omnipotence and omniscience

[FallingPianos]

Can omniscient God, who
Knows the future, find
The omnipotence to
Change His future mind?

- Karen Owens

 

[kal-el]

Here is the definition of omniscient:

having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.

Now if you have complete knowledge of every single situation, and consequence, there would be no need to change your mind, because changing your mind presupposes that you expect a different outcome. But when we read the bible, we don't see an omniscient diety. Here's 1 of many examples:

Exodus 32:7-14

Then the LORD said to Moses, "Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. 8 They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, 'These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.'

9 "I have seen these people," the LORD said to Moses, "and they are a stiff-necked people. 10 Now leave me alone so that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them. Then I will make you into a great nation." 11 But Moses sought the favor of the LORD his God. "O LORD," he said, "why should your anger burn against your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'It was with evil intent that he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains and to wipe them off the face of the earth'? Turn from your fierce anger; relent and do not bring disaster on your people. 13 Remember your servants Abraham, Isaac and Israel, to whom you swore by your own self: 'I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and I will give your descendants all this land I promised them, and it will be their inheritance forever.' " 14 Then the LORD relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened.

Basically, God's hitman Moses is saying STFU GOd, you're wrong.

Here is the defintion of omnipotent:

having very great or unlimited authority or power.

Once again, when reading the bible, we don't encounter an all-powerful being. Instead we find a diety who is clumsy, doesn't think things through, throws all sorts of coniption fits, not to mention who must be allergic to iron.

 

[MrFungus420]

not to mention who must be allergic to iron.

Allergic to iron?

You lost me on that one...'Splain, please...

 

[kal-el]

Allergic to iron?

You lost me on that one...'Splain, please...

Hey MrFungus. Yea, what I meant by that is iron must be like God's kryptonite. As there's a certain passage in the bible, well I have provided it:

Judges 1:19

The LORD was with the men of Judah. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had iron chariots.

 

[MrFungus420]

LOL...Thanks...

 

[Gibberish]

Judges 1:19

I think the bible corrupted and purely a work of man, but I like to be fair and not to take passages out of context or add my own opinions into them.

1. Where does it say that god was physically with the men and not just rhetorically with them as is the meaning through the majority of the bible?
2. Where does it say that is was the god, and not the men, who had a problem fighting men on iron chariots?

 

[Thelost1]

Well, considering that it's a hoy book, i would think that it would be like David, y'know, the "spirit of the lord" or something.

What it means to me is that the "Men of Judah" were not technoligically advanced to a point at which they could defeat the hill people.

 

[kal-el]

1. Where does it say that god was physically with the men and not just rhetorically with them as is the meaning through the majority of the bible?

Well, I hope you cannot deny that God was fairly the active diety throughout the majority of the OT. I mean making a sun stand still so an army could fight, sending plagues, parting seas, using a hailstorm as a weapon in a battle, and performing all kinds of miracles so the Israelites could win battles. I'm curious, where do you get this rhetorical "The Lord was with them" in the majority of the bible? I have heard that God threw the fight on purpose because he was tring to get Israel "battle ready" or something like that.

2. Where does it say that is was the god, and not the men, who had a problem fighting men on iron chariots?

It doesn't, but if it was just the men, it wouldn't say "The Lord was with the men of Judah."

 

[Rev.]

Here is the definition of omniscient:

having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.

Now if you have complete knowledge of every single situation, and consequence, there would be no need to change your mind, because changing your mind presupposes that you expect a different outcome. But when we read the bible, we don't see an omniscient diety.

If you believe the future is open, there is no conflict.

 

[Gibberish]

Well, I hope you cannot deny that God was fairly the active diety throughout the majority of the OT. I mean making a sun stand still so an army could fight, sending plagues, parting seas, using a hailstorm as a weapon in a battle, and performing all kinds of miracles so the Israelites could win battles. I'm curious, where do you get this rhetorical "The Lord was with them" in the majority of the bible? I have heard that God threw the fight on purpose because he was tring to get Israel "battle ready" or something like that.

