Arguments About God Based On Omni Traits Should Be Abandoned

People should stop using Omni Traits such as Omnipotence, Omnibenevolence, Omniscience, Omnipresence, Omnificence, etc. when making arguments about god, especially to form premises.

There are 3 problems with using Omni Traits as a premise for an argument:

1) When a person uses Omni Traits as part of their premise, they are making a straw man of the Judeo-Christian god and are instead making arguments against an imagined Platonic god of Greek philosophy.

2) The use of the prefix Omni- disqualifies, denies, disbars, refutes, etc. the Judeo-Christian god because the Omni- prefix precludes the dynamism of the Judeo-Christian god (a dynamism which the Platonic god lacks).

3) The use of Omni Traits obscures rather than focuses debate about god.

Before concluding I will defend against accusations of the ‘No True Scotsman Fallacy’ which may arise.

The use of Omni Traits lead to straw man arguments

The use of Omni Traits frame arguments about god around a Greek interpretation of god rather than a Judeo-Christian interpretation of god. This philosophically Greek interpretation of god is rooted in the tradition of the supremacy of rationality passed down through the ages from Socrates, through Plato, through Descartes, on and on, called the Platonic. When such a god as this is being debated about, what is closest to truth in such an argument between Platonists is what is most rational, most morale, most just, most universal, most utilitarian, etc. When a Platonist debates a Christian that is not a Platonist (there are many that hail from the tradition of Augustine), they are debating someone who ascribes to the Jewish god of Jewish philosophy and tradition.

We should be familiar with the tactical advantages enjoyed by the debater allowed to frame the debate. When a Christian apologist accepts Omni Terms as part of the premises of the argument, the Christian is shackling their arguments to the Greek understanding of god rather than the Jewish understanding god. In the course of such an argument the Christian apologist will find themselves arguing against the rationality, the morality, and the unchangeableness of god. Such an approach can only result in Greek philosophical conclusions rather than Jewish philosophical conclusions.

I will contrast the philosophical differences between the Platonic god and the Judeo-Christian god.

The Platonic god of Greek philosophy has the following characteristics: never changing, obeys the laws of science, is the pinnacle of rationality, must obey his own commandments, cannot have a contradictory nature, has to be physical or spiritual, follows a strict morality, never makes mistakes, and can be understood by man through reason. The ethics of such a god can be summarized as what is good for one people is good for all people. For the Platonist, the answer to Socrates’ famous question is that the pious is loved by god because it is pious.

The Judeo-Christian god of Jewish philosophy has the following characteristics: a changing approach to humans, not bound by the laws of science, not bound by his own commandments, has an all-encompassing nature, is sometimes physical, dictates what is moral based on circumstance, may make mistakes, and can never be completely comprehended by man through reason. The ethics of such a god can be summarized as what god commands for some people may be forbidden to other people. For the Christian, the answer to Socrates’ famous question is that what is pious is loved by god.

Omni Terms fool you into thinking you are discussing an infinite god when in fact you are describing a small god limited by Greek philosophical dogma. Rather than accurately describe the grand nature of god, the Omni Terms squeeze god into a framework of Greek rationality.

The use of the Omni prefix precludes a dynamic god

The Omni- prefix limits the Judeo-Christian god to a Greek rule follower. The Judeo-Christian god is more than the Omni Traits allow for. The paradoxical and dynamic Jewish god is forever constrained by Greek rationality. The Greek rational god is a caricature of the Jewish paradoxical dynamic god.

The exceptions to the Omni Traits are their refutations. I was tempted to offer counterexamples to each Omni Trait, to quote bible passages that show exceptions to the Omni-ness of god’s positive attributes, but these counter examples already fill the body of every argument that begin with Omni Traits as premises.

The use of Omni Traits obscures argument

If someone wants to make an argument concerning the Judeo-Christian god they should base their premises off of specific text from the old or New Testament instead of using Omni Terms.

Premises based off of Omni Terms are more pregnant with meaning and more vague than premises using specific biblical text.

When people today use O’s for their premises they are choosing a starting point that is one step away from original biblical text. That Omni Term, that step away from specific biblical text, offers a person a kind of shorthand for a general concept of god, which may be useful when thinking about god in the future, but this kind of shorthand is not precise enough to serve as a premises because Omni Terms are by nature much vaguer and less precise than any actual biblical text.

Moving forward, the modern Christian apologist, when faced with an opponent using Omni Terms as premises for their arguments, should insist that specific biblical passages be used rather than Omni Terms.

Response to ‘No True Scotsman Fallacy’ accusations

Distinguishing between the Platonic and the Judeo-Christian god creates a ripe target for accusations of the ‘No True Scotsman Fallacy’ (NTSF).

The Christian makes an assertion about their god, the Platonist finds an exception, the Christian says we’re not talking about the same god. In such a case the Christian makes a NTSF.

Seen from the other perspective, the Platonist says to the Christian your god should follow my rules, the Christian says his god is an exception, the Platonist then says your god is invalid based on your exceptions. In such a case the Platonist makes a NTSF.

With NTSF accusations the perpetrator is the one that asserts first and dares to clarify an exception from a critic. What’s asserted is irrelevant – the exception breaks all. One is then cowed into not making positive assertions, especially about god.

In both cases The Platonists and the Judeo-Christians are claiming to know a truer nature of god than the other.

The classic debate between a Platonist and a Theist goes like this:

Platonist: If you’re god existed would he do this?

Theist: Were not thinking about the same god.

Platonist: You’re evading the question.

The modern debate goes like this:

Platonist: Theist you say god is like this but I found an exception therefore your god doesn’t exist.

Theist: We’re not thinking about the same god.

Platonist: You’re moving the goal posts.

I’m both cases the Platonist sets a NTSF trap, baiting the Christian in with a claim made about the Christian’s beliefs. The Theist may counter the trap with a straw man accusation, but then gets countered by a NTSF accusation! Theists, is it time for a new counter?

The Theist knows the Platonist’s Greek philosophy and also knows the Jewish philosophy. In this way the Theist’s view of god contrasts the Platonist’s view of god. They are incompatible views, being in fact polar, dialectical, etc. opposites of each other.

Conclusion

The Omni Traits limit god by placing rules over him, forcing him to be bound by rules, to be obligated morally to rules. To the Platonist, rules are more important than god! The Platonist stands besides Rules looking down on god in judgment.

Problems arise when god is given positive attributes. More problems arise when these positive attributes are given the Omni- prefix requiring the attribute to be without exception! Describing god using positive attributes has only created footholds for people to argue against the existence of god.

The Judeo-Christian god is more than, is greater than, what Omni Traits allow for. Rather than express the infinite majesty of god, the Omni Traits put god into a box of Platonic rules. To the Platonist, Jewish philosophy about the nature of god will always fall short and end in irrationality. To the Christian, Platonism cannot handle paradox, due to the law of non-contradiction, and will always fall short of comprehending the dynamism of the Judeo-Christian god.