Captain Scarlet Wrote:The assertion that he can only do good things means that he cannot break his own nature nor codes NOT that it is logically impossible for him to do so, thus he is not totally free.Who told you that the Christian God can do or does only benevolent things? (I think benevolent is more appropriate to what you mean, than good is). There are also christian people who believe this what you say to the extreme that they think that God suffers when a man suffers, but I believe that's madness. So perhaps you can tell me how you drew the conclusion how God "must be".
Quote:Would you argue because an xtian god is immortal he cannot make himself into a mortal? He is immortal by nature, thus eveything about him is such and he can't help that and must be that and only that?
You use the traditional terms: omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent. Know that this terms are not found in the Christian Bible nor "all-powerful", "all-knowing", etc. These terms were invented by people afterwards, perhaps to make God more special. The same way, the Islamic god Allah, to be more special, people said that everything that happens, everything that anyone or anything does has been per-ordained by Allah before He created the world. And they brag that their Allah is more special than any other god, and believe that, in order to be "God", one must have these attributes.
So this what you say is "making your own theory of how God must be, and if your theory contradicts itself, GOD DOES NOT EXIST!!"
As about freedom, how can you define a paradoxical term and expect not to contradict itself in a certain context??
Correct me if I'm wrong.