We can't argue this because my belief is these people were not talking to God but wrote the same as people today say they "talked to God". I don't take the bible literal and think there is great misinterpretation.

It doesn't, but if it was just the men, it wouldn't say "The Lord was with the men of Judah."

Is God with us in Iraq because people say that God is blessing us and with our troops?

 

[jennyb]

in what instance would you want God to change Its mind? if God is all knowing, then It is already figured out and done.
A human saying God should change Its mind...is saying the human knows better.

 

[kal-el]

We can't argue this because my belief is these people were not talking to God but wrote the same as people today say they "talked to God". I don't take the bible literal and think there is great misinterpretation./B]

So basically what you are saying here is that you pick and choose what you wish to take as "literal", and what not, just to solidify your faith? Let me ask you, do you beleive in Satan? Do you believe that Jonah got swallowed by a whale? How far in his teaching/ministry do you actually think Jesus would have gotten if he began every sermon saying, "Ok people, the stories in the OT you believe to be true are actually not real, they are meant to teach a moral lesson?"

Matthew 12:40

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Notice Jesus never says, "I wish to make a moral point". He speaks with great passion, as if it's a fact. My point is if you don't see the OT as literal, as Jesus apparently did, how can you call yourself an adherent to Christ?

Is God with us in Iraq because people say that God is blessing us and with our troops?

That's way different. Remember, the OT spanned thousands of years, in it God was active. Moses got a glimpse of God, and Jacob had a brawl with the guy. The stories in the OT suggest that God was fine with manifesting physically. But nobody has any recorded evidence of any type of encounter with God in the past 2,000 years. So, in conclusion, if someone says, "God is with our troops" everybody knows it's figurative.

 

[kal-el]

If you believe the future is open, there is no conflict.

To our point of view, the future is very well open. The conflict arises when there is an omniscient diety that knows exactly how the future will unravel. Any choice we make other than what it has plannned out for us will prove it not to be omniscient.

 

[Ivan The Terrible]

To our point of view, the future is very well open. The conflict arises when there is an omniscient diety that knows exactly how the future will unravel. Any choice we make other than what it has plannned out for us will prove it not to be omniscient.

Have you ever heard that G-d is ONE? Do you understand the ONEness of G-d?

 

[Gibberish]

So basically what you are saying here is that you pick and choose what you wish to take as "literal", and what not, just to solidify your faith? Let me ask you, do you beleive in Satan? Do you believe that Jonah got swallowed by a whale? How far in his teaching/ministry do you actually think Jesus would have gotten if he began every sermon saying, "Ok people, the stories in the OT you believe to be true are actually not real, they are meant to teach a moral lesson?"

What have I picked and choosen? No I don't believe in Satan. Jonah might have ben swallowed by a whale but I highly doubt he lived if he was.

Notice Jesus never says, "I wish to make a moral point". He speaks with great passion, as if it's a fact. My point is if you don't see the OT as literal, as Jesus apparently did, how can you call yourself an adherent to Christ?

I don't. It's your assumption that I call myself such. Which is why I said this whole discussion is pointless. I find the bible to be manipulated by man and they took the freedom and peace that Jesus taught and made a business out of it.

That's way different. Remember, the OT spanned thousands of years, in it God was active. Moses got a glimpse of God, and Jacob had a brawl with the guy. The stories in the OT suggest that God was fine with manifesting physically. But nobody has any recorded evidence of any type of encounter with God in the past 2,000 years. So, in conclusion, if someone says, "God is with our troops" everybody knows it's figurative.

No one knows that that these people in the OT had direct interaction with God either. What will people think in 4000 CE when they read that in 2006 "God was with our soliders in Iraq", or that a group of Isalmist were waging a war against the Christian God? Does that mean they were actually battling God itself?

