did change the future, then He would not be omniscient.

Lem me see here, according to your holy book your God personally ordered more infant killings than all American abortion doctors combined, ordered the annihilation of half a dozen civilizations, routinely taunted and tortured humanity, introduced evil into the world then blamed the things he created for it (even though he's supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent), then abandoned humanity for at least a couple thousand years while making plans to come back and slaughter 2/3 of Earth's inhabitants so that he can judge them and throw most of them into a torturous hell for all of eternity... for not being able to overcome the nature your book says he gave them... Just so he can have non-free will - having cloud gnomes sing his praises for eternity.

He then recited, «He is the First and the Last, the Outward and the Inward, and He is omniscient.»

If god is Omniscient, then He would KNOW exactly how to convince anyone and everyone that He exists.

I'm saying that if God creates every person, and is omniscient (all knowing), then He knows that person will go to hell before he creates them.

For Hartshorne the answer to this is a qualified no: «If God knows all the universe, then God - and - the - universe contains no more items than God (as omniscient).

If it is a game, then the odds seem rather stacked against the average man, what with the Opponent being omniscient.

If he is omnipotent, then he can not be omniscient, and there would be no prophecies.

Then why didn't he just say that, and leave no room for misinterpretation, which, if he was omniscient, he would have known would arise?

If either of these did not come true, then Jesus / God would not be omniscient.

If God were omniscient and infinite and a whole range of other superlatives, but did not care about us, then God would not be the God we worship and might not even merit the name of God.

Fred, if your prayer can cause your version of a god to change his mind, then your version of a god is neither omnipotent or omniscient.

SO then, is it laughable that I maintain that God is omniscient and omnipresent?

If agape is operative in such finite processes, then the creator could not be omnipotent or omniscient.

If you say that you know everything then you are omniscient and therefore you are God.

Next, if God's «omniscience» is taken to mean that he knows all things that actually are, then Hartshorne agrees that God is omniscient.

If I accept the idea that God is Omniscient, Omnipotent and Omnipresent, shouldn't I then accept the idea He could create the world and the universe and all that is in it with athought?

But if God is omniscient, and knows everything you are going to do before you do it and is never wrong, then there is no such thing as free will.

What if God has communicated to us, then we'd know a LOT (in comparison to knowing little... of course we're not going to be omniscient).

If god is omnipotent and omniscient, then would he be capable of creating a boulder so huge and heavy that not even he could lift it?

«Why did God plant The Tree of Knowledge in a place He knew, being Omniscient, would not Meet His Expectation (s), then decide to create two souls that would not Meet His Expectation (s), and then punish them for being created to not Meet His Expectations?»

If God is omniscient, then it means that he knows every single thing that happens in the universe, both now and infinitely into the future.

why don't you start with why humans invented religion in the first place, the origins of the books of the bible, the multiple «christ» (copied) stories throughout the history of time, fossil evidence of evolution of man and all species, all the discrepancies in the bible, knowledge of all the gods that humans have believed in through recorded history, the political uses of christianity in the time of it's origin, the fact that every other religion has followers who believe just as strongly in their own god / book, that fact that if you had been born in another part of the world you would be a different religion and going to «hell», and that a good, kind, omniscient god wouldn't allow all the suffering and evil to happen, and wouldn't need «help» as christians like to tout... and then we'll get to all these ridiculous fools.

If God is omniscient and chose to do such and such a thing rather than its converse, then God WOULD N'T change his mind, because he would have already chosen the BEST course of action.

I mean, honestly, what kind of bovine excrement omniscient being designs a universe that obeys a set of rules (physics), but designs a sentient being that He will then cast into eternal torment at death — no matter how good the being was during its life — unless that being has faith in His son?

Mickey is first interested in the older woman and then becomes interested in the younger woman, and still he tells the story as if he's objective, up there almost omniscient on the lifeguard's stand at the ocean's edge.

One told the story from Chastain's point of view, and the other from McAvoy's point of view, but then Benson cut together an omniscient version (titled Them), which is the one that will be released first theatrically.

A sentence like «High heels be damned, she ran down the street towards number Twenty - Eight» begins with a first - person narrator (it's the girl who damns the high heels) and then shifts to third (it's an omniscient narrator who describes her running down the street), which can jar and disorient the reader.