Is God's knowledge, limited?

[Wndrtch]

I've often thought, that God's knowledge is somewhat limited, as the Bible says that he "tests" us. Why test, if you already know all there is to know?

Take Genesis.

Adam & Eve were told not to eat the apple of the tree, to test their obedience to God. They failed the test and were thrown out of The Garden of Eden. Why conduct the test, if He already knew they would fail?

How about Abraham?

Again, we have a man being tested for his obedience to God. In this case, Abraham passed the test, and was rewarded for it. If God already knew that Abraham's devotion was complete, then why the test in the first place? You don't test things you already know to be true.

This leads me to believe that God's knowledge has a limitation.

I'm curious what y'all think on this.

[Deadshot]

OOORRRR...are the stories of Adam and Eve or Noah simply Christian myths, used to explain the unexplainable.

You assume that the Bible is written by the "Hand of God". I believe that the Bible is written by man, and men make mistakes, even when guided by the Hand of God.

[Elrathin]

A theory that I hold as a distinct possibility (and would explain a great many things) is the wind-up clock theory. A God (not necessarily Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, whatever religion) or Gods created the universe and simply walked away.

From there we have folks creating and making up their own religions as time goes on. There is a distinct possibility that whatever god(s) are out there, they simply do not care about you.

[BoogyMan]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.

[Deadshot]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.


That is possible, but with problems that humans just cannot comprehend.

So I believe God knows all, but in a limited way. Here's my example.

As a person with free will, I can choose to go and kill someone today. God can know the path that my normal day will take. God can know the path that would progress if I were to kill someone tody. God can know the path that would progress if I were to get into a car wreck, etc. So God can know the hundreds or thousands of different directions my life can take from my decisions made today. But God doesn't know where I'll be 20 years from now, but s/he does know the hundreds of different places I could be, 20 years from now.

So God doesn't know "All" so much as s/he knows all the possiblities, which our small brains just can't imagine.

[Truth_and_Power]

Omniscient god --- Free Will

Obvious paradox

[Scorpion]

God is all knowing. He tests us for the same reason that not all prayers are answered. Because He chooses to do so. It's just that simple.

[Wndrtch]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.


That's my point. IF He/She is truely "Omniscience", then why does He/She need to test? You only test, to identify an unknown truth. If all truths are known to you, why waste the time?[hr]
God is all knowing. He tests us for the same reason that not all prayers are answered. Because He chooses to do so. It's just that simple.


But why? There must be a reason. I don't think God does things, just "for the hell of it"

[Scorpion]

quote=Scorpion]
God is all knowing. He tests us for the same reason that not all prayers are answered. Because He chooses to do so. It's just that simple.


But why? There must be a reason. I don't think God does things, just "for the hell of it"
[/quote]

Because God is not inclined to inform us of why He does what he does.

[Elrathin]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.


Let's go with this one. If God is ALL KNOWING, then he knows from birth who will go to heaven and who will go to hell. So what's the point if he knows the outcome?

[Scorpion]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.


Let's go with this one. If God is ALL KNOWING, then he knows from birth who will go to heaven and who will go to hell. So what's the point if he knows the outcome?


Assuming that there is what we humans have labeled as heaven and hell. Our conception of heaven and hell may be incorrect and admission to the next life may be determined by reasons incomprehensible to us.

[BoogyMan]

God is all knowing. He tests us for the same reason that not all prayers are answered. Because He chooses to do so. It's just that simple.


I could not have put it any better Scorpion, accept that I would say all prayers ARE answered. Sometimes the answer is no.

I would also add that God does not tempt man to sin.

Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: but every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

Also when God find's man in temptation He provides a method of escape, man simply has to choose it.

There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

[Scorpion]

Thank you Boogy.

I believe that God is an all knowing, all caring supreme being and that He can and does do as He sees fit. A sceptical person might say that the entity which I have described cannot exist because it does not follow the natural law and because a caring deity would not allow the bad things in this world to occur. Ah, but that is the mystery of God, a mystery that He understands and that we can never understand but instead we must rely on faith.

As Boogy so aptly pointed out, God does not tempt us to sin but He does test our faith, some more then others.

[Wndrtch]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.


Let's go with this one. If God is ALL KNOWING, then he knows from birth who will go to heaven and who will go to hell. So what's the point if he knows the outcome?


:clapper:

Thank You!!

[Truth_and_Power]

Because God is not inclined to inform us of why He does what he does.


Perhaps god has repeatedly explained his purpose to us, but we have not understood it because it is so simple. He is raising children.

[Wndrtch]

Thank you Boogy.

I believe that God is an all knowing, all caring supreme being and that He can and does do as He sees fit. A sceptical person might say that the entity which I have described cannot exist because it does not follow the natural law and because a caring deity would not allow the bad things in this world to occur. Ah, but that is the mystery of God, a mystery that He understands and that we can never understand but instead we must rely on faith.

As Boogy so aptly pointed out, God does not tempt us to sin but He does test our faith, some more then others.


If I may, this is not a mystery, but a truth. God knows that in order for any species to survive and thrive, it must be challenged. When you survive or defeat a hardship, you have learned and adapted for the next time. When you don't, natural selection takes over.

After all, it's the rock in the water's path, that gives the stream it's music.

[Scorpion]

Because God is not inclined to inform us of why He does what he does.


Perhaps god has repeatedly explained his purpose to us, but we have not understood it because it is so simple. He is raising children.


That could very well be true. Also, I believe that your analogy that we are God's children is profoundly accurate and serves to support our faith in His all caring abilities.

[Deadshot]

Having read a lot of History of the Holocaust, I find the whole thing about God answering prayers as a total joke.

I'm sorry but there was no reason not to answer some of those prayers. I can give you historical accounts of Nazis taking people right off the train and within minutes they are gassed and dead.

One specific example was of a girl in Auschwitz where a 16 year old girl stumbled out of the Zyklon B "showers", somehow alive mumbling about being saved by God, only to have the SS commander pull his pistol out and shoot her.

God may intervene from time to time, but free will rules all. IMHO, prayers are rarely answered.

[Wndrtch]

Having read a lot of History of the Holocaust, I find the whole thing about God answering prayers as a total joke.

I'm sorry but there was no reason not to answer some of those prayers. I can give you historical accounts of Nazis taking people right off the train and within minutes they are gassed and dead.

One specific example was of a girl in Auschwitz where a 16 year old girl stumbled out of the Zyklon B "showers", somehow alive mumbling about being saved by God, only to have the SS commander pull his pistol out and shoot her.

God may intervene from time to time, but free will rules all. IMHO, prayers are rarely answered.


Perhaps this was a test for all Humanity, to answer the question, will good people stand up against evil? Lot's of good people banned together and died to defeat Nazi Germany. I think that says something positive about our species.

Also, an immortal being would not have the same perspective regarding life and death, as a mortal. IF, you believe we have an immortal soul, then death is not final. It is just a transition to something more. Pain and suffering is only a temporary condition then.

That is why God can see all sins as equals. Murder has no more or less impact than say stealing does, because He sees death as non-final.

So, regarding the story of the girl, perhaps her prayer was answered, because her death was quick, and not dragged out. She was spared some suffering, and went to God quickly.

[Deadshot]

Imortal or not, all powerful or not a sentient being knows and realizes suffering. To not stop it when the chance presents itself...

[Buck Laser]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.

But omniscience ain't the same thing as ominipotence, which means all powerful. There's a difference.
PS: After I posted this, I realized that I'd misread the title. But I believe an omniscient God would limit his power.

[Scorpion]

Imortal or not, all powerful or not a sentient being knows and realizes suffering. To not stop it when the chance presents itself...


I understand that as a human there is the inclination to critique adversity as a failure by God to protect us when he is able to do so. But again, faith demands a trust in God and the realization that caring does not always mean happiness.

God recognizes suffering. In my estimation God allows suffering to serve mankinds greater good and to test our humanity, just as he tested his Son Jesus during His life and on the cross.

As Boogy said in a previous post, God listens to our prayers but He doesn't always say yes, sometimes the answer is no.

[Elrathin]

I'm sorry but it's funny when anything good happens, it's "God answered our prayers" and when something bad happens, it's "For the greater good". Sounds like a bunch of mumbo jumbo to justify God.

[BoogyMan]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.

But omniscience ain't the same thing as ominipotence, which means all powerful. There's a difference.
PS: After I posted this, I realized that I'd misread the title. But I believe an omniscient God would limit his power.


In saying that an an omniscient God would limit His own power you are pointing to the fact that He IS omnipotent Buck.

[Wndrtch]

Imortal or not, all powerful or not a sentient being knows and realizes suffering. To not stop it when the chance presents itself...


I understand that as a human there is the inclination to critique adversity as a failure by God to protect us when he is able to do so. But again, faith demands a trust in God and the realization that caring does not always mean happiness.

God recognizes suffering. In my estimation God allows suffering to serve mankinds greater good and to test our humanity, just as he tested his Son Jesus during His life and on the cross.

As Boogy said in a previous post, God listens to our prayers but He doesn't always say yes, sometimes the answer is no.


...and sometimes, the answer is not obvious.

[Scorpion]

I'm sorry but it's funny when anything good happens, it's "God answered our prayers" and when something bad happens, it's "For the greater good". Sounds like a bunch of mumbo jumbo to justify God.


Hmmm, "mumbo jumbo to justify God." Or perhaps it's the way in which God works. As I've said, it's a matter of faith in God and His plan.

Oh ye of little faith.[hr]


Imortal or not, all powerful or not a sentient being knows and realizes suffering. To not stop it when the chance presents itself...


I understand that as a human there is the inclination to critique adversity as a failure by God to protect us when he is able to do so. But again, faith demands a trust in God and the realization that caring does not always mean happiness.

God recognizes suffering. In my estimation God allows suffering to serve mankinds greater good and to test our humanity, just as he tested his Son Jesus during His life and on the cross.

As Boogy said in a previous post, God listens to our prayers but He doesn't always say yes, sometimes the answer is no.


...and sometimes, the answer is not obvious.