 

[kal-el]

Have you ever heard that G-d is ONE? Do you understand the ONEness of G-d?

Ivan, I really don't understand what the doctrine of the trinity has to do with this discussion?

 

[Ivan The Terrible]

Ivan, I really don't understand what the doctrine of the trinity has to do with this discussion?

I'll take that as a no. :mrgreen: To be clear I have to say when I say "ONEness of G-d" I mean it in the Jewish since not the Christan version. Also the ONEness of G-d is much more profound than the natrue of G-d. It shapes all that is! That is how it connects to your discussion. Shall I continue?

 

[kal-el]

What have I picked and choosen?

I present my case here:

No I don't believe in Satan.

---

Jonah might have ben swallowed by a whale but I highly doubt he lived if he was.

I don't. It's your assumption that I call myself such.

Well, if you're not a christian, I apologize. It's just that you seemed to be arguing on the basis that the bible has validity, and it backs up your assertions.

I find the bible to be manipulated by man and they took the freedom and peace that Jesus taught and made a business out of it.

I agree with most of that, execept the part about it only being manipulated by man. I think it was totally assembled, concocted, and planned out ny man. I think this "God" was sketched in the image of man.

No one knows that that these people in the OT had direct interaction with God either. What will people think in 4000 CE when they read that in 2006 "God was with our soliders in Iraq", or that a group of Isalmist were waging a war against the Christian God? Does that mean they were actually battling God itself?

I see what you are saying, but in all actuality, God had a history of aiding the Israelites out of Egypt, and in their battles. This was going on for quite some time. Why would he make a cameo appearance and be with our troops in Iraq? I would think he would have many, many questions to answer if he mysteriously showed up for one war, he would have to start by explaining his 2,000 year hiatus.

 

[kal-el]

I'll take that as a no. :mrgreen: To be clear I have to say when I say "ONEness of G-d" I mean it in the Jewish since not the Christan version. Also the ONEness of G-d is much more profound than the natrue of G-d. It shapes all that is! That is how it connects to your discussion. Shall I continue?

Sure, I wish to see how a word that is not even utilized in scriputre, applies to the discussion of omnipotence or omniscience.

 

[Gibberish]

I agree with most of that, execept the part about it only being manipulated by man. I think it was totally assembled, concocted, and planned out ny man. I think this "God" was sketched in the image of man.

I believe most of the stories happend to an extent but were exaggerated. I also believe that the NT captures what Jesus taught but put a belief system around him to create a business.

but in all actuality, God had a history of aiding the Israelites out of Egypt, and in their battles. This was going on for quite some time.

According to the man who wrote those books. I wonder what kind of education he had and what the heat does to a man walking in the desert for 3 months.

You can be quite confusing at times, you say the bible is false but then qoute it as if what it says is fact.

Why would he make a cameo appearance and be with our troops in Iraq? I would think he would have many, many questions to answer if he mysteriously showed up for one war, he would have to start by explaining his 2,000 year hiatus.

That would be because he never actually made any appearances, only people who "felt" God with them but wrote as if God was really with them. The same way that people say "God is with you" or "God is with me” or "God is helping me". God is never physically with these people or can they prove is spiritually with them.

 

[Rev.]

Sure, I wish to see how a word that is not even utilized in scriputre, applies to the discussion of omnipotence or omniscience.

Kal-el, you are too funny!!!

You want Ivan to justify using a word not found in the Bible when you've used TWO!!??? :rofl

The kicker is, he never used it...YOU did!! :rofl

 

[Jerry]

Can omniscient God, who
Knows the future, find
The omnipotence to
Change His future mind?

- Karen Owens

What a fallacious question.

God can only do what is logically possible. God can do everything which is logically possible, but He can only do what is logically possible.

Numbers 23:19;

God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

When in possession of all knowledge ever, to change your mind is to bear false witness to yourself, which is a sin, and God can not sin.

