Is Omniscience logical ?

[momo666]

I am curious what are your thoughts on the following claim: "God cannot be omniscient because he has no way of knowing if his knowledge constitutes all knowledge".
Or another variation: "God cannot be omniscient because he has no way of knowing if another god feeds him false information".

At the moment I am having a hard time finding a way to properly defend these claims.


Here is what I think is a good source on the matter: http://www.skeptic.ca/Impossibility_Arguments_for_God.htm

What do you think of this defense of the omniscience paradox: https://www3.nd.edu/~jspeaks/courses/2009-10/20229/LECTURES/15-omnipotence-omniscience-2.pdf -> page 9-13

 

[Deleted member 619]

The first thing to note is that you shouldn't think of these as claims to be defended. In reality, these are counters to claims, not claims in and of themselves.

I'd shy away from erecting them as claims, and reserve them as counters. Once you make a claim, the burden of proof is on you. As long as you're merely presenting plausible counters to others' truth-claims, the onus is upon them.

Use any argument up to and including the point to which you can reasonably own it, and no further.