2009/9/8 Pat <[email protected]>: > On 8 Sep, 16:20, Simon Ewins <[email protected]> wrote: >> 2009/9/8 Pat <[email protected]>: >> You deny God the ability to change his mind? > > Yes. An omniscient entity that follows His own laws would not lie or > change His mind about anything. Thus why He made such statements as > 'everlasting covenant'.
Except, since God is the source of truth nothing that he ever says could be a lie. Even it appeared to be from your human perspective. > Alternatively, the entities stating T1 and T2 may not be the > same. That was not suggested. I suggested that it is God at T1 and at T2, the seemingly conflicting statements are not actually in conflict because God (only one of them, I assume) is the source of truth so anything he says is true. Period. >> You seem to want to nail God down based on an external source of >> truth. That doesn't sound right to me. > > Which external source? Logic? No, truth. > What external source do you intend, here? There is nothing external > to God. I agree. So truth comes from God. God does not (and cannot be) judged as truthful or not by any standard other than what God says. Therefore: A) Everything that God says is true because truth is what God says B) God says X at time T1 C) X is true because all God says is true D) God says Y not X at time T2 E) Y is true because all God says is true F) God did not lie at T1 even though at T2 what was said at T1 is now false See? God is the source of truth. >> B) Deny him the ability to change his mind > > There are many things God can't do. Omnipotence does NOT mean being > able to do everything concievable, such as round squares and other > illogical premises. Fine. And changing his mind is impossible for him as well? That seems to be extremely limiting to omnipotence, the simple act of changing his mind? This does not violate any laws of logic in and of itself and because truth is not a standard outside of God then all that God says is always truth so that doesn't violate logic (although it creates some strange mind-loops). >> C) Assume that you know all that God knows vis a vis his purpose >> > > Knowing God's purpose and knowing MY purpose are two different kettles > of fish. I would never pretend to know the full extent of God's > purposes in particular. In general, though, His purpose is to perform > all that is possible for energy to do. And that's a huge amount. But you said in the original post that "success was assured" because of God's purpose. All these posts are to simply show that you cannot justify that statement since (as you rightly admit, above) you do not know God's purpose. So if God's purpose is for failure of your idea, purpose, plan etc. then that is what will happen. To God it would not be a failure since it is in line with his purpose but you would see it as a failure and then probably say, "Oh well, it was God's will.". > I understand what you're saying but my experience was not just self- > validating. I had to go to an expert in order to decipher/understand > the knowledge I was given. So, in that particular revelatory > experience, it was not self-validated but part of the message was > validated by an expert (a Rabbi) in ancient languages (in this case, > Hebrew). Plus, I've only just started to realise that there was, in > that message, another, hidden message--and I'm still working on > figuring that bit out, as my knowledge of Hebrew (and Kabbalah) has > dramatically increased over the past 20 years. Well, good luck to you. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