It is not logically possible for an omniscient being to change it's mind. Given that God is omniscient; He can not change his mind. I mean, change His mind to what? He's already omniscient. There's nothing left for Him to change His mind to.

This is like asking: "Can God, being omnipotent, cease to exist?
If God can cease to exist, then that limits His power as He would have none while not existing; and if God can not cease to exist, then His lack of ability to self terminate is a limitation to His power.

Either way, God is not omnipotent."

Well of coarse this question is also fallacious because it demands that God do something which is not logically possible. It's like demanding that God create a 1 sided triangle or a perfect circle with 5 corners. It's not logically possible.

Or how about: "Can God create a rock so heavy He can't lift it?
Either He can create the rock and not be able to lift it, thus He is not omnipotent, or He can not create the rock and is thus, not omnipotent.

Either way, God is not omnipotent."

Here also the question demands of God something which is not logically possible, as everything God creates He can move.

"Can God lie?"
You get the idea.

 

[Jerry]

Sure, I wish to see how a word that is not even utilized in scriputre, applies to the discussion of omnipotence or omniscience.

Kal-el, you are too funny!!!
You want Ivan to justify using a word not found in the Bible when you've used TWO!!??? :rofl

The kicker is, he never used it...YOU did!! :rofl

The last time I saw someone call out Kal-el about a word not being in the bible, Kal-el showed them 4 entries for it.

Well lets see if Rev. has egg on his face....

.....do dee do dee do.....File/New/Window....Favorites/"Look It Up"/"Scripture"/BibleGatway.com....cut-and-paste "omnipotence".........and we get "Sorry. No results found for "omnipotence" in Keyword Search"......cute-and-paste "omniscience"........wait on my slow azz computer........Don't buy Norton, guys, that CCAPP program realy slowes your michine down.........I want Lego's for Christmas, btw............and again we get "Sorry. No results found for "omniscience" in Keyword Search".

So far as I can tell, Rev., your in the clear.

 

[kal-el]

You can be quite confusing at times, you say the bible is false but then qoute it as if what it says is fact.

Of course I don't adhere to any of the bible, or view it as any more than a weekly world news paper, but when you are debating Christians, I love using the bible against them. Keep your enemies close, keep your friends closer.

 

[kal-el]

Kal-el, you are too funny!!!

You want Ivan to justify using a word not found in the Bible when you've used TWO!!??? :rofl

The kicker is, he never used it...YOU did!! :rofl

Well, let's take a looksie at these definitions, shall we?

Omnipotent:
1.almighty or infinite in power, as God.
2. having very great or unlimited authority or power.
–noun 3. an omnipotent being.
4. the Omnipotent, God.



Now in the bible, we find these passages:

Psalms 147:5

And Jesus himself claims God can do anything:
Luke 1:37
Matthew 19:26

The bible hammers home this point when God's power is emphasized during Jesus' death on the cross.
1 Corinthians 1:17-18
1 Corinthians 1:23-24

And his power is stressed in the continuing ministry of the church:
Ephesians 3:20

Lastly, God's power is talked about in his management of the universe:
Psalms 65:6
Jeremiah 32:17

Now, let's bring up that good ole dictionary once more shall we?

Omniscient:
1.having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.
–noun 2. an omniscient being.
3. the Omniscient, God.


The bible goes to great lenghts to show that God does indeed have perfect fore and after knowledge:

Psalms 147:5
Psalms 139:1-6
Matthew 6:4
Matthew 6:8

So, you are correct, the terms "omnipotence" and "omniscience" are not used in biblical text; however it clearly ephasizes that God has these characteristics. Are the actual words that important? I mean, I'm sure if the bible writer's had these words available at the time, they without a doubt would have included them. So, rather then saying "God has complete foreknowledge and knows the consequences of all our actions", we can just say he's omniscient. And instead of saying "there's nothing he cannot do" we can just say he's omnipotent. Not that hard to comprehend really. Makes it a hell of alot easier to define this God.