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 POI in post #10]

that the Bible likely does not produce even one claim, or one piece of instruction in which humans could not have manifested all upon their own, and with no help from the 'divine.'

This seems to be another subject.
Can you show anything in the bible which definitively tells us that the God of the bible is omniscient?

Here are some verses which might be used for such purpose
1 John 3:20

"God is greater than our heart, and He knows all things."

Someone could attempt to say that this means God knows all things about all things (is omniscient) but if one takes into account the context that surround that line (the passages that surround the verses) one is left with something different than an argument for omniscience.

Psalm 147:5

"Great is our Lord, and abundant in power; His understanding is beyond measure."

In this verse one does not even have to look at the passage. Being abundant in power tells one that the God has enough power for whatever task is at hand. "Beyond measure" is more a statement about human limitations.

Job 37:16

"Do you know the balancings of the clouds, the wondrous works of Him who is perfect in knowledge?"

Again - we have the same - more of an observation of human limitations than a declaration of omniscience.

What all this portrays is not an entity with unlimited knowledge but an entity of unlimited knowledge compared to what humans know.

Did the ancients even know what clouds were or how they formed or shifted shape? Were the biblical writers told such things, and if so, why did they not tell it in their writing?

And even if they did know or had shared their knowing that us readers in the modern world could wonder at their knowledge, how would this mean that God was omniscient? (is the state of possessing unlimited, infinite knowledge.)

Even the idea that humans could have used such expression to think of a creator entity knowing absolutely everything that could possibly be known, does not mean that such an entity exists.
And to back-peddle from that, even the idea that we exist within a created thing could have been thought up by humans does not mean the creator of that thing knows absolutely everything.
And to flip that, just because humans can think we don't exist within a created thing and that a creator cannot exist doesn't mean that it is the case.

[The Tanager]

[Replying to William in post #11]

While I agree the author of 1 John 3:20 isn’t making an argument for omniscience, what in the context leaves one with the thought that this is not saying God is omniscient?

And why is the “ayin mispar” (translated as ‘beyond measure’, ‘infinite’, ‘no limit’, and the like) of Psalm 147:5 and the “tamim dea” (translated as ‘perfect in knowledge’ and the like) statements about human limitations?

Job 37 seems to talk about both God’s knowledge being perfect and human limitations.

I’m also confused by the argument you seem to be arguing against, as it isn’t coming from these verses. They aren’t saying the writers were told God’s perfect knowledge (on clouds or whatever), that they are writing about the content of that perfect knowledge, or that doing so would mean God is omniscient. It’s not an argument offered for God’s knowledge or God’s existence, either; it’s just an assertion that God knows all things, has no limit to his knowledge, and is perfect in knowledge.

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #12]

Are you arguing that these passages show us that those who wrote them considered that what we define today as "omniscient" is how they understood YHWH (the person of) - if so, I am not in disagreement.

My comments were focused on other writers as well who appeared to understand the same God differently and thus we have the contradiction and why my words are as they are.

Further to that, it appears unnecessary to understand YHVH as being omniscient when "way more knowledgeable than humans" is sufficient.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #13]

Me: Is it necessary to understand YHVH as being omniscient when "way more knowledgeable than humans" is sufficient.

YHVH:
Ravens Play & Invent Games – These intelligent birds engage in play for no practical reason, indicating complex cognition and social structures.

Me: These point to the creatures and therein the consciousness which aminates said creatures and how said consciousness use intelligence through the limitations of the creature forms...

YHVH: Deliberate and important
The individuals experience re that which is ruling said experience…
A heartbeat heard in the quiet spaces between words
Acknowledge The Agreeable

Me: So - the argument as it were - is that one can if one wants to, think of YHVH as being - shall we say "absolutely knowing everything which can be known" but the belief as it were is not different than if one simply argued that YHVH is "way more knowledgeable than humans" - because consciousness acting through the limitations of human experience cannot experience what that is, anyway...

YHVH: viewtopic.php?p=1075157#p1075157

Me: True that. "Our Mother who art in heaven" is something human beings can understand as an entity who is "way more knowledgeable than humans"...yet at the same time could well be restricted to localised knowledge rather than having access to universal knowledge...

[The Tanager]

[Replying to William in post #13]

I’m not sure what other writers you spoke of, what contradiction you are referring to, or what issue Yahweh being omniscient is unnecessary for. What it seemed to me like you said you have clarified you were not arguing, so thanks for that.

[POI]

Can you show anything in the bible which definitively tells us that the God of the bible is omniscient?

The interlocutor in question thinks the Bible god is. I was simply moving down the line regarding the list of topics from the other thread. And in my created topic, I very loosely issued that term; and are instead just re-defining the term 'advanced knowledge' or something similar. Which would effectively mean knowledge in which humans could not have had at the time (and/or) intelligence above/beyond human capability.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #13]

I’m not sure what other writers you spoke of, what contradiction you are referring to,

Let's just say that if you were all knowing in the sense being spoken of, and we were to play a game of hide and seek and you were the seeker, there is no way you would not know where I hid. Agreed?
Or let's say that I arrived at you house unannounced, you would not need to ask me why I was there or where I had been and what I had been doing before I arrived. Agreed?

or what issue Yahweh being omniscient is unnecessary for.

It is enough for now to agree that knowing more than human know is sufficient, agreed?

[The Tanager]

[Replying to William in post #17]

Let's just say that if you were all knowing in the sense being spoken of, and we were to play a game of hide and seek and you were the seeker, there is no way you would not know where I hid. Agreed?

Agreed.

Or let's say that I arrived at you house unannounced, you would not need to ask me why I was there or where I had been and what I had been doing before I arrived. Agreed?

Agreed. But there could still be a good reason to ask you those questions anyway.

It is enough for now to agree that knowing more than human know is sufficient, agreed?

Sufficient for what?

[William]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #18]

Let's just say that if you were all knowing in the sense being spoken of, and we were to play a game of hide and seek and you were the seeker, there is no way you would not know where I hid. Agreed?

Agreed.

Or let's say that I arrived at you house unannounced, you would not need to ask me why I was there or where I had been and what I had been doing before I arrived. Agreed?

Agreed. But there could still be a good reason to ask you those questions anyway.

By all means, if you have such good reasons please share them if you think they would be important to the subject.

It is enough for now to agree that knowing more than humans know is sufficient, agreed?

Sufficient for what?

Sufficient for agreement, for one.
Sufficient for existence, overall. Having the capability