Omniscience

[POI]

I am moving along to topic number (4) with The Tanager. The first three were (justice, free will, and belief), as they spawned from the 'Carnivore thread' (viewtopic.php?t=42773). FYI, below were the climactic conclusions for the prior three topics...

1) viewtopic.php?t=42916 -- (ended at posts 65, 67, and 69)
2) viewtopic.php?t=42936 -- (ended at post 52)
3) viewtopic.php?t=42958 -- (ended at posts 9, 11, 16, and 20)

**********************

Omniscience is the state of possessing unlimited, infinite knowledge. Derived from the Latin words omnis ("all") and scientia ("knowledge"), it is most commonly associated with divine attributes, narrative perspectives, or advanced systemic technology.

For debate:

A) Name one thing from the Bible that humans could not think of, or write about, all on their own accord alone at the time. Meaning, something written which absolutely requires additional help (and/or) inspiration from a "higher" source?

B) If you think you can provide one, or more, we can certainly discuss and explore accordingly. But if you cannot produce a single piece of wisdom/information/other, for which humans could not have formulated upon their own accord(s) alone at the time, then why in the heck should anyone think or believe that the Bible was actually inspired by a 'higher power'?

[William]

[Replying to William in post #29]

The "more general point" being that YHVH "could" be omniscient...

No. The more general point being that it’s not silly for an omniscient being to ask questions. I have not made any argument in this thread for either the claim that YHVH could be omniscient or that YHVH is omniscient. I’ve only been addressing things you’ve said or asked me.

I see. So, first you bring the word "silly" into the conversation, and then you argue that was the point you were making.

"Silly" wasn't something I argued or even mentioned.

I guess we can let this thread sink now...

[The Tanager]

No. The more general point being that it’s not silly for an omniscient being to ask questions. I have not made any argument in this thread for either the claim that YHVH could be omniscient or that YHVH is omniscient. I’ve only been addressing things you’ve said or asked me.

I see. So, first you bring the word "silly" into the conversation, and then you argue that was the point you were making.

"Silly" wasn't something I argued or even mentioned.

I guess we can let this thread sink now...

I didn't say you thought it was silly and apologize if it seemed otherwise. You asked me something and I answered it while also extending that to a different thought some people could have. You misunderstood my aim and so I've clarified.

[William]

What people think - not debatable. They think what they think.

Why they think what they think - that is the question.