[pokervintage]

[ QUOTE ]
So you posted the definition of omniscience just so you could refute it or...what?

[/ QUOTE ]

NO. Omniscience means the capacity to know everything. But knowing everything does not mean controlling everything. Well, not exactly. If one tosses an unbiased coin and the result is truely random even an omniscient being could only at best predict the probability of the result, heads or tails. (or standing on edge if you consider that as a possible result). Certainly one could say that omniscience implies that the being would know every physical aspect of the toss and be able to predict with %100 percent sccuracy the result of the toss. However if all of the elements of a specific toss were known the toss would then not be random. Randomness means each result is equally likely. Now if the elements of the toss were known before hand that would negate the ability for each result to be equally likely so for our purposes in a random event all of the elements of the event cannot be known. Therefore omniscience cannot know anything more than there will be a toss, which is everything to be known at the tiem, and the best he can do is predict the probability of the results. Omniscience does not mean that one has the power to control events only to know everything there is to know about the event. It does not mean all powerful. If the only thing to know is that it is random then omniscience can only know that the possible results and the probability of each.

Now if we add omnipotence, all powerful, then the event itself can be controlled. And we can then run Sam over with the bus whenever we please. We still must be both Omnisicent and omnipotent because we need to KNOW initially where sam is so we can control the event of hitting him with our bus. Omniscience and omnipotence are not the same as someone has claimed. Not exactly. They are indeed different, somewhat, and one does not ultimtely and perfecty yield the other nor does one allow the other to also be simply true.

pokervintage