Omniscient the right term or does there need to be another?

[nobspeople]

In a recent, 'hot topic', otseng said: "I have no problem with God being omniscient, the only thing I've mentioned is God not being omnipotent." and can be seen here if interested (or you somehow missed it)
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38657&start=120

Notice the bolded section.
Otseng believes, by their own admission, god isn't all powerful. They outline their reasoning based on at least one specific biblical passages about god not being able to lie, but they say it's, basically, 'OK with them' that god is all knowing.

But the bible does seem to indicate god isn't all knowing as well. Or does it?
From the genesis story:
[3:9] But the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?" - this seems to indicate god didn't know where Adam was - why else would be call to the man? Surely, he could have just went to where he'd know Adam was?
[3:11] He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?"
Again, surely god would know. It could be he wanted Adam to admit it, as god does seem to play games with humanity throughout the bible and seems to love riddles (see here: https://www.gotquestions.org/riddles-in-the-Bible.html). This would be much akin to the 'god doesn't need us to tithe, we need to tithe' reasoning (lucky for god's ledger it seems!).
[3:13] Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this that you have done?" See above reasoning and potential response.
Genesis 3:15 and the following few verses seem to indicate god was angry (or at least annoyed) and kicked them out of the garden.

Now if god is omniscient, this means knowing everything, past, present and future. He would have know where everyone was, what they did, why they did it (and that they would do it), and on and on. There's literally no legitimate need to ask questions when you know the answers. I don't see any reason why Adam or Eve, literally being with god, they'd think 'Well, he won't know we ate it! We'll just act like everything copasetic!"
Some would counter that 'parents do this to their children'. But the whole god/parent comparison isn't legitimate as parents aren't god in any way. Comparing parents and god are like comparing apples to an apple tree.

This is a very amateur look at the 'all knowing' issue, for sure. But when one uses the bible and quotes to create their own paradigm, it's quite easy to do.

Now then, it's quite possible that god is knows all, except for what it chooses not to know. If that's the case, then the term omniscient isn't apt at all.

For discussion: Is the omniscient term completely correct when describing god, or should there be another term to use? Or is it simply god isn't all knowing?

[JehovahsWitness]

'Where were you when I created everything?' is of course rhetorical. God knows as well as do where he was; nowhere and we know the point of that 'question'.

So, correct me if I'm wrong (unlike some in this thread) your position is that the God of the bible is depicted on occassion asking rhetorical questions ie questions for which he is perfectly aware of the answer? If so, what would you say to someone that holds that it would be impossible for an omniscient God to employ such a linguistic tool?







RELATED POSTS


How can a perfect God "regret"?
viewtopic.php?p=1014669#p1014669

Does God "changing his mind" mean that he ' He failed to get it right the first time'?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 44#p895644

[JehovahsWitness]

So, what didn't the god of Abraham know about the future?

I dont think anyone can say for sure; it seems evident the God of the bible is depicted as being selective in the use of his powers of foreknowledge.




JW

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

FREE WILL, OMNISCIENCE and ...SELECTIVE FOREKNOWLEDGE

[TRANSPONDER]

'Where were you when I created everything?' is of course rhetorical. God knows as well as do where he was; nowhere and we know the point of that 'question'.

So, correct me if I'm wrong (unlike some in this thread) your position is that the God of the bible is depicted on occasion asking rhetorical questions ie questions for which he is perfectly aware of the answer? If so, what would you say to someone that holds that it would be impossible for an omniscient God to employ such a linguistic tool?

I'd say it didn't matter to me either way. My argument is that rhetorical question is by any means always the explanation for God apparently not knowing what was happening. What is Your explanation for God letting things happen that he later had to put right or doing things he later 'repented' of?

(cue: 'God knows best; it's all part of the Plan')

[TRANSPONDER]

erratum - Damn I should have said 'rhetorical question is Not by any means..'

So, what didn't the god of Abraham know about the future?

I don't think anyone can say for sure; it seems evident the God of the bible is depicted as being selective in the use of his powers of foreknowledge.




JW

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

FREE WILL, OMNISCIENCE and ...SELECTIVE FOREKNOWLEDGE

That is indeed the explanation that one is forced to (other than it is all the work of men) in the case of Jesus. That is, he is keeping Some knowledge from Jesus or his changing his mind (in the case of the Canaanite (1) woman) looks more like not knowing that he was going to do so beforehand. God doing this to himself is harder to understand. In fact I can't imagine how God could keep knowledge from himself. If the idea is to suggest that he knew everything but still acted as though he didn't, that makes no sense and is surely inadequate as an explanation. As I say above, that it is all the work (and invention) of men explains it far better, and trying to maintain Bible credibility with efforts at apologetics explanation to make it work is surely faith based, not based on a fair view of the internal evidence.

(1) the term is synonymous with Syrio - phoenecian and effectively means living in the former Phonecian area of Tyre and Byblos, which was one of the states and kingdoms of Canaan before the Bronze age collapse and appears to be one of the few that managed to survive. In fact Tyrian silver was the approved shekel for ritual use in the Jerusalem temple, because of its' purity.

[JehovahsWitness]

... I can't imagine how God could keep knowledge from himself.