Absolutely spot on right Wndrtch.:thumbsup:

[Elrathin]

Oh ye of little faith.


Or I just don't believe in the medicine man's tonic.

Seriously though, I could come up with several different theories about God and not one of them could be proven wrong.

The way I look at it, if you're listening to 100 people tell a different lie, no matter who you believe, you still don't know the truth.

Yes, I know that one or a couple could be telling the truth, but you'd never know for sure. I just don't believe in man made religions. I'm not saying there couldn't be a god or gods, but there is also the posibility that there isn't.

[Scorpion]

Oh ye of little faith.


Or I just don't believe in the medicine man's tonic.

Seriously though, I could come up with several different theories about God and not one of them could be proven wrong.

The way I look at it, if you're listening to 100 people tell a different lie, no matter who you believe, you still don't know the truth.

Yes, I know that one or a couple could be telling the truth, but you'd never know for sure. I just don't believe in man made religions. I'm not saying there couldn't be a god or gods, but there is also the posibility that there isn't.


Ok El. I certainly respect your opinion. The fact that God cannot be explained lends proof to his all powerfulness and all knowing supreme being. The true mystery of God and the requirement of faith in a belief in God.

[Elrathin]

The fact that God cannot be explained lends proof to his all powerfulness and all knowing supreme being.


Proof? Maybe to you, but not to me. It lends to your opinion that he is all powerful and all knowing, but it certainly is not proof that he is all powerful or all knowing. The situation where he cannot be explained could also be proof to someone else that he doesn't exist.

As I said earlier, there are numerous explanations of God and his meaning. So in some of those, yes God can be explained. Whether or not that is the truth is another story. And yes, I know truth is also in the eye of the beholder, but I think you get my meaning.

If there is a God(s) and that supernatural being wants me to believe, then he will have to do more than just rumor mill or from some textbook that man wrote over a thousand years ago.

I need a little something more updated ;)

[Wndrtch]

The fact that God cannot be explained lends proof to his all powerfulness and all knowing supreme being.


Proof? Maybe to you, but not to me. It lends to your opinion that he is all powerful and all knowing, but it certainly is not proof that he is all powerful or all knowing. The situation where he cannot be explained could also be proof to someone else that he doesn't exist.

As I said earlier, there are numerous explanations of God and his meaning. So in some of those, yes God can be explained. Whether or not that is the truth is another story. And yes, I know truth is also in the eye of the beholder, but I think you get my meaning.

If there is a God(s) and that supernatural being wants me to believe, then he will have to do more than just rumor mill or from some textbook that man wrote over a thousand years ago.

I need a little something more updated ;)


Be careful...

The next time we get some "proof" of God, it may be too late to start believing.[hr]If there is a God(s) and that supernatural being wants me to believe, then he will have to do more than just rumor mill or from some textbook that man wrote over a thousand years ago.

I need a little something more updated ;)


LOL!!

Ok, so the Supreme Being, Master of the Universe, Creator of all things, Knower of all knowledge, Eater of Planets, is going to take time out of his schedule, just to show up on Earth and dope-slap you in the head, in order for you to believe in Him! LMAO!!

I think that might be misconstrued as arrogance, don't you think!

(sorry for poking fun at you, but as I thought about what you said, it seemed rather amusing to me)

[Scorpion]

Well, as I've previously stated, I belive in God as a supreme being and if others disagree with my belief that's fine. Believe as you so choose.

In some matters faith prevails over proof.

Have a pleasant evening to all of you. I've been in and out of surgery for the past 24 hours so it's off to bed for me.

[moses2792796]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.


So you don't believe in free will?

[Elrathin]

I think that might be misconstrued as arrogance, don't you think!



Actually no, arrogance is wanting someone to worship you.

[BoogyMan]

Omniscience, God is all knowing.


So you don't believe in free will?


I believe wholly in free will. God knowing all does not equate to Him operating me like a puppet.

[moses2792796]

But if he knew all, including the future, then when he created mankind he must have known everything that would happen to every single person, therefore by creating us he already sealed our fate. If we truly had free will God could not know 'all'.

If God is omniescent even he would not have free will. In fact God is probably the least free of anyone, according to Christians.

[underdawg]

I like what ifs. I do not know if there really is a God or not, but just for the sake of an argument lets say there is. Then you ask how can there be free will if God already knows the future? If God created multiple futures and they already exist, then our choice would determine which future that we wind up in. No paradox would exist if there were multiple possible futures.

[moses2792796]

But for God to be all knowing he would have to know which path we would take.

[Wndrtch]

I think that might be misconstrued as arrogance, don't you think!



Actually no, arrogance is wanting someone to worship you.


LOL!! :clapper:

Touché!

[Truth_and_Power]

Imortal or not, all powerful or not a sentient being knows and realizes suffering. To not stop it when the chance presents itself...


Sometimes you have to let your kids learn the hard way so they won't keep making the same mistakes.

[piratemonkey]

I believe wholly in free will. God knowing all does not equate to Him operating me like a puppet.


I have to agree with some others here...

If you take that statement to it's rational conclusion, god knew that creating humans would result in suffering and sin.

Knowing this, how is that act of creation a moral act? He knew the results of his actions would be mass suffering on a huge scale.

Sometimes you have to let your kids learn the hard way so they won't keep making the same mistakes.

Three problems with this argument:
1) You don't know, for a fact, what your kids will do... an all-knowing god does.
2) You didn't create every single physical object and impulse that leads to the suffering of your kids... a creator god did.
3) Since, according to every survey on teenage pregnacy, adultery and divorce that I've ever seen, evangelical christians sin just as often as non-christians... explain to us how one "learns from their mistakes" by finding Jesus.

[BoogyMan]

I believe wholly in free will. God knowing all does not equate to Him operating me like a puppet.


I have to agree with some others here...

If you take that statement to it's rational conclusion, god knew that creating humans would result in suffering and sin.

Knowing this, how is that act of creation a moral act? He knew the results of his actions would be mass suffering on a huge scale.

He also knew that there would be those who would accept Him, do His will, and would be with Him in Heaven after this life is over. The view you choose to take is one that would justify those who would rebel against God and seek their own way.

[piratemonkey]

Think of it this way, Boogie:

God is deciding how to create the universe. He's got two choices:

1) A universe where this is suffering.
2) A universe where this is no suffering.

Which is the moral choice?

Which is the compassionate choice?

Which is the merciful choice?

We have innate impulses toward certain behaviors that are hard-wired in our brains. Why would a merciful god create us with impulses toward sinful behavior?

Why not give us free will and not those impulses toward sin?

Is "testing" our faithfulness worth Billions of people suffering horribly?

[BoogyMan]

Think of it this way, Boogie:

God is deciding how to create the universe. He's got two choices:

1) A universe where this is suffering.
2) A universe where this is no suffering.

Which is the moral choice?

Which is the compassionate choice?

Which is the merciful choice?

We have innate impulses toward certain behaviors that are hard-wired in our brains. Why would a merciful god create us with impulses toward sinful behavior?

Why not give us free will and not those impulses toward sin?

Is "testing" our faithfulness worth Billions of people suffering horribly?


Man HAS a free will pirate, that is my whole point. God has given us the ability, based on that free will to either cave in to those more base impulses, or to set them aside and do what is right. What happens in this life is hard, sometimes seemingly unbearably so, but this life is not where mans final reward is.

[moses2792796]

If man has free will then God cannot be all knowing, it's that simple.

[JohnM81]

Interesting topic. I start off first by saying that this discussion is completely opinion based being we can't know for sure how the mechanics of omnicience and free will operate in the mind of God.

With that said...


I think its important to understand that there are several verses in the bible that indicate God is outside of time. IF this is true, everything that has happened, is happening, and will happen is taking place all at the same instance for God. So being able to percieve the cause and effect of every action or inaction at once would be a good reason to say he is omnicient.

Now the question of free will and omnicience being diametrically opposed is easily settled if we first understand the above paragraph. God saw a person look at the item in the store, steal it, get caught, and go to jail at the same time. Does God have omnicience in this situation? Yes. Does the person have free will in this situation? Yes.

So free will and omnicience are completely compatable if understood in this way.

[I Like Beer]

This leads me to believe that God's knowledge has a limitation.

Could He pose a question so complex that even He couldn't answer it? I say, 'yes' because He can do anything. :)

I think you could say that these tests were foregone conclusions. God knew what would happen, but they became object lessons for future generations.[hr]
If man has free will then God cannot be all knowing, it's that simple.


Why not? He just may know what we'll choose, but doesn't influence it.

[moses2792796]

Because if he is all knowing he must have known our choices before he created us and therefore sealed our fate by choosing to do so. If he did not know what we would choose then he is not all knowing.

[Wndrtch]

Could He pose a question so complex that even He couldn't answer it? I say, 'yes' because He can do anything. :)

I think you could say that these tests were foregone conclusions. God knew what would happen, but they became object lessons for future generations.

Perhaps, He tests not for His understanding, but so we could learn about ourselves.

God knew what Abrahams devotion was, but Abraham didn't fully undertsnad it, until he was tested.

Ok, so God can go back to being "All Knowing".

[I Like Beer]

Because if he is all knowing he must have known our choices before he created us and therefore sealed our fate by choosing to do so. If he did not know what we would choose then he is not all knowing.

It could be as you describe.

However, if we operate without the knowledge that our fate is sealed, how is that different, in practice, from having complete freewill?

In this case, the illusion of self-determination is as real to us as actual self-determination. As long as we are kept in the dark as to the true nature of fate.

In this way, God is all-knowing, the die is cast, but we go merrily on our way thinking it makes a difference if we cheat on our taxes or not. Eeek, what a horrible thought.[hr]
Could He pose a question so complex that even He couldn't answer it? I say, 'yes' because He can do anything. :)

I think you could say that these tests were foregone conclusions. God knew what would happen, but they became object lessons for future generations.

Perhaps, He tests not for His understanding, but so we could learn about ourselves.

It certainly sounds like a plausible explanation to me.

[moses2792796]

But you accept that free will and God being all knowing cannot both be true. They directly contradict one-another. Unless God only became all knowing after he created man.

