Omniscience Argument Revisited

[Rational AKD]

Unlike Christian apologists, I won't stick with flawed arguments. After all, my interest in philosophy is not to defend to death my preconceived notions of what I think is (or ought be) the case. Likewise, thanks for demonstrating your inability to be charitable or thorough.

you need not stereotype me. I don't use arguments or information that have been shown faulty or false.

I actually already realize what this changes in the argument, but seeing as there's a time limit on edits, I can't really alter the OP to reflect this.

i'm glad.

I can easily grant that. After all, it logically follows from my statement (which you ignored in your haste earlier). However, unless you're a rather novel kind of Christian, you have to give up any sort of basis for affirming God's omniscience, certainly if it is supposedly stated by God himself. God can only assume his omniscience, he could never know it, even in principle.

it's funny how little you know of the bible. God doesn't actually claim to be omniscient in the bible. in fact, the bible doesn't say there is nothing he doesn't know, or that he knows everything. is says in psalms that his understanding is beyond measure (which is also tricky passage BTW since the word translated to "beyond measure" or "infinite" actually means number), it says in Isaiah that his understanding is unsearchable, it says he knows the future or "the end from the beginning" as he puts it, it says in acts that he knows the hearts of all. it is put many ways in the bible, but it is never said "there is nothing he doesn't know" or "he knows everything." God never himself claims it either, so even if you have sources of people claiming this it means nothing if it doesn't come from the God of the bible.

In the part of my post you "conveniently" left out, I demonstrated that there is possible knowledge that God could never BY HIMSELF learn, but is nevertheless possible in principle.

no, you demonstrated how there is a KU, being knowledge of UU's, which is impossible to have. as you said in premise 2:

No conscious being can rule out having UUs due to the impossibility of the contrary

unless you would like to claim you also made a mistake here...

Go ahead, reread the part of my post you dishonestly ignored for examples. It is indeed quite amusing how poor your reading comprehension and honesty are.

what you listed was not possible knowledge, it was impossible knowledge. "How does God know that he wasn't created by an even greater being" he couldn't know unless that being revealed himself to him, which could only happened if there was one. "He can't, and to say otherwise is to pretend to have defeated solipsism" i'm glad we agree he can't know that, so stop pretending it's possible knowledge. "(I doubt you'd make that claims)" and you're obviously wrong, but as I've said all this doesn't prove anything on your side. "Yet, God COULD learn of this higher being's existence if that higher being wanted to" déjà vu. and of course that would presume one exists, and if not then it would be absolutely impossible for him to know that. it still doesn't prove anything. "so it's a UU for God until such time as he is aware of the question, which then becomes an (unanswered) KU (known unknown)" that's assuming he doesn't know. and if he does, then it's a KU, but the unknown part is still an impossible one to know. did I miss anything?

Has God EVER claimed to be omniscient?

no, as I've answered above.

In regards to other arguments against omniscience, I would tend to stake my lot with those that use other common apologetic positions to undermine that attribute, such as the oft-held 'there can be no actual infinite' position that is necessary for, among other things, the Kalam Cosmological argument.

funny, if there's no actual infinite then what makes you think omniscience presumes infinite knowledge? that would only be the case if you assumed there is infinite knowledge, which I don't.
omniscience only means he has all (possible) knowledge, infinity needs not to be interjected.