is that the argument?

If so

The argument is formally invalid

And it commits a fallacy in propositiional logic as the inference rule is invalid

It doesnt follow that you will necessarily do something

What follows, is that you will do something, not necessarily though

you could do Y instead of X

Idk if thats the argument

You're trying to propose,

God know all. God make all. God make you think you have free will...


But really god knows what you will eat for breakfast before you go to bed everynight. So if god is all powerful, you didnt choose your breakfast. God already did when he made you. He just didnt let you in on it.

How does this rebutt omnipotence?

@Sentient23 what you are saying there isnt addressing my point

Because I don't know what your point is

it sounds VERY similarly to theological fatalism

why is it

and its implications on morality and free will

Christians dont get it

lol I get it, im saying your argument is formally invalid

Have i explained it badly

Its a fallacy in propositional logic

I am familiar with theological fatalism mate

Its formally invalid, it doesnt follow that you will necessarily do X, the only thing that follows is that you will do x, but you COULD do y, as its not necessary for you to do X

ye but

you cant rebutt it

i just did lol

Its invalid syllogism

Yeah but god already knows what will happen in all timelines, right?

Or... is HE NOT OMNIPOTENT?

Omniscient etc

God knows all yes, however, just because god knows you will do X, does not mean you will necessarily do X, but that you WILL do x

the difference here

is

That there is no "necessity" for you to do X

As you could still do y

since its not necessary to do X

Yes but. When he made you he knew everything you would do before you did it. Yes?

I already addressed that

God knows i will do X

However, that doesn't mean i will necessarily do X

Then god isnt omnipotent in that scenario

gg