[Scorpion]

But you accept that free will and God being all knowing cannot both be true. They directly contradict one-another. Unless God only became all knowing after he created man.


There's no contradiction so why couldn't they both be truths?

[I Like Beer]

But you accept that free will and God being all knowing cannot both be true. They directly contradict one-another. Unless God only became all knowing after he created man.


No, I don't accept that. Why must there be a contradiction? Humans can select form an infinite number of options but God always knows which choice we will make.

We have freewill, God is all knowing.

[moses2792796]

If God is all knowing he must have known all our choices before he created us as well. Unless he became all knowing after he created us, which would work.

[Tsky]

Which God are we talking about? There are thousands.

[Wndrtch]

Which God are we talking about? There are thousands.


Cthulhu

http://www.summeroflovecraft.com/images/cthulhu-6.jpg

[Saigio]

Which God are we talking about? There are thousands.


Cthulhu

http://www.summeroflovecraft.com/images/cthulhu-6.jpg


Cthulhu saves...
some...
for later.

[Wndrtch]

Which God are we talking about? There are thousands.


Cthulhu

http://www.summeroflovecraft.com/images/cthulhu-6.jpg


Cthulhu saves...
some...
for later.


LOL!!

I knew this would bring you out!

I'm a huge fan of H.P. Lovecraft. I think I read most if not all his stories, and was terribly bummed when I couldn't find anymore material to read. I wanted more.

[Saigio]

LOL!!

I knew this would bring you out!

I'm a huge fan of H.P. Lovecraft. I think I read most if not all his stories, and was terribly bummed when I couldn't find anymore material to read. I wanted more.


Lovecraft's stuff is great. I've only found one book of stories at my local library, but I was hooked almost instantly.

[Deadshot]

Cthulhu

http://www.summeroflovecraft.com/images/cthulhu-6.jpg


Cthulhu always scared the hell out of me. I guess it was the tenticles. That new Stephen King movie, The Mist has a lot of Cthulhu like monsters...hell I'm scared now!:sadly:

[Tsky]

Who worships Cthulhu?

Whoever his worshippers are I can assure you that your god is not all knowing.

Any worshippers of Thor online right now? My response to you is the same for the Cthulhu worshippers.

[moses2792796]

Even if there were god's (assumptions) there would still be God (certainty), and he would have created them as well. You cannot make divisions in the divine, I think the Hindus had this figured out nicely.

[Tsky]

Even if there were god's (assumptions) there would still be God (certainty), and he would have created them as well. You cannot make divisions in the divine, I think the Hindus had this figured out nicely.


Assumptions? Hindus? How about facts and holy scriptures.

"For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him." 1 Cor. 5:8

So if there are many gods and many lords, who is Almighty God and is HE all knowing?

That is the question.

[Tsky]

"The idols of the nations are silver and gold, the work of the hands of earthling man. A mouth they have, but they can speak nothing; eyes they have, but they can see nothing; ears they have, but they can give ear to nothing. Also there exists no spirit in their mouth. Those making them will become just like them, everyone who is trusting in them." Psalms135:15-18

[moses2792796]

Even if there were god's (assumptions) there would still be God (certainty), and he would have created them as well. You cannot make divisions in the divine, I think the Hindus had this figured out nicely.


Assumptions? Hindus? How about facts and holy scriptures.

"For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him." 1 Cor. 5:8

So if there are many gods and many lords, who is Almighty God and is HE all knowing?

That is the question.


The one God in his highest nature would be all knowing but I doubt we can comprehend the workings of its conciousness, it is likely to be nothing like that of a man, we may even deem it to be unconcious. If there was an unconcious 'life force' binding the universe together (which is a certainty, the question is whether this God is concious) then free will would seem more viable.

[Tsky]

I've often thought, that God's knowledge is somewhat limited, as the Bible says that he "tests" us. Why test, if you already know all there is to know?

Take Genesis.

Adam & Eve were told not to eat the apple of the tree, to test their obedience to God. They failed the test and were thrown out of The Garden of Eden. Why conduct the test, if He already knew they would fail?

How about Abraham?

Again, we have a man being tested for his obedience to God. In this case, Abraham passed the test, and was rewarded for it. If God already knew that Abraham's devotion was complete, then why the test in the first place? You don't test things you already know to be true.

This leads me to believe that God's knowledge has a limitation.

I'm curious what y'all think on this.


Your observations prove not that God is limited but that he created us with free will and he does not 1. predetermine our every action 2. uses his unlimited knowledge perfectly.

Therefore what you do is your choice and was not predestined by God. You have no one to blame for your actions except yourself. That was highlighted in the very first book of the Bible. He used his foreknowledge in telling Adam and Eve how their lives would be after disobedience. He said life would be hard and Eve would have childbirth pains. He then reiterated what he told them from the beginning and that is if they ate from the tree they would die and that they did. And by the way, he didn’t put the tree there as a test but the tree was a symbol of his right to set standards for mankind to follow. Adam and Eve’s failure to recognize his Sovereignty showed they did not appreciate the God who had created them. God also set a plan in motion to free mankind of the sins by Adam and Eve by telling them of a seed at Gen 3:15. That seed was Jesus Christ. For those that say the story is a myth that means the conspiracy was started by Moses and continued for thousands of years by other conspirators and even when Jesus came on the scene he too believe in Adam and Eve. Adam was mentioned in the genealogical line of Jesus Christ and yet some here have said Adam and Eve are a myth. Ok.

[moses2792796]

I think the symbolism of the Adam and Eve story is pretty obvious to anyone not blinded by a materialistic interpretation of the scripture.

[Newscaster]

Actually, people say that God talks to them all the time. So, if this is true, why not test him to make sure we are worshipping the right God. Therefore, I suggest we call him and tell him to show up at some prestigeous College or University and give him an SAT test. Maybe that would settle things.

[moses2792796]

I wonder if God could beat Deep Blue at chess...

[Tsky]

I think the symbolism of the Adam and Eve story is pretty obvious to anyone not blinded by a materialistic interpretation of the scripture.


I think people who don't believe the Bible at all aren't qualified to state whether the story of Adam and Eve is symbolic or not. The correct application of common sense dictates that the ENTIRE Bible is symbolic in the mind of the non-believer as none of it is believed to be true. Therefore the assertion that the story of Adam and Eve is symbolic is not a sound statement if the Bible as a whole is symbolic or make believe. Why separate one make believe story from the rest?

The person who believes in the Bible understands it is IMPOSSIBLE for Adam and Eve to be mere allegory since Jesus Christ said he came to redeem us from what Adam caused and the genealogical line of CHrist traces back to Adam. That wouldn't be the case if Adam were symbolic. Furthermore, why would God allow all mankind to inherit the sinful nature of someone who didn't exist? Why would God send Jesus to die for someone who didn't exist? The scriptures make it clear that Jesus 'paid the price' for Adam's sin. How is that so if Jesus is real but Adam is fake? Whether you believe Jesus is the Messiah or not has nothing to do with the fact that Jesus was a historical figure who died. He said he died to redeem us from Adamic sin. To Jesus and his Father who sent him, Adam was very real. [hr]
Actually, people say that God talks to them all the time. So, if this is true, why not test him to make sure we are worshipping the right God. Therefore, I suggest we call him and tell him to show up at some prestigeous College or University and give him an SAT test. Maybe that would settle things.


I say if you talked to God at all you should be committed since you don't believe he exists. Or is it that you do believe he exists but he is of little use unless he's being mocked?

[moses2792796]

I think the symbolism of the Adam and Eve story is pretty obvious to anyone not blinded by a materialistic interpretation of the scripture.


I think people who don't believe the Bible at all aren't qualified to state whether the story of Adam and Eve is symbolic or not. The correct application of common sense dictates that the ENTIRE Bible is symbolic in the mind of the non-believer as none of it is believed to be true. Therefore the assertion that the story of Adam and Eve is symbolic is not a sound statement if the Bible as a whole is symbolic or make believe. Why separate one make believe story from the rest?

The person who believes in the Bible understands it is IMPOSSIBLE for Adam and Eve to be mere allegory since Jesus Christ said he came to redeem us from what Adam caused and the genealogical line of CHrist traces back to Adam. That wouldn't be the case if Adam were symbolic. Furthermore, why would God allow all mankind to inherit the sinful nature of someone who didn't exist? Why would God send Jesus to die for someone who didn't exist? The scriptures make it clear that Jesus 'paid the price' for Adam's sin. How is that so if Jesus is real but Adam is fake? Whether you believe Jesus is the Messiah or not has nothing to do with the fact that Jesus was a historical figure who died. He said he died to redeem us from Adamic sin. To Jesus and his Father who sent him, Adam was very real.


This dogmatic materialist view of scripture does not do it justice, why insist that the Bible is pure knowledge of the realm of becoming? That is the domain of scientists.

[Newscaster]

I am a bit surprised here. Since when is someone who does not believe the bible is 100 percent true or not, disqualified from determining the symbolism of the book. The Bible is many things to many people and it is NOT all symbolism, nor is it all myth or truth. It all depends on what you want to get out of it.
I personally take the "bible stories" with a grain of salt because I believe they were created to help put across a philosophical idea. I do not regard the book as a history text even though there are some things in it that are indeed true.....true but not miraculous. The bible, to me, is a guide for living. There are some very good ideas about relationship between people within its pages. But there are also idea that stem from the says of the pagan religions that are not good ideas at all.
We look upon the characters some call "Heroes of the Bible" but these heroes participate in some very bloody and violent stories within the bible. At one time, those events were considered pretty heroic. Not so much today as people really are coming to the idea that violence is not such a holy thing and the Bible is a very violent book. Just look at how many children are killed by G-d.
So you can look at the books and say this part is symbolism, this is true and this is nonsense and you can say those things without having to be a believer or non-believer. What you do have to have though, is a brain to determine which is which.