That may be true but your not being able to fathom how something can be done would not negate an omnipotent God being able to do anything he so wishes; that is unless there is another meaning to omnipotent you have in mind. In short, your not knowing how something is done doesnt mean it cannot be.




RELATED POSTS

Is God SELECTIVE in his use of his powers of foreknowledge?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 14#p848314

How can an OMNISCIENT God not know something?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 98#p894598

How can a perfect God "regret"?
viewtopic.php?p=1014669#p1014669

Does God "changing his mind" mean that he ' He failed to get it right the first time'?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 44#p895644

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

FREE WILL, OMNISCIENCE and ...SELECTIVE FOREKNOWLEDGE

[nobspeople]

... I can't imagine how God could keep knowledge from himself.

That may be true but your not being able to fathom how something can be done would not negate an omnipotent God being able to do anything he so wishes; that is unless there is another meaning to omnipotent you have in mind. In short, your not knkwing how something is done doesnt mean it cannot be.

I didn't read it that TP was saying it can't be done. Just that it doesn't make a lot of sense to them. Though I could have mis-read; I haven't been wrong yet this week so it's about time

[Tcg]

In fact I can't imagine how God could keep knowledge from himself.

Exactly. God would have to know what he chose not to know before he chose not to know it with the result that he would of course know what he didn't know. It is an absurdity, but not the only one needed to explain a God that can't possibly add up logically..


Tcg

[Miles]

[Replying to Miles in post #15]

This approach seems deeply problematic since it requires God to withhold grace, or even actively punish someone, before that person has done anything wrong.

Take King Saul as an example. God knew that Saul would turn away from Him. So God could have withheld His grace and never allowed Saul to become king in the first place. But then Saul would never have been king to have the opportunity to follow God or to turn away from God. For this to become a reality God had to give Saul the opportunity to succeed or to fail, even knowing the final outcome. Otherwise God was acting unjustly be treating someone negatively who not in fact done anything wrong.

Or take the flood. God could have refrained from creating people who would do evil. But that in effect punished people for doing evil before they actually did anything evil. They need the opportunity to do evil before God could respond to that. Responding to something before it happened in inherently contradictory.

Spin it any way you wish, but the trouble is,when it comes down to the finish line god recognizes he made a mistake. A result he failed to foresee. And failing to foresee = a lack of omniscience.


.

[TRANSPONDER]

... I can't imagine how God could keep knowledge from himself.

That may be true but your not being able to fathom how something can be done would not negate an omnipotent God being able to do anything he so wishes; that is unless there is another meaning to omnipotent you have in mind. In short, your not knkwing how something is done doesnt mean it cannot be.




RELATED POSTS

Is God SELECTIVE in his use of his powers of foreknowledge?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 14#p848314

How can an OMNISCIENT God not know something?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 98#p894598

How can a perfect God "regret"? [this post]
viewtopic.php?p=1014669#p1014669

Does God "changing his mind" mean that he ' He failed to get it right the first time'?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 44#p895644

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

FREE WILL, OMNISCIENCE and ...SELECTIVE FOREKNOWLEDGE

I thought we'd end up here. Essentially, God knows best'. I cannot think of any other explanation other than the plain and obvious one (man - made myth) and neither can you or you'd do better than this, so the only apologetic you have is effectively 'God knows what he is doing'. .

Well that was to be expected. Bible -believers never say 'coo you must be right. I'd better start having doubts and questions', but that doesn't matter. What does matter is that you have come up with nothing but a Faith-claim that the Bible is right and God knows what He is doing. That isn't going to move atheists other than to laughter and I venture to hope also on the part of the Right Hon peanut gallery, browsers and lurkers who I hope are thinking about this exchange.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to Miles in post #15]

This approach seems deeply problematic since it requires God to withhold grace, or even actively punish someone, before that person has done anything wrong.

Take King Saul as an example. God knew that Saul would turn away from Him. So God could have withheld His grace and never allowed Saul to become king in the first place. But then Saul would never have been king to have the opportunity to follow God or to turn away from God. For this to become a reality God had to give Saul the opportunity to succeed or to fail, even knowing the final outcome. Otherwise God was acting unjustly be treating someone negatively who not in fact done anything wrong.

Or take the flood. God could have refrained from creating people who would do evil. But that in effect punished people for doing evil before they actually did anything evil. They need the opportunity to do evil before God could respond to that. Responding to something before it happened in inherently contradictory.

Spin it any way you wish, but the trouble is,when it comes down to the finish line god recognizes he made a mistake. A result he failed to foresee. And failing to foresee = a lack of omniscience.


.

Bjs' apologetic makes zero sense to me. A god who knows everything would have his plan for all of us, and he didn't have to make Saul a king just to give him an opportunity to succeed, fail, sin or not, turn to God or not. But if he's going to have a king over His People, why choose one who fails?Ok I already know the argument - this was the best God could do and He has His Plan. That's why I choose tighter examples that make far less sense as part of God's plan, like the Flood scenario and for that matter serious gospel contradictions. God arranged for the Bible to look like it was full of holes to test people's Faith? Well, people who have that will (maybe) believe it and good luck Anyone who thinks that evidence and logical reasoning count for anything must doubt; and for God to punish people who think straight? That can't be right.