• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is it possible for you to do anything that God did not already know you would do?

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
It's like saying wouldn't a god who knows everything know what it's like to know absolutely nothing?

I don't see this as an intellectually honest question, but a vapid philosophical word game. I don't see an infinite being as being not bound by logic. You may disagree with this, but, trust me, I understand what you're saying, and you're not telling me anything I haven't pondered on countless times before reaching my conclusions.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
:yes:
It's like saying wouldn't a god who knows everything know what it's like to know absolutely nothing?

I don't see this as an intellectually honest question, but a vapid philosophical word game. I don't see an infinite being as being not bound by logic. You may disagree with this, but, trust me, I understand what you're saying, and you're not telling me anything I haven't pondered on countless times before reaching my conclusions.
The 'God' that is omniscience must necessarily know 'absolutely nothing' as well.

There is no requirement for it to make logical sense. To say that it must is to limit the whole concept (further).
 

Troublemane

Well-Known Member
my answer is simple....God knows all and causes all, because God is all. everything/everyone is part of the divine being because existence IS God, so everything which happens is caused by it/him/her.

pretty straightforward. :D
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
:yes:
The 'God' that is omniscience must necessarily know 'absolutely nothing' as well.

There is no requirement for it to make logical sense. To say that it must is to limit the whole concept (further).

Yeah, I disagree. I don't think anything can be outside the realm of logic - or that a logical contradiction can be true. I don't think this would limit omniscience or omnipotence either.

Could an omnipotent god make a square circle? No. This isn't a comment on this god's omnipotence, it's merely a logical impossibility. These other philosophical exercises fall into this same category.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
The concepts are inseparable (except where one might choose to separate them).

You did ask if I would present an alternative image of 'omniscience'.

I don't see how that follows. Why would god need to be everything to know everything? He could have any number of ways of obtaining this complete knowledge without everything being part of him.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Yeah, I disagree. I don't think anything can be outside the realm of logic - or that a logical contradiction can be true. I don't think this would limit omniscience or omnipotence either.

Could an omnipotent god make a square circle? No. This isn't a comment on this god's omnipotence, it's merely a logical impossibility. These other philosophical exercises fall into this same category.
An omniscient/omnipresent/omnipotent 'God' would be a square circle. It would be the square circle that exists as an idea, as a logical impossibility, as a philosophical exercise, and as a potentially real thing. This 'God' could be nothing less if it knew/was/made everything. It is me, reading this question; you, asking this question; and the question itself.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
An omniscient/omnipresent/omnipotent 'God' would be a square circle. It would be the square circle that exists as an idea, as a logical impossibility, as a philosophical exercise, and as a potentially real thing. This 'God' could be nothing less if it knew/was/made everything. It is me, reading this question; you, asking this question; and the question itself.

I guess you accept logical contradiction as possible or not. I do not think they are possible.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Why would god need to be everything to know everything?

He could have any number of ways of obtaining this complete knowledge without everything being part of him.
'God' as the ultimate spectator is one image of 'God' that people present (deistic perhaps). I believe it's not one that jives as well with the omniscience/omnipresence/omnipotence concept as 'God' as everything.
 

Beaudreaux

Well-Known Member
What does it mean to know a thing as a state? If I said I was in a state of frembolikma, would you know 'frembolikma' from my statement? Would you 'understand' at all?

I submit that this 'God' does not know the state of uncertainty unless it has been uncertain.

I also submit that in the scenario it must know it.
This line of reasoning is akin to the "Can God make a rock so heavy that even he can't lift it?" argument. Only you are saying "Can God know so much that he knows what it's like to not know something." In both cases, God is asked to defy logic.
 

Beaudreaux

Well-Known Member
Additionally, a query such as would a god who knows everything know what it's like to not know something?, falls into the same category as would an omnipotent god be able to make a rock so big he couldn't lift it?

These are semantical games and logical sleight-of-hand, not intellectually honest comments on the state of a being with infinite qualities.
If I'd only read ONE more post down. :) Oh well. Great minds...
 

rageoftyrael

Veritas
Sleight of hand? Are you kidding? What happened to just asking a question for the sake of asking it? So, if i do ask, can someone with infinite power create a rock they can't lift, why is that dishonest? Just take it at face value, unless the person has some kind of agenda from it. Sorry about the tiny little rant there, but i have a post about literally that question(can someone with infinite power create a rock they can't lift?) and getting a lot of flack for it, and don't really understand why, they keep sidestepping the question and throwing straw man arguments at me in an attempt to NOT think, if you ask me.
 