[Tsky]

I am a bit surprised here. Since when is someone who does not believe the bible is 100 percent true or not, disqualified from determining the symbolism of the book. The Bible is many things to many people and it is NOT all symbolism, nor is it all myth or truth. It all depends on what you want to get out of it.
I personally take the "bible stories" with a grain of salt because I believe they were created to help put across a philosophical idea. I do not regard the book as a history text even though there are some things in it that are indeed true.....true but not miraculous. The bible, to me, is a guide for living. There are some very good ideas about relationship between people within its pages. But there are also idea that stem from the says of the pagan religions that are not good ideas at all.
We look upon the characters some call "Heroes of the Bible" but these heroes participate in some very bloody and violent stories within the bible. At one time, those events were considered pretty heroic. Not so much today as people really are coming to the idea that violence is not such a holy thing and the Bible is a very violent book. Just look at how many children are killed by G-d.
So you can look at the books and say this part is symbolism, this is true and this is nonsense and you can say those things without having to be a believer or non-believer. What you do have to have though, is a brain to determine which is which.


Actually Newscaster the use of the brain comes in when it's time to determine which parts are real and which parts are symbolic. Yes there is symbolism in the Bible but the Bible makes it clear which parts are symbolic or used for illustration purposes and which parts are real. The smart person is the one who can determine which is which and the honest person is the one uses the information for good and not for bad. Is it symbolic that the children of non-believers were killed along with their parents? What if its not symbolic? If it is real then that requires that you delve into the scriptures to find out how it can be justified considering the BIble says 'all God's ways are just.' But to the casual reader such as yourself the last thing you are interested in doing is delving deep into the scriptures to find out why GOd acted the way he did in certain situations because that would mean you have to actually put faith in the answers the Bible provides. That beig said, we all know where the buck stops with you.

The part that doesn't make any sense to me is the absolute certainty that the Bible means little or nothing to you and your reading of it is only done to 'prove a point' or to find fault with it. Therefore any analysis you have of the Bible is destined to be flawed and any observations you make are destined to be skeptical. That is why people like me don't trust your so-called analysis and your opinions. I mean really, what serious student of the Bible asks questions like, 'I wonder if God can help me pass the SAT's?'

I might add that your attempt at sounding geniune in the above post is actually quite entertaining, but not at all believable.

[Newscaster]

Tsky, thats amazing that you can ascertain that the Bible means little r nothing to me. I never said that. I said there are stories in the bible that were created to make a philosophical point. There are also some truths and some baloney. But I have never expressed any feeling about my personal reaction to the bible. Oh yes, remember one thing.....I only accept one half of the bible. I do not deal with the NT. Now, do you want to create a truism from that?
The bible is part of faith and faith is personal and anything I say about the level of my faith is very personal and therefore, I dont talk about it. As I have said before....its when one person's beliefs intrude upon mine, then I talk. So, dont try to decipher my beliefs. You will be wrong every time.

[Tsky]

Tsky, thats amazing that you can ascertain that the Bible means little r nothing to me. I never said that. I said there are stories in the bible that were created to make a philosophical point. There are also some truths and some baloney. But I have never expressed any feeling about my personal reaction to the bible. Oh yes, remember one thing.....I only accept one half of the bible. I do not deal with the NT. Now, do you want to create a truism from that?
The bible is part of faith and faith is personal and anything I say about the level of my faith is very personal and therefore, I dont talk about it. As I have said before....its when one person's beliefs intrude upon mine, then I talk. So, dont try to decipher my beliefs. You will be wrong every time.


You have an interesting dilemma as a person who believes in only half the Bible. You also have an interesting dilemma as someone who acknowledges that parts of the Bible are symbolic but other parts are literal.

The problem with believing only half the Bible means you have some special knowledge about which part is more authentic than the other. The ENTIRE Bible is in harmony from Genesis to Revelations. To believe only half of the book means one part is fictional although the entire Bible agrees. I would love to know what special knowledge you have that points to one section being more authentic than the other since the differences certainly can’t come from the Bible itself, the whole book is in complete harmony.

The dilemma you have with acknowledging the Bible uses symbolism is distinguishing which part is symbolic and which part is not. If you believe the story of Adam and Eve is symbolic then you cannot even believe the parts of the Bible you claim to believe as it is clear that the writers of the OT believed that Adam and Eve were real, live people. Not only were they believed to be real but they were believed to be the mother and father of humankind. It’s interesting that Moses knew all men had a common ancestor long before scientists who now acknowledge that regardless of race we did indeed come from the same person. Why would Moses use symbolism to describe our beginnings and at the same time be absolutely correct about our beginnings? Doesn’t it make more sense that he would actually tell us the name of our first parents if indeed he was inspired to write the Bible by the one person who knew our first parents, and that was God?

When you do quote the Bible it is likely biased, incorrect, sarcastic or a combination of all three. I don’t have to know exactly what you believe to know what you most likely believe based on your posts. And what you most likely believe based on your posts is that you are smarter than the people who believe the Bible to be inspired by God and yet you yourself believe in parts of that book yourself. You have a very interesting dilemma indeed. I would love for you to prove to me that what you believe about the scriptures that you don't fully believe in qualifies you as more intelligent than those who believe in 100% of what the Bible contains.

[piratemonkey]

The problem with believing only half the Bible means you have some special knowledge about which part is more authentic than the other. The ENTIRE Bible is in harmony from Genesis to Revelations. To believe only half of the book means one part is fictional although the entire Bible agrees.

Translation:

You don't believe in the exact same mythology that I do, so you must be wrong.

(Hint: ALL religious belief is based upon ZERO evidence so all are equivalent, from a rational perspective.)

[moses2792796]

Tsky has an unfortunate view of the Bible where he refuses to believe that it is not 100% historical fact. This undermines the metaphysical nature of scripture by forcing it into a materialistic mindset, it's no better than atheism, this is the failure of fundamentalists.

[Tsky]

The problem with believing only half the Bible means you have some special knowledge about which part is more authentic than the other. The ENTIRE Bible is in harmony from Genesis to Revelations. To believe only half of the book means one part is fictional although the entire Bible agrees.

Translation:

You don't believe in the exact same mythology that I do, so you must be wrong.

(Hint: ALL religious belief is based upon ZERO evidence so all are equivalent, from a rational perspective.)


Correct translation:

How can you believe in half of a whole part? The Bible consists of 66 books, what proof do you have that the ones you believe in are more important that the ones I believe in?[hr]
Tsky has an unfortunate view of the Bible where he refuses to believe that it is not 100% historical fact. This undermines the metaphysical nature of scripture by forcing it into a materialistic mindset, it's no better than atheism, this is the failure of fundamentalists.



Translation: First of all I haven't taken the time to figure out if Tsky is male or female so I choose male.

Secondly, I don't read or believe in the the Bible and the parts I have read I don't understand. Therefore I chose to believe none of it is literal.

[Deadshot]

The Bible is not 100% historical fact, which has been proven before.

One needs to believe in the message and lessons of the Bible, but not the literal interpretation of the Bible.

The story of Job is a perfect example of the illogical and non-sensical story in the Bible.

[BoogyMan]

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

[Tsky]

The Bible is not 100% historical fact, which has been proven before.

One needs to believe in the message and lessons of the Bible, but not the literal interpretation of the Bible.

The story of Job is a perfect example of the illogical and non-sensical story in the Bible.


1. Who has proven the Bible is not 100% historical fact?
2. What proof do you have that the Bible was not meant to be accepted as fact by its writers?
3. Why on earth would the writers make up fake 'historical' events during the time in which they lived knowing no one would believe them since they lived during that time and would know the information was incorrect?
4. Is the account about the Jews meant to be taken symbolically also?
5. Why have archaelogists discovery actual people, city and events that occured in the Bible? If it is all a fable, none of the people should exist.
6. Again, Jesus was proven to be a real historical figure. Why is it sound to acknowledge that he existed but then assert that everything we know about him is false?
7. Why would the people who fought and died for the Bible do so if it were a symbolic book? Wouldn't they know it was symbolic considering they would have lived during the time it was written and would know the Red Sea was not literally parted and therefore the book is a fable? Why die for a fable?
8. If you yourself are not a sincere student of the Bible how do you know if it's literal or not? Specifically, please relay the account of Job to me and tell me what parts of it lead you to believe it is a fable and not an actual account.
9. If you can acknowledge that some parts can be literal then tell me what lithmus test you use to determine which parts are symbolic.

[moses2792796]

Tsky has an unfortunate view of the Bible where he refuses to believe that it is not 100% historical fact. This undermines the metaphysical nature of scripture by forcing it into a materialistic mindset, it's no better than atheism, this is the failure of fundamentalists.



Translation: First of all I haven't taken the time to figure out if Tsky is male or female so I choose male.

Secondly, I don't read or believe in the the Bible and the parts I have read I don't understand. Therefore I chose to believe none of it is literal.



I think you missed my point, I understand the inner meaning of the Bible, I understand that it is a representation truth in its highest form, this inevitably means that it is not necessarily truth of material events. The inability to see this is materialism in the guise of religion, and it undermines everything that religions around the world are meant to achieve.[hr]

The Bible is not 100% historical fact, which has been proven before.

One needs to believe in the message and lessons of the Bible, but not the literal interpretation of the Bible.

The story of Job is a perfect example of the illogical and non-sensical story in the Bible.


1. Who has proven the Bible is not 100% historical fact?



Charles Darwin

Let it go Tsky, religion is not meant to dwell on this material knowledge, if that's what interests you become a scientist.

[Newscaster]

Tsky, first, for Jews, the NT is NOT part of the Bible. Therefore, the stories within the NT are just that...stories. By the way, those stories, it has been found, hasve been liufted from many other religious writings that have nothing to do with Jesus or Christianity. Now, if you ever sat down with Rabbinical scholars for any length of time, you will find out that the OT as you call it, is not designed to be believed in its entirety. Those Rabbi's will tell you the same as I have....the stories are there to make points in philodophy but not to be considered as histiory books. And remember T, Jesus was a Jew all his life. He never advocated the creation of a new religion and if he had been alive when Christianity came to be cnsidered a separate faith, I sincerely doubt that Jesus would have signed up. Maybe what they call Christianity today ought to be called Paulianity.
Asfar as who reads what and believes what...thats up to you but you have no right or authority to determine what I believe or why. Nor do you have the ability.

