An objection on the Omniscence Of G-D is found on "" http://www.youtube.com/watch?

v=7YYVPGwk0ac&feature=related "" The intention of this Paper is to examine this argument logically. The Essence of the new thiestic objection on Omniscience Of G-D. ''IF G-D DOETH EXIST THEN HE DOETH KNOW THE TRUTH VALUES OF ALL PROPOSITIONS WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINITY AND CERTITUDITY. IF GOD DOETH KNOW ALL TRUTH VALUES OF ALL PROPOSITIONS THEN G-D MUST KNOW WITH ABSOLUTECERTAINITY THE TRUTH VALUE OF THE PROPOSITION '' GOD IS NOT MISTAKEN, OR MORE PRECISELY AND LESS GRAMMATICALLY GOD DOES BE NOT MISTAKEN''. HOW EVER IF G-D IS MISTAKEN THEN G-D DOETH NOT AND MUST NOT KNOW HE IS [DOES BE] MISTAKEN . GOD CAN NOT KNPW THE TRUTH VALUE OF THE PROPOSITION '' G-D IS NOT MISTAKEN WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINITY''. THIS IMPLIES G-D IS NOT OMNISCENT. THIS IMPLIES G-D DOES NOT EXIST''. This is a fallacy rather a fallacious argument. ANALYSIS OF THE STATED ABOVE ARGUMENT. 1]IF G-D IS OMNISCIENT THEN G-D DOETH KNOWTRUTH VALUES OF ALL THE PROPOSITIONS AND ALL THE PROPOSITIONS INCLUDING THE PROPOSITION '''G-D IS NOT MISTAKEN'''' WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINITY. 2] IF G-D IS OMNISCIENT THEN G-D IS CERTAINLY NOT MISTAKEN. SINCE '' A MISTAKE OR AN ERROR IS <<THE LACK OF CERTAINITY OR NOT KNOWING A PROPOSITION OR NOT KNOWING THE TRUTH VALUE OF A PROPOSITION>> WITH CERTAINITY AND CERTITUDE. 3] IF G-D IS MISTAKEN OR IS IN ERROR THEN G-D IS NOT G-D . 4] IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT G-D IS G-D YET G-D IS NOT G-D. IF IT IS SUPPOSED OR ASSUMED THAT G-D IS AN OMNISCIENT BEING THEN IT IS [DOES BE] IMPLIED AND IMPLICATED THAT G-D IS NOT MISTAKEN AND THERE IS NO FLAW IN DIVINE KNOWLIDGE. IF IT IS SUPPOSED OR ASSUMED THAT G-D IS MISTAKEN THEN G-D IS NOT AN OMNISCIENT EXISTENT. TO CLAIM G-D IS OMNISCIENT YET MISTAKEN ,IT IS IMPLIED THAT '' G-D IS OMNISCIENT YET NOT OMNISCIENT''. THIS IS A CONTRADICTION. EVEN A RATIONAL MINDED ATHIEST FRIEND CAN NOT PUT FORWORD THIS FALLACY AS AN ARGUMENT AGAINST THE VERY EXISTENCE OF G-D OR THE ATTRIBUTE OF OMNISCIENCE OF G-D OR BOTH. FOR SKE OF AN ARGUMENT LET IT BE SUPPOSED OR ASSUMED THAT G-D DOETH NOT EXIST. IF G-D DOETH NOT EXIST EVEN THEN THE PROPOSITION <<<< IF G-D DOETH EXIST THEN G-D IS [DOETH BE] OMNISCIENT>>>> IS TRUE. IF THIS ABOVE STATED PROPOSITION IS TRUE THEN IT IS DIRECTLY IMPLIED THAT G-D DOETH KNOW THAT G-D IS OMNISCIENT AND NOT MISTAKEN WITH CERTAINITY AND CERTITUDE ,WHETHER G-D EXISTETH OR EXISTETH NOT. THIS SHEWETH THAT THE KNOWLIDGE OF THE STATED ABOVE PROPOSITION IS DIRECTLY IMPLIED AND STRICTLY IMPLICATED FROM THE SUPPOSITION OR THE ASSUMPTION THAT <<<< G-D IS OMNISCIENT OR OMNISCIENCE IS AN ATTRIBUTE / QUALITY /PROPERTY OF G-D>>>>. IF THE MAKER OF THIS NEW OBJECTION HAD SOME HOW ATTEMPTED TO SHEW THAT A KNOWLIGE OF ALL THINGS IMPLIETH A NOT- KNOWLIDGE OF THE STATED ABOVE PROPOSITION THEN HE WOULD HAVE SOME LOGICAL VALUE IN THIS ARGUMENT. SINCE IN THIS PROPOSED CASE OMNISCIENCE WOULD HAVE BEEN A SELF CONTRADICTING OR A SELF REFUTING OR A PARADOXIAL IDEA. SINCE IT WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS:A--->B & A----> NOT B

WHERE OMNISCIENCE IMPLIETH KNOWLIDGE OF ALL PROPOSITION INCLUDING THE ABOVE STATED PROPOSITION AND OMNISCIENCE IMPLIETH NOT-KNOWLIDGE OF THIS STATED ABOVE PROPOSITION [ IN THE SUPPOSED /ASSUMED CASE]. BUT THIS IS CERTAINLY NOT THE CASE. IF THE ABOVE STATED PROPOSITION <<<<< IF G-D DOETH EXIST THEN G-D IS [DOETH BE] OMNISCIENT>>>>> IS FALSE THEN THE PROPOSITION IF G-D DOETH EXIST THEN HE IS NOT OMNISCIENT IS TRUE.BUT IF G-D IS NOT OMNISCIENCT THEN G-D DOTH CEASE TO BE G-D.SINCE OMNISCIENCE , OMNIPOTENCE, OMNITHELETE, OMNINECESSITY ARE THE ESSENTIAL PROPERTIES /ATTRIBUTES/QUALITIES OF THE DIVINE EXISTENT THAT IS G-D /DEITY/DIVINITY OR ANY OTHER WORD FOR G-D.