A
I think you misunderstand Blain,
An example: It is impossible to move an immovable object. If you can move an immovable object then it is not immovable. This is a paradox, as such is it impossible to do. Arguing that God can preform paradoxes (ie. being perfectly good but committing immoral acts, drawing circular squares, etc.) Paradoxes leads to a conclusions that are logically unacceptable or self-contradictory.
Are you suggesting that logic does not apply to god? If so, how do you deal with these paradoxes?
An example: It is impossible to move an immovable object. If you can move an immovable object then it is not immovable. This is a paradox, as such is it impossible to do. Arguing that God can preform paradoxes (ie. being perfectly good but committing immoral acts, drawing circular squares, etc.) Paradoxes leads to a conclusions that are logically unacceptable or self-contradictory.
Are you suggesting that logic does not apply to god? If so, how do you deal with these paradoxes?
its is not a paradox. it is an inability for those who are not born again in the Spirit to discern spiritual things.
just as one would have a hard time describing color to a blind person.