[Deadshot]

The Bible is not 100% historical fact, which has been proven before.

One needs to believe in the message and lessons of the Bible, but not the literal interpretation of the Bible.

The story of Job is a perfect example of the illogical and non-sensical story in the Bible.


1. Who has proven the Bible is not 100% historical fact?

Science. The world is older then the world purported in the Bible.

2. What proof do you have that the Bible was not meant to be accepted as fact by its writers?

It is not possible to do what Noah did. Beyond the fact of two of every animal, the rain coming down would have destroyed the salientity of the oceans killing almost every fish. Also, beyond the logistics of feeding housing that many critters for that long of a time, how do you genetically restart those animal races with just two animals? You MUST have more.

If you want more proof read Leviticus, which is in the Bible, and which Boogy will point out should be ignored because it's not NT, and see what laws we follow there.

3. Why on earth would the writers make up fake 'historical' events during the time in which they lived knowing no one would believe them since they lived during that time and would know the information was incorrect?

The same reason many people wrote myths and creation stories. To explain the unexplainable.

4. Is the account about the Jews meant to be taken symbolically also?

Huh? If you're talking about people who are Christians, and I'll pick on Boogy again here, who discount the OT, then I have no idea. The Bible is a package deal.

5. Why have archaelogists discovery actual people, city and events that occured in the Bible? If it is all a fable, none of the people should exist.

Ah, here your wanting to go all "Black and White" on me. I believe in Jesus. I think Moses did much of what was in the Bible. And I have no problem with those that believe in, for example, the story of Noah and simply accept it on faith.

But just because I believe in Jesus, does not mean that I believe if I work the Sabbath that I should be killed (Exodus 35:2) The Bible is more about the overall message, treat others as you wish to be treated - help the poor - be honest, etc. then about a literal interpretation and following.

6. Again, Jesus was proven to be a real historical figure. Why is it sound to acknowledge that he existed but then assert that everything we know about him is false?

Never said it was.

7. Why would the people who fought and died for the Bible do so if it were a symbolic book? Wouldn't they know it was symbolic considering they would have lived during the time it was written and would know the Red Sea was not literally parted and therefore the book is a fable? Why die for a fable?

Tsky, I don't know how old you are or if you've read a lot of history, but people die for a lot of things. Money, power, love...More people have died in the name of God then for anything else. I don't know how you feel about other religions, but I have Christian friends that believe that the Muslim Religion is simply a "fable" and look at how many of those people die for that religion.

8. If you yourself are not a sincere student of the Bible how do you know if it's literal or not? Specifically, please relay the account of Job to me and tell me what parts of it lead you to believe it is a fable and not an actual account.

The Cruelity of God in Job is a joke. Again, I don't know your marital status or if you have kids. But I simply refuse to believe that, just to test me, Job, God would allow my wife and children to be killed, forget everything else that happened to Job, and then in the end, if I was good, replace my wife with Angelina Jolie and double the number of kids. God's not like that, your not a piece on a chess board.

I love my wife and kids, and to be honest if I were to find out that they died because God had a bet over me with the Devil, I think I'd tell him to "Fuck Off!" God is not going to play you, or allow the Devil to play you. You have free will, God said so. The Devil can tempt me, with Angelina Jolie - please:evil: (my wife said this is the only woman she have a threesome with - PLEASE Devil - TEMPT ME!!!! ;)), but God would not simply change out my wife and kids with "better" ones, like he does in the Story of Job. God is my father and loves me, I sincerely believe this.

I love this quote, about Job, from Stephen King "When his life was ruined, his family killed, his farm destroyed, Job knelt down on the ground and yelled up to the heavens, "Why God? Why me?" and the thundering voice of God answered, "There's just something about you that pisses me off". " Does that sound like a loving God? Hence, IMHO, the story of Job is simply unbelievable.

9. If you can acknowledge that some parts can be literal then tell me what lithmus test you use to determine which parts are symbolic.


I don't think there is a "Litmus" test for the Bible. It's simply a matter of faith. I don't believe in the story of Adam and Eve, it's sexist and God loves all equally. Noah is not scientifically possible, but as a matter of faith - all things are possible in God, so that's a "Push" for me. Job is a joke, God is not going to play a game with your life for shits and giggles - God need prove nothing to the Devil or anyone for that matter.

We can discuss specific examples too. Like Homosexuality. Why is it wrong in both Testaments of the Bible? Because for a religion to spread, Jewish or Christian, one must have soldiers to defend against those that would crush the faithful. Two men or two women produce no offspring that would either serve as soldiers or serve to make more of the faithful. Ergo, being against homosexuality would be a logic strategic outlook in a time where wars were nearly constant and people could be attacked, en masse, at a moments notice. Things are different now. Hence what was literal in Leviticus, like being able to stone one's child to death, are not literally taken today.

I answered your 8 questions, Tsky, could you answer one of mine? How can a Christian who believes in the Bible have no problems with the anti-Gay stance in Leviticus and believe in the 10 commandment of the Old testament, yet break Leviticus law which talks about not eating shell fish or not touching a woman during menstration? Isn't that exactly what I'm doing? Taking one part of the Bible as fact and faith and discarding another part as not literal and not applicable to today's standards?

I guess that's really 1 quesiton in three parts, but can you answer it?

[moses2792796]

How about this: When separated from their context, everything in the Bible is purely fiction, but when seen as a whole, the Bible becomes a pure manifestation of truth.

[Deadshot]

How about this: When separated from their context, everything in the Bible is purely fiction, but when seen as a whole, the Bible becomes a pure manifestation of truth.


I don't know if that's perfect, Moses, but it is something that I, at least, can live with.

Thanx and good job.

[Newscaster]

When you talk about everything in the Bible being pure fiction, you must remember that probably more than half the bible is advice and philosophy. The bible stories are fiction but were deemed necessary in order to better illustrate the points being made. Why did Jesus talk in parables? Because he needed parables to make his points clear to the crowd of marginally educated people he was talking to. As I have said before, the bible, both halves, are great guides for living or philosophical books but they are NOT history books.

[Tsky]

How about this: When separated from their context, everything in the Bible is purely fiction, but when seen as a whole, the Bible becomes a pure manifestation of truth.


I don't know if that's perfect, Moses, but it is something that I, at least, can live with.

Thanx and good job.


Huh?

True fiction?

Ok.[hr]"How can a Christian who believes in the Bible have no problems with the anti-Gay stance in Leviticus and believe in the 10 commandment of the Old testament, yet break Leviticus law which talks about not eating shell fish or not touching a woman during menstration? Isn't that exactly what I'm doing? Taking one part of the Bible as fact and faith and discarding another part as not literal and not applicable to today's standards?" Deadshot

If the Bible is taken as a whole it is clear that the law was leading to something greater which the Bible says was Christ. Christ said the law was nailed to the stake with him and while it was very necessary in the ancient times that the Jews lived it was not applicable after Jesus came on the scene and was not applicable today. (It made sense that the Jews didn't eat shellfish because they are the scum of the ocean and they certainly didn't have the sterilzation methods or medicines to deal with diseases that could result from it's consumption.) The law was perfect and could not have been followed perfectly and was a reminder to the Jews to stay humble and look to something greater. And by the way do you know what parts of the law were far beyond the times of the people in ancient history and kept the Jews free from disease? I'm sure you don't because you only look for negative.
Jesus was perfect so he fulfilled the law perfectly. You cannot fault Christians for not still living by the Law of Moses and not fault the Jews for not heading to the same law. That part of the Bible is supposedly the only part they believe in and yet they can't follow the Law. They were never meant to live solely by the law and can't possilbly do so. The most important parts of the law that were to be followed even to today were highlighted by Christ. The issues regarding sexual morality also remained the same and in both the OT and the NT, homosexuality is condemned. You can't get around that and if that is the reason you don't believe the Bible I don't blame you. Homosexuality according to the Bible is a sin.

[Wndrtch]

How about this: When separated from their context, everything in the Bible is purely fiction, but when seen as a whole, the Bible becomes a pure manifestation of truth.


I don't know if that's perfect, Moses, but it is something that I, at least, can live with.

Thanx and good job.


Huh?

True fiction?

Ok.[hr]"How can a Christian who believes in the Bible have no problems with the anti-Gay stance in Leviticus and believe in the 10 commandment of the Old testament, yet break Leviticus law which talks about not eating shell fish or not touching a woman during menstration? Isn't that exactly what I'm doing? Taking one part of the Bible as fact and faith and discarding another part as not literal and not applicable to today's standards?" Deadshot

If the Bible is taken as a whole it is clear that the law was leading to something greater which the Bible says was Christ. Christ said the law was nailed to the stake with him and while it was very necessary in the ancient times that the Jews lived it was not applicable after Jesus came on the scene and was not applicable today. (It made sense that the Jews didn't eat shellfish because they are the scum of the ocean and they certainly didn't have the sterilzation methods or medicines to deal with diseases that could result from it's consumption.) The law was perfect and could not have been followed perfectly and was a reminder to the Jews to stay humble and look to something greater. And by the way do you know what parts of the law were far beyond the times of the people in ancient history and kept the Jews free from disease? I'm sure you don't because you only look for negative.
Jesus was perfect so he fulfilled the law perfectly. You cannot fault Christians for not still living by the Law of Moses and not fault the Jews for not heading to the same law. That part of the Bible is supposedly the only part they believe in and yet they can't follow the Law. They were never meant to live solely by the law and can't possilbly do so. The most important parts of the law that were to be followed even to today were highlighted by Christ. The issues regarding sexual morality also remained the same and in both the OT and the NT, homosexuality is condemned. You can't get around that and if that is the reason you don't believe the Bible I don't blame you. Homosexuality according to the Bible is a sin.



If one is a "true" Christian, then your guiding principals is to love God with all your heart and soul, and love your fellow man with all your heart and soul. You are charged with taking care of your own actions, and not to worry about another’s, beyond assisting them if they ask or need it. Judgment is reserved for God.

