CA Livestream #1 – Free Will, New Atheists, and Revisionist Christian History (08/18/20) [Patron Feed]

This is from the patron livestream (the full stream and video link are available on patreon). My internet connection was a bit choppy, so there are brief moments that appear to have been cut out when things were buffering. Bonus episodes and monthly livestreams can be accessed by supporting the podcast over at


2 thoughts on “CA Livestream #1 – Free Will, New Atheists, and Revisionist Christian History (08/18/20) [Patron Feed]

  1. I enjoyed getting to see the man behind the podcast. It was interesting to hear your take on these questions. Thanks for sharing. With regards to the omniscience question you addressed at 6:10, it seems to me that the question of the plausibility of omniscience hangs on an understanding of what knowledge is and how it is stored in our brains. If knowledge is just a pattern of synapses firing or some combination of physical and electrical stimuli in our brains then I see no reason why a God or other beings couldn’t, at least theoretically, run through all the possible patterns of physical, electrical and maybe chemical activity that represent knowledge/emotion and know everything that a human could know without going through the experiences that inspire those patterns in us. PS. This question is about omniscience (all knowledge) 😉

    1. Thank you! And that’s a good point about God simulating different experiences. There are still two problems I don’t know how to untangle: sinful knowledge and knowledge that seems otherwise incompatible with God’s other attributes. For the latter, I’m wondering how God could know things like fear, frustration, or despair. Can an omnipotent God really imbibe those emotions in the same way a non-omnipotent being can? It seems impossible in the absence of some explanation wherein God temporarily suspends his ordinary properties to have genuine human (and non-human) experiences. But there’s still the problem of God not knowing sin. The solutions I hear tend to invoke God’s nature, and say that a being of his kind cannot sin. It’s logically impossible for a being of his type to know sin. Okay, fine, but he’s not omniscient anymore. Michael Martin also has a good response to this in Atheism: A Philosophical Justification. He imagines a being named McNose whose knowledge is of the highest degree, but McNose only knows how to scratch his nose. He knows everything there is to know about his nose’s itching and being scratched, and it is logically impossible for a being of his type to know anything other than itching and scratching his nose. Absurdly, McNose is omniscient. So here’s a sensible definition of an omniscient being: If being is omniscient, that being has knowledge that any non-omniscient beings have. God does not meet this standard.

Leave a Reply