Heneni

Miss Independent
There is a scripture in the bible which says, that it is not in a man, not even in a good man to direct his steps. Sounds like no man has free will. But that is not entirely the case. It is not within a man to determine his birth date or the day he will die, neither is it in his ability to manupulate time or events even though he thinks he can. And as time moves on, so he moves forward. As the arm of the clock steps forward so we step forward in time. So we cannot direct our steps because we cannot manipulate time back and forth or freeze it. What is done is done, what is going to happen in the future cannot be changed because it hasnt happened yet.

As i understand it, god is the one who decides when and where a man falls or gets up. But he is not the one who decides how we respond to life, in that we have complete free will. For example: Paul lived by the sword therefore he would die by the sword. He was instrumental in the persecution of the saints. I think it was an unchangable fact that paul was going to die an unnatural death. That was a given. However, if he had died without becoming an apostel, and he died an unnatural death, he would have died because he lived by the sword, so he died by the sword. But since he turned his life over to god, his type of death wasnt going to matter, he would still die the same way, but now it would be a martyrs death.

Another example: We all have talents. We can use it for the glory of god or we dont. Doest change the fact that we have the talent.

Take Hitler for example: He killed himself. He was always going to die an unnatural death but he could have done it as an act of willfull suffering and therefore brought glory to god, or he did it as suicide, therefore not bringing glory to god.

A man commits adultery and looses his children and his wife. If he used his 'passion' for the gospel, he would have lost his wife and children too. She would not have been able to cope with the dedication he has for god, anymore than she would have been able to forgive him for his adultery. But in the one case his life is bringing glory to god, in the other case it is not.

The wife would have always left her husband. She could have lost him through adultery or she could have given him away for the sake of the gospel, or SHE would have committed adulery and left.

Jesus was born to die. He did. And he would have. If jesus did not lay down his life the jews would have killed him anyway. He was going to die. But by the way he died he brought many people into glory.

All the disciples were going to die as martyrs. Judas died an unnatural death, just like the other disciples, but he brought it on himself. The death of the disciples brought god glory, the death of judas did not.

A man is dedicated to god, serves him faithfully and loves him dearly. He is shot in a hijacking and paralyzed for the rest of his life. The same thing would have happened to him had he been an atheist. Its how he responds to what happens to him that either brings god glory or not.

So god knows the end from the beginning of our life, he is the one that directs our steps, but we have free will to determine how we respond, and therefore we are still accountable.

Adam would have fallen. God said he would die if he ate from the wrong tree. Jesus died as well, by being nailed to a tree. The both died.

Bill gates would alwasy have been a rich man. He either would have won the lottery or he would have started microsoft. What he does with his money is what counts. Every man therefore has to be content with his lot. But we are still responsible for HOW we live our lives. Good things happen to bad people, and bad things happen to good people. The same tragedies strike them both, but they respond to it differently.

Maybe im over simplifying things here. But it makes sense to me...at the moment.
 

Just_me_Mike

Well-Known Member
Sleight of hand? Are you kidding? What happened to just asking a question for the sake of asking it? So, if i do ask, can someone with infinite power create a rock they can't lift, why is that dishonest? Just take it at face value, unless the person has some kind of agenda from it. Sorry about the tiny little rant there, but i have a post about literally that question(can someone with infinite power create a rock they can't lift?) and getting a lot of flack for it, and don't really understand why, they keep sidestepping the question and throwing straw man arguments at me in an attempt to NOT think, if you ask me.
I'll play with your question.
If I was God at lesat the one of the bible for this discussion, and I wanted to make something that could destroy me. Would I do it?
If I were God, and wanted to created something that I could do nothing with, would I do it?
I think only a human would come up with such a stupid question about the rock. I am not sidestepping your question, but just asking why would a perfect God ever do something that would be beyond God's abilities. I think however to DIRECTLY answer your question God can not create something that is greater than God. Because God is infinte, and as such we are trying to put a limit on infinite with your Rock question.
However the bible says with God all things are possible.

The real question is can we as finite creatures understand an infinte God?

Do we really understand what an all powerful God is? Are we clever by asking a rock question? What really is your point, just spell it out for us. :)
 
Top