Also, no one sin is above another in God's eyes. And seeing how no one is without sin, how can you condemn another for theirs?

Christ represented a new covenant between God and Man, which is to mean that Man is to refer to Christ's teaching to identify God's will, and not reach into the past (Old Testament).

[Deadshot]

Tsky, I will no longer respond to your posts on this topic. I answered your questions, you did not see fit to answer mine. Ergo, a dialogue is impossible with you on this subject.

[Tsky]

How about this: When separated from their context, everything in the Bible is purely fiction, but when seen as a whole, the Bible becomes a pure manifestation of truth.


I don't know if that's perfect, Moses, but it is something that I, at least, can live with.

Thanx and good job.


Huh?

True fiction?

Ok.[hr]"How can a Christian who believes in the Bible have no problems with the anti-Gay stance in Leviticus and believe in the 10 commandment of the Old testament, yet break Leviticus law which talks about not eating shell fish or not touching a woman during menstration? Isn't that exactly what I'm doing? Taking one part of the Bible as fact and faith and discarding another part as not literal and not applicable to today's standards?" Deadshot

If the Bible is taken as a whole it is clear that the law was leading to something greater which the Bible says was Christ. Christ said the law was nailed to the stake with him and while it was very necessary in the ancient times that the Jews lived it was not applicable after Jesus came on the scene and was not applicable today. (It made sense that the Jews didn't eat shellfish because they are the scum of the ocean and they certainly didn't have the sterilzation methods or medicines to deal with diseases that could result from it's consumption.) The law was perfect and could not have been followed perfectly and was a reminder to the Jews to stay humble and look to something greater. And by the way do you know what parts of the law were far beyond the times of the people in ancient history and kept the Jews free from disease? I'm sure you don't because you only look for negative.
Jesus was perfect so he fulfilled the law perfectly. You cannot fault Christians for not still living by the Law of Moses and not fault the Jews for not heading to the same law. That part of the Bible is supposedly the only part they believe in and yet they can't follow the Law. They were never meant to live solely by the law and can't possilbly do so. The most important parts of the law that were to be followed even to today were highlighted by Christ. The issues regarding sexual morality also remained the same and in both the OT and the NT, homosexuality is condemned. You can't get around that and if that is the reason you don't believe the Bible I don't blame you. Homosexuality according to the Bible is a sin.



If one is a "true" Christian, then your guiding principals is to love God with all your heart and soul, and love your fellow man with all your heart and soul. You are charged with taking care of your own actions, and not to worry about another’s, beyond assisting them if they ask or need it. Judgment is reserved for God.

Also, no one sin is above another in God's eyes. And seeing how no one is without sin, how can you condemn another for theirs?

Christ represented a new covenant between God and Man, which is to mean that Man is to refer to Christ's teaching to identify God's will, and not reach into the past (Old Testament).


What part of this didn't I know or were you just trying to highlight the fact that we agree on something? I'm not sure. I will add though that folks like yourself get confused about judging as opposed to acknowledging. You somehow think that loving your neighbor means forgetting there is a such thing as right and wrong. While final judgment is left to God he makes it very clear which actions will merit harsh judgment or have you not read that? What is the purpose of judging if there is no right or wrong? And acknowledging right from wrong does NOT mean hate homosexuals, thieves, greedy person and fornicators and adulterers. There is no room for hating anyone (and I can't even count how many homosexuals and fornicators I love!) However if I know that someone I care about is practicing something God disproves of and will face judgment AND pay for their sins NOW, why wouldn't I give advice on how to avoid both? Only someone who has love and compassion would be willing to put themselves out there to guide someone on a better path instead of saying 'to each their own.' And you are right, the Bible does not distinguish between sins and links murderers with fornicators. Should we turn a blind eye to murderers also? Just askin.

[moses2792796]

How about this: When separated from their context, everything in the Bible is purely fiction, but when seen as a whole, the Bible becomes a pure manifestation of truth.


I don't know if that's perfect, Moses, but it is something that I, at least, can live with.

Thanx and good job.


Huh?

True fiction?

Ok.



One word: metaphysics

The transcendent part of religion is what is important.

[Tsky]

How about this: When separated from their context, everything in the Bible is purely fiction, but when seen as a whole, the Bible becomes a pure manifestation of truth.


I don't know if that's perfect, Moses, but it is something that I, at least, can live with.

Thanx and good job.


Huh?

True fiction?

Ok.



One word: metaphysics

The transcendent part of religion is what is important.


Alright Moses. I officially crown you "King of Made Up Terms to Give Me Ground in an Argument When I Can't State Facts."

Wear your crown well, don't disappoint me. :worship:

[moses2792796]

Just because you have a small vocabulary doesn't mean other people are talking gibberish...

here's another word for you: dictionary

[Newscaster]

There are areas of the bible that are pure common sense. You dont have to be a rocket scientist to understand them or to agree with them and lack of adequate vocabulary is not a handicap. But we who read the bible and make pronouncements regarding the advice given, sometimes get ourselves all confused as I am right now. I couldnt locate the quote in earlier postings but someone said "We are taught to love God...." Well, thats fine and good but we are also taught that God is a fire breathing entity who will toss us into fire at the drop of a hat, who will punish us individualy or as a nation and sometimes for th slightest things. We are told that all sins carry the same weight, that jay walking is equally as bad as mass murder and that hell is just around the corner if we dont get our acts to gether. How does one come to love a God who seems to be sitting there just waiting eagerly for us to make either a single misstep or a whopper. If you stop and think for a moment, is that the kind of God you want?
My God is one who is NOT vengeful, angry or who deals in retaliation. My God is one who made us, who looks down on us fondly and watches as we attempt to follow the laws he set down and help when necessary. My God gives us the benefit of the doubt because we are NOT Godlike...because we are just plain folks trying to deal with the imperfections he built into us. I find it difficult to get all warm and fuzzy about a God who is just looking for a reason to attack us. I find it difficult to deal with all those demands he allegedly makes on us or to deal with his clergy who are the ones who actually create these demands and threaten hell if we dont follow. I want a God who loves me and my family and who sticks by us no matter what as I love and support my family, no questions asks. Today' leaders of organized religion, in their continuing quest for power, have created a limited kingdom for God to operate in and who make the rules.
The question of this thread is.....Is God's Knowledge Limited? I suspect not but I also see that we dont try to find out because we are too busy listening to the likes of Benny Hinn, Rev Hagee, Jan and Paul Crouch, Rod Parsley, Paula White and the platoons of other evangelists who seek the contents of our wallets. And they always have something they want to sell us or promises they are NOT empowered to make. Is God's Knowledge limited? No. But I also believe he is watching and taking notes about those who allow our own knowledge to become limited.

[moses2792796]

My favourite Christian, Fred Phelps, he manages to be less biblical than most atheists, eg, (journalist), 'Jesus didn't preach hate" (Phelps), "Yes he did! He taught us to hate FAGGOTS!" etc etc etc etc etc.

Good job converting people to atheism, then again I'm not sure he cares, I get the impression that he enjoys being a hateful, delusional moron.

[Wndrtch]

My favourite Christian, Fred Phelps, he manages to be less biblical than most atheists, eg, (journalist), 'Jesus didn't preach hate" (Phelps), "Yes he did! He taught us to hate FAGGOTS!" etc etc etc etc etc.

Good job converting people to atheism, then again I'm not sure he cares, I get the impression that he enjoys being a hateful, delusional moron.


No, he taught us to love the sinner, but hate the SIN. He also warned us (as individuals) to be guarded against the ways in which sin corrupts and ruins lives.

He taught often, by using "parables", which are anecdotal arguments. When he said that it would be better to cut off you hand, to avoid it sinning, he wasn't being literal, but was trying to drive a point home.

I don't know Mr. Phelps, but if he did say that, he obviously knows very little about Christ, and doesn’t care to learn either. He said that just to create some controversy, so someone would buy his crappy books (assuming he's even published anything). This guy's no better than Howard Sterns.

[moses2792796]

According the the Westboro Baptist church Fred Phelps is a prophet of God and has better knowledge of the scriptures than any other living human. Other fools think religion is about positivity and love, but Phelps knows better, he teaches that religion is about hate, his slogan for his church is "God hates fags". Heard of the funeral picketing?

[Easy90]

A theory that I hold as a distinct possibility (and would explain a great many things) is the wind-up clock theory. A God (not necessarily Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, whatever religion) or Gods created the universe and simply walked away.

From there we have folks creating and making up their own religions as time goes on. There is a distinct possibility that whatever god(s) are out there, they simply do not care about you.


Sounds like you're a classical "deist."

[Professor]

I've often thought, that God's knowledge is somewhat limited, as the Bible says that he "tests" us. Why test, if you already know all there is to know?


I think it is to test us a people for our own sakes, so we can see what we are made of. The concept is sort of like school, if you weren't challenged you wouldn't have become smarter and gotten better.

I have a personal story. When I was in high school I got very sick. Since I was raised Christian I believed in God at that point. One of my friends from my Christian school said God was testing me. After 2 1/2 years of being ill I was sick of it. I came to the conclusion that it is bullshit. Why am I being made miserable? For the amusement of a higher being? So God is sitting up there with bean dip and beer watching. For his own observation? So God is up there was a lab coat and a clip board. Why? There is no God. It is the kinder explaination, because if there is and he is all powerful and "testing" me, knowing I am so miserable, he's a bastard. That's it. There was a little more going on, but I left the church shortly after that.

[Wndrtch]

I've often thought, that God's knowledge is somewhat limited, as the Bible says that he "tests" us. Why test, if you already know all there is to know?


I think it is to test us a people for our own sakes, so we can see what we are made of. The concept is sort of like school, if you weren't challenged you wouldn't have become smarter and gotten better.

I have a personal story. When I was in high school I got very sick. Since I was raised Christian I believed in God at that point. One of my friends from my Christian school said God was testing me. After 2 1/2 years of being ill I was sick of it. I came to the conclusion that it is bullshit. Why am I being made miserable? For the amusement of a higher being? So God is sitting up there with bean dip and beer watching. For his own observation? So God is up there was a lab coat and a clip board. Why? There is no God. It is the kinder explaination, because if there is and he is all powerful and "testing" me, knowing I am so miserable, he's a bastard. That's it. There was a little more going on, but I left the church shortly after that.


Did you get better?

[Ralph]

"Great is our Lord, and of great power: his UNDERSTANDING is INFINITE." (Psalm 147:5). How can anyone place a limit to the knowledge of an entity that created the entirety of our existence, from the smallest mirco-organism, to all the wonders of the universe, and the physical laws that controls such? Thus, the real question is, "Do I as a free willed, free thinking individual concede to the professed knowledge of God, do I fear this knowledge or do I simply dismiss the very idea of deity as nonsense, in the conceit of my own greatness?" I believe the Psalms again best answers this question, "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom...." (Psalm 111:10). Indeed," It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the LIVING GOD." (Hebrew 10:31) Wisdom is not measured by how the world defines it, as God as said, "the wisdom of this world is but foolishness with God" ( 1 Cor 3:19). Thus, we cannot measure wisdom by what man concludes, but by what God instructs, in His INFINITE UNDERSTANDING of His creation. Ralph

[Tharagor]

"God's" knowledge is obviously limited. Free will can only exist if "God" does not know the result of all choices.

If "God" knows all choices then the "universe" must be ruled by predestination.

If "God" guarantees free will, then such a deity cannot predict all choices.

Ergo, "God's" knowledge is obviously limited.

[Elrathin]

Free will can only exist if "God" does not know the result of all choices.

I can't accept this statement by itself. If God does know all, I can follow your predestination bit, but there still can be free will.

For example, if God knows the choices you will make, but doesn't interfere, it is still free will because you are being allowed to still make the choices you want to. God just knows the outcome.

Now if you are saying that God intervenes at points in our lives, then yes, knowing the outcome and interfering are against the idea of free will.

[Osborn F. Enready]

In order for god to have knowledge, he would have to have reason, and operate using logic, which are two things not often put forth by any of the gods I have read about since in most cases of religion, the bulk of it is based on blind faith devoid of both.

Also, in order for there to be knowledge, there would have to be a god, which I have not seen yet.

Any tangible evidence for a god out there? Maybe, if you consider nature god, but as far as established religions go.... zilch.

So yes, assuming god were to exist, which there is no proof of, his knowledge would be limited by his rejection of reason, logic and his predisposition toward blind faith in mystical reality.

Lets interview the god in question, and see what they have to say? Maybe then I can be a "believer".

[Wndrtch]

In order for god to have knowledge, he would have to have reason, and operate using logic, which are two things not often put forth by any of the gods I have read about since in most cases of religion, the bulk of it is based on blind faith devoid of both.

Also, in order for there to be knowledge, there would have to be a god, which I have not seen yet.

Any tangible evidence for a god out there? Maybe, if you consider nature god, but as far as established religions go.... zilch.

So yes, assuming god were to exist, which there is no proof of, his knowledge would be limited by his rejection of reason, logic and his predisposition toward blind faith in mystical reality.

Lets interview the god in question, and see what they have to say? Maybe then I can be a "believer".


What if we were to assume for sake of agument, that God is a more evolved version of man ? I'm sure you believe there to be life beyond Earth, somewhere in the Universe. Many scientists believe there is life out there, due in part to statistical probability (if it happened here, it must happen elswhere). What if there is a species similiar to man with man's potential for learning, that has had 10,000 years longer to evolve and learn? That being, would be percieved a God by primitive man (Old Testimate timeframe), whould he not? WE tend to think of God as some kind of "energy" being, but perhaps He's just a highly advanced Humanoid.

I guess what I'm saying is, that instead of rejecting God based on a primative charactorizations, why don't we look at him with modern eyes, and re-charactorize Him?

[Ralph]

"God's" knowledge is obviously limited. Free will can only exist if "God" does not know the result of all choices.

If "God" knows all choices then the "universe" must be ruled by predestination.

If "God" guarantees free will, then such a deity cannot predict all choices.

Ergo, "God's" knowledge is obviously limited.


God "DOES NOT KNOW" what will happen in the future, predestination is the fact of God "PLANNING" with purpose what He wishes to bring about and then exercising His "unlimited" power to bring about what He has "predetermined" by planning for the future. Notice, and very carefully try "comprehending" the very words of God Himself as He "specifically" explains How He conducts the passage of what He has "PREDETERMINED". "Remember the former things of old (The Past): for I am God, and there is none else (no more gods, just the one true God), for I am God, and there is none like Me. DECLARING the end(future) from the beginning, and from ancient times (the past), THE THINGS THAT ARE "NOT" YET DONE(the future) (clearly saying some things He has declared has yet to come to pass), saying My counsel shall stand I WILL DO (make action) ALL WITH MY PLEASURE.(He will make these things happen, when He wants to bring them about)........YEA, I HAVE SPOKEN IT (PREDETERMINED IT), I WILL ALSO BRING IT TO PASS; I HAVE PURPOSED IT. I WILL ALSO "DO IT". (He does not say I know the future, but I will bring about a future just as I planned) (Isaiah 46:10-11)

Thus by saying that God somehow can look into an "imagined" future when the scriptures declare exactly how God brings about what He has "planned" is not exercising your God given capacity of "free will" to RIGHTLY DIVIDE THE WORD, as we are instructed to do ( 2 Tim 2:15). "STUDY (I would suggest that you try it, before you flippantly parrot the WRONG conclusions of others) to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." ERGO, you have wrongly concluded what is actually written concerning the subject of predestination. Proving that it is "YOUR" knowledge that is limited, NOT THE LIVING GODS' (R)

[PostmodernProphet]

In order for god to have knowledge, he would have to have reason, and operate using logic

why?......reason is used to deduce, to arrive at knowledge.....if knowledge is already held what need would he have of reason....as an alternative to using reason to deduce knowledge, he may simply HAVE knowledge......

[Wndrtch]

In order for god to have knowledge, he would have to have reason, and operate using logic

why?......reason is used to deduce, to arrive at knowledge.....if knowledge is already held what need would he have of reason....as an alternative to using reason to deduce knowledge, he may simply HAVE knowledge......


I always thought, knowledge was the product of observation.

[piratemonkey]

I always thought, knowledge was the product of observation.



God doesn't follow rules like that. God can just "have" knowledge.

Just like Fairies just "have" fairydust... the don't make it, silly! ;)

[PostmodernProphet]

I always thought, knowledge was the product of observation.



not inconsistent....if he sees all that has happened, is happening, and will happen......

[Deadshot]

Since we have free will, I don't believe that God knows exactly what is going to happen. I think God can be suprised, so to speak. He/She/It can see all possible outcomes, but WE pick which path we take, resulting in another slew of outcomes.

So, can God know and see all, yup. But if God sees 150 different possible outcomes for the next decision that I make, he doesn't know which one I'll choose, just the options opened up before me.

[Ralph]

The "biblical" definition of knowledge is as such, "Woe unto you, LAWYERS! for you have taken away the key of KNOWLEDGE: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in, ye hindered." (Luke 11:52). In Proverbs 24:3-4, Three main ideas are compared to a house; UNDERSTANDING is the foundation. KNOWLEDGE is the furnishings that one places inside the finished product. Thus, KNOWLEDGE is the comprehension of the facts as they are presented. It is described as filling our "minds" with pleasant and useful things. WISDOM is knowing when to apply the knowledge that we have been taught. God is the source of ALL knowledge ( l Samuel 2:3, Psalm 94:10). He teaches us knowledge through the word that He has chosen to reveal to us, if he does not reveal this knowledge then it is a secret, the knowledge that is possessed by God (Deut. 29:29). When we respect God we take on the proper attitude to learn from God in His revealed word. Thus, "Fear of the Lord is the beginning of all knowledge." (Proverbs 1:7)

Some people present an attitude of hating knowledge, by Biblical example we call these people "FOOLS". "How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and FOOLS hate knowledge? (Proverbs 1:22)

Knowledge must be learned before we actually need its use in any life situation. If we put it off and scorn its learning it will not be available when our lives may depend upon it. Thus, we are given a firm warning from God in addressing such, "Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof: (thus once again proving by Biblical example the "free will" that God has presented man). I also will laugh at your calmity; I will mock when your fear cometh; When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you. Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me: For that they hated knowledge, and did not "CHOOSE" (there is that Biblical example again, that some conclude does not exist) the fear of the Lord: They would (heed) none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof. Therefore shall they they eat of the fruit of their OWN WAY, and be filled with their own devices. (Proverbs 1: 24-31) (R)

[Ralph]

Since we have free will, I don't believe that God knows exactly what is going to happen. I think God can be suprised, so to speak. He/She/It can see all possible outcomes, but WE pick which path we take, resulting in another slew of outcomes.

So, can God know and see all, yup. But if God sees 150 different possible outcomes for the next decision that I make, he doesn't know which one I'll choose, just the options opened up before me.


Your are correct, again by Biblical example. Genesis 6:6----"And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth; and He grieved in His heart."
Have you never wondered how God could possibly be "grieved" in His heart, if He knew in advance that man would become so corrupt? Or how Jesus could "marvel" at the faith presented by the centurion? (Matthew 8:10), If every choice of man is predetermined, by what example could Jesus/God marvel in amazement at something that anyone could have done? (If He already knew that it was going to happen, there can be no SURPRISE) The only WILL that is predetermined is the "will of God" and His ability to bring about what He has purposed, despite the "free will" of man....after all, who is to stop the Living God from manipulating the physical world that He is responsible for creating? Man is free to choose as he will, still this will not stop the LORD from bringing about what HE has purposed, even before the beginning of time actual. He will bring about what He has purposed in His own good time and at His own will, at a time of His choosing, not man's choosing. (R)

[Tharagor]

Free will can only exist if "God" does not know the result of all choices.

I can't accept this statement by itself. If God does know all, I can follow your predestination bit, but there still can be free will.

For example, if God knows the choices you will make, but doesn't interfere, it is still free will because you are being allowed to still make the choices you want to. God just knows the outcome.

Now if you are saying that God intervenes at points in our lives, then yes, knowing the outcome and interfering are against the idea of free will.


You see, the thing is, if God knows the potential choices, but not the actual choice that you will make, then there is free will. However, this requires "God's" knowledge to be limited, because if he knows precisely which choice you will make, there is no possibility for choice. If the choice is a foregone conclusion, free will does not exist.

Interference is a non-issue.[hr]

"God's" knowledge is obviously limited. Free will can only exist if "God" does not know the result of all choices.

If "God" knows all choices then the "universe" must be ruled by predestination.

If "God" guarantees free will, then such a deity cannot predict all choices.

Ergo, "God's" knowledge is obviously limited.


God "DOES NOT KNOW" what will happen in the future, predestination is the fact of God "PLANNING" with purpose what He wishes to bring about and then exercising His "unlimited" power to bring about what He has "predetermined" by planning for the future. Notice, and very carefully try "comprehending" the very words of God Himself as He "specifically" explains How He conducts the passage of what He has "PREDETERMINED". "Remember the former things of old (The Past): for I am God, and there is none else (no more gods, just the one true God), for I am God, and there is none like Me. DECLARING the end(future) from the beginning, and from ancient times (the past), THE THINGS THAT ARE "NOT" YET DONE(the future) (clearly saying some things He has declared has yet to come to pass), saying My counsel shall stand I WILL DO (make action) ALL WITH MY PLEASURE.(He will make these things happen, when He wants to bring them about)........YEA, I HAVE SPOKEN IT (PREDETERMINED IT), I WILL ALSO BRING IT TO PASS; I HAVE PURPOSED IT. I WILL ALSO "DO IT". (He does not say I know the future, but I will bring about a future just as I planned) (Isaiah 46:10-11)

Thus by saying that God somehow can look into an "imagined" future when the scriptures declare exactly how God brings about what He has "planned" is not exercising your God given capacity of "free will" to RIGHTLY DIVIDE THE WORD, as we are instructed to do ( 2 Tim 2:15). "STUDY (I would suggest that you try it, before you flippantly parrot the WRONG conclusions of others) to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." ERGO, you have wrongly concluded what is actually written concerning the subject of predestination. Proving that it is "YOUR" knowledge that is limited, NOT THE LIVING GODS' (R)


Ralph, refer to the above.

[Ralph]

Free will can only exist if "God" does not know the result of all choices.

I can't accept this statement by itself. If God does know all, I can follow your predestination bit, but there still can be free will.

For example, if God knows the choices you will make, but doesn't interfere, it is still free will because you are being allowed to still make the choices you want to. God just knows the outcome.

Now if you are saying that God intervenes at points in our lives, then yes, knowing the outcome and interfering are against the idea of free will.


You see, the thing is, if God knows the potential choices, but not the actual choice that you will make, then there is free will. However, this requires "God's" knowledge to be limited, because if he knows precisely which choice you will make, there is no possibility for choice. If the choice is a foregone conclusion, free will does not exist.

Interference is a non-issue.[hr]

"God's" knowledge is obviously limited. Free will can only exist if "God" does not know the result of all choices.

If "God" knows all choices then the "universe" must be ruled by predestination.

If "God" guarantees free will, then such a deity cannot predict all choices.

Ergo, "God's" knowledge is obviously limited.


God "DOES NOT KNOW" what will happen in the future, predestination is the fact of God "PLANNING" with purpose what He wishes to bring about and then exercising His "unlimited" power to bring about what He has "predetermined" by planning for the future. Notice, and very carefully try "comprehending" the very words of God Himself as He "specifically" explains How He conducts the passage of what He has "PREDETERMINED". "Remember the former things of old (The Past): for I am God, and there is none else (no more gods, just the one true God), for I am God, and there is none like Me. DECLARING the end(future) from the beginning, and from ancient times (the past), THE THINGS THAT ARE "NOT" YET DONE(the future) (clearly saying some things He has declared has yet to come to pass), saying My counsel shall stand I WILL DO (make action) ALL WITH MY PLEASURE.(He will make these things happen, when He wants to bring them about)........YEA, I HAVE SPOKEN IT (PREDETERMINED IT), I WILL ALSO BRING IT TO PASS; I HAVE PURPOSED IT. I WILL ALSO "DO IT". (He does not say I know the future, but I will bring about a future just as I planned) (Isaiah 46:10-11)

Thus by saying that God somehow can look into an "imagined" future when the scriptures declare exactly how God brings about what He has "planned" is not exercising your God given capacity of "free will" to RIGHTLY DIVIDE THE WORD, as we are instructed to do ( 2 Tim 2:15). "STUDY (I would suggest that you try it, before you flippantly parrot the WRONG conclusions of others) to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." ERGO, you have wrongly concluded what is actually written concerning the subject of predestination. Proving that it is "YOUR" knowledge that is limited, NOT THE LIVING GODS' (R)


Ralph, refer to the above.


God's knowledge has no limits, as per the physical universe that He created. The limit that "YOU" are trying to assign is but "imagined", as explained. There is "no" future that co-exists along side the present. It is an impossibility of the physical nature of the universe. God's knowledge is not limited by something that only exists in the minds of people....the future. As also stated, the proven "fact" of "free will" makes an exact knowledge of any future event impossible to know, as free will indeed could change any "exact" occurrence from existing. Thus, just as stated by God, He predestines by "manipulation" not "prognostication" of something that is very "fluid"...i.e., the FUTURE, which can change by "free will" actions of man. But, this fact, DOES NOT stop God from bringing about what He has "purposed", by manipulating the "present"...at His point of choosing. When the time comes for his predestined purposes to occur, He makes them happen in the present, of that time. God is eternal. (Ps. 93:1-2, Ps. 90:2) What? Is He going to die waiting for the precise time to bring about what He has purposed to happen? When He chooses the "right" time, He makes it happen. It's simple to comprehend. That is why manipulation of time actual is only theorized in "science fiction", because it cannot breach the "physical laws" that God has implemented. "He hath made every thing beautiful IN HIS TIME: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from beginning to the end." (Ecclesiastes 3:11) Thus, just as stated by God (Deut. 29:29), unless God "specifically" reveals what his intentions are, it is a secret, only known by God, not men. (R)

[Tharagor]

God's knowledge has no limits, as per the physical universe that He created. The limit that "YOU" are trying to assign is but "imagined", as explained. There is "no" future that co-exists along side the present. It is an impossibility of the physical nature of the universe. God's knowledge is not limited by something that only exists in the minds of people....the future. As also stated, the proven "fact" of "free will" makes an exact knowledge of any future event impossible to know, as free will indeed could change any "exact" occurrence from existing. Thus, just as stated by God, He predestines by "manipulation" not "prognostication" of something that is very "fluid"...i.e., the FUTURE, which can change by "free will" actions of man. But, this fact, DOES NOT stop God from bringing about what He as "purposed", by manipulating the "present"...at His point of choosing. When the time comes for his predestined purposes to occur, He makes them happen in the present, of that time. It's simple to comprehend. That is why manipulation of time actual is only theorized in "science fiction", because it cannot breach the "physical laws" that God as implemented. (R)


It is? Pray tell, how? My point is simple. Free choice can only exist if the result of the choice cannot be known precisely, before the choice is made. Therefore, if free will exists, "God" cannot know the choice because it has not happened yet.

[Ralph]

God's knowledge has no limits, as per the physical universe that He created. The limit that "YOU" are trying to assign is but "imagined", as explained. There is "no" future that co-exists along side the present. It is an impossibility of the physical nature of the universe. God's knowledge is not limited by something that only exists in the minds of people....the future. As also stated, the proven "fact" of "free will" makes an exact knowledge of any future event impossible to know, as free will indeed could change any "exact" occurrence from existing. Thus, just as stated by God, He predestines by "manipulation" not "prognostication" of something that is very "fluid"...i.e., the FUTURE, which can change by "free will" actions of man. But, this fact, DOES NOT stop God from bringing about what He as "purposed", by manipulating the "present"...at His point of choosing. When the time comes for his predestined purposes to occur, He makes them happen in the present, of that time. It's simple to comprehend. That is why manipulation of time actual is only theorized in "science fiction", because it cannot breach the "physical laws" that God as implemented. (R)


It is? Pray tell, how? My point is simple. Free choice can only exist if the result of the choice cannot be known precisely, before the choice is made. Therefore, if free will exists, "God" cannot know the choice because it has not happened yet.


Please present the book, chapter and verse where God has declared to know any "precise detailed" future event. In fact I have presented passages of scripture that point to the fact that God does not know precisely, the future. Thus, you have no "POINT" in "proving" that God's knowledge is limited. Knowledge CAN NOT be limited by something that does not yet exist...the future. Thus, man's "free will" choices places limits on the knowledge of God....HOW? Knowledge of future events does not exist, for the simple physical reason, they have not occurred yet. But this DOES NOT STOP GOD from predetermining any specific event in the future. No matter what man "decides" by action of his free will, God simply manipulates the then "current" time to bring about what He has purposed from the past. When and only when He so chooses. An example of such. God predestined that Jesus would be betrayed by a false friend. He simply manipulated the present time in which Jesus existed to bring about this occurrence that He foretold. He(God) knew, exactly the mindset of JUDAS, that he was selfish, self centered, loved power, and was "emotionally" unstable and could commit suicide at a point in the future. God knows the mind of man by the Spirit of man that rests inside him, he then uses this "knowledge" to manipulate events of the present, when he so chooses. Again, this does not place limits upon man's free will choices, nor does it place limits upon God's knowledge. Another event that is predetermined is the end of the ages, the end of the world. When God deems the time right, He will bring about the circumstances that will make it happen, again at His choosing, with no one knowing when.

It seems that you are forgetting a fundamental fact in the nature of man, he is made in the image of God. It is a spiritual image, and brings along with it the free will choices that make man the master of his/her own fate. As demonstrated by scripture, "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good from evil...." (Genesis 3:22). God does not "predetermine" each man's fate, man chooses by free will, his own fate. God at times manipulates man to bring about what He has purposed, but this pl