After considering to do a video response, because I had seen that argument advanced too often as of late, I opted for a comment and see how that would go:
I responded: Then by Trinitarian standards, one person of the Godhead has knowledge that the other two members don't. How is that even remotely compatible with the notion of the creeds that affirm that all persons of the polypersonal God are "co-equal" and all knowing? (see Athanasian Creed, #26)
Further, one must assume Trinitarianism in order to even suggest the question that Jesus has selective foreknowledge, or at least assume two natures. It's circular reasoning.
He responded: Of course I am assuming the Trinity is true. It is the only way to counter arguments AGAINST the Trinity. Plus, you are missing the point. If Jehovah can use His foreknowledge selectively, then why can't the Son? If Jehovah can do that and still be considered all knowing, then that refutes the argument that Jesus cannot be Deity because He doesn't know certain future events.
He admitted that he is assuming the Trinity is true in his argument trying to counter argue against a non-Trinitarian argument.
1. He assumes Jesus has the ability or capability of selective foreknowledge without showing an ounce of evidence.
2. He assumes Jesus is God from the outset.
3. By his own admission, he assumes the Trinity is true and is the "only way" to argue for the Trinity.
We see then, the question and argument is not only faulty because it applies circular reasoning but also because it is based on several faulty assumptions.
Further, one must assume Trinitarianism in order to even suggest the question that Jesus has selective foreknowledge, or at least assume two natures. It's circular reasoning.
He responded: Of course I am assuming the Trinity is true. It is the only way to counter arguments AGAINST the Trinity. Plus, you are missing the point. If Jehovah can use His foreknowledge selectively, then why can't the Son? If Jehovah can do that and still be considered all knowing, then that refutes the argument that Jesus cannot be Deity because He doesn't know certain future events.
He admitted that he is assuming the Trinity is true in his argument trying to counter argue against a non-Trinitarian argument.
Begging the question- Basically, an argument that begs the question asks the reader to simply accept the conclusion without providing real evidence; the argument either relies on a premise that says the same thing as the conclusion (which you might hear referred to as "being circular" or "circular reasoning"), or simply ignores an important (but questionable) assumption that the argument rests on. (See the University of North Carolina's page on Logical Fallacies)Clearly, the question is applying circular reasoning. What is more, however, is that he is also basing his question on several faulty assumptions, namely:
1. He assumes Jesus has the ability or capability of selective foreknowledge without showing an ounce of evidence.
2. He assumes Jesus is God from the outset.
3. By his own admission, he assumes the Trinity is true and is the "only way" to argue for the Trinity.
We see then, the question and argument is not only faulty because it applies circular reasoning but also because it is based on several faulty assumptions.
Ivan, you completely missed my point. I have posted a rebuttal to your last post on my Youtube channel. Why not include the link to my video and let your audience hear my real argument?
ReplyDeleteWhat we have here is typical trinitarian fudge.If God is a single being as agreed by both unitarian and trinitarian alike no one can be fully God and not know ALL that God knows.To make matters worse the day and hour in question are the one God's own determination Daniel2:21.So trinitarians would have us believe that God does not know his own mind.
ReplyDelete@aservantofJehovah- No, actually the Watchtower would have you believe that Jehovah doesn't know His own mind. My video explains that.
ReplyDeleteIt has been more than 24 hours since Ivan has replied to my last post so I am going to assume that he is busy and has other pressing matters which require his attention. So, I will provide the url to my post so you can hear my argument from my own lips. Feel free to make a comment on my Youtube channel. Be sure to click the "see all" link so that you can read our comments in order.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtxoNpUDRDs
You have, in typical trinitarian fashion,Asserted this you have not proved it.
ReplyDeleteAsserted and not proved what?
ReplyDelete@keith your opening statement that the Jehovah's witnesses Claim that Jehovah does not know his own mind.
ReplyDeleteHow about we carry this arguing by assumption to its 'logical' conclusion.Mark13:32"Concerning that day or hour NOBODY knows.Neither the ANGELS in heaven,nor the son but the father only"Are we to understand that the angels also have selective foreknowledge? because there is absolutely nothing in this passage that prevents this.And that appears to be Mr. walkers only caveat.What about everyone else who does not know,Selective foreknowledge?
ReplyDelete