Here's the first problem. Define omniscience. Do you think omniscience entails such things as God knowing how to fly an airplane, or fix a computer problem? If one could plug themselves into the G-O-D omniscience database they would walk away knowing Kung Fu and being able to fly helicopters? Does it means there is this "being" out there somewhere who can read thoughts and predict next week's winning lottery ticket numbers?
To me these are all very naive, childlike notions of what "all-knowing" might mean. To me, all-knowing would much more entail being able to see through to the true nature of everything as it is, rather than through the illusion of limited perceptions imagining what is real or true when it is but a reflection of our own selves. This omniscience is not some ginormous computer database of facts and figures and technical knowledge, of all personal histories past, present, future. The G-O-D infinity data warehouse? I don't think so.
Once you remove modify this Santa Claus type idea of omniscience, the rest of the arguments based on that notion become moot.
Same thing. What does omnipotent actually mean? To me it means it is a matter of unconditional being. It is being without cause or effect. Therefore nothing can create or destroy it, as there is nothing above or below or outside it. It is the power of everything that is. This is a very different understanding than some comic-book version of a god with bolts of lightning coming out of his eyes and a giant foot that crushes everything it steps on.
Wouldn't you agree?
Again, once you change the understanding of these terms to something a little more sophisticated, the rest of the arguments become moot points.
Same thing again. What does omnipresent really mean? Some form of entity that exists non-locally in a quantum-level reality? But that would not be God then, but some universal mathematical equation. Nor would it look like Santa Claus again that can magically hit every house in the word traveling faster than Flash Gordon on his way to a date.
Many do imagine God in such magical terms however.
To me omnipresent means something along the lines of the Ground of all Being. It would be in terms that God is not separate from creation, neither inside nor outside, but is the "being" of "being". It is therefore not "up there" or "out there", nor "in here", but inside and outside, future and past, etc, are not places nor spaces where this "being" moves from or to.
A way to imagine this is like a map that is drawn out on a piece of paper with lines and curves, dots and letters, etc, which represent all time and history. God is the piece of paper itself all is drawn upon. It is not other to anything, but is part and present in everything that is. Now add to this "omniscience and omnipotence" as I described. This paper is living and not apart from or separate to. It transcends the lines, and is the fabric on which the lines are drawn. The lines and fabric are not separate.
One other thought to add to this, these lines are not predetermined lines either which the fabric planned out in advance nor is drawing them out for us.
I do not see "the creation" as something that happened historically. Creation is a constant. Creation is happen in each and every moment. Nothing is predetermined. The only constant is the paper on which these living lines are being created, moment to moment, in repeating patterns, and novel, evolving forms.
In short, getting rid of the Santa Clause notions of God helps in dealing with these larger questions that the logical mind natural will see. Questions like, "If God is all powerful, can he create a rock he cannot lift?" become moot points. They're only valid questions when you think of God in those terms. Get rid of those terms. Move beyond them. I prefer developing a better understanding of God, rather than chucking it all out because we all know logically that a Mighty Mouse can't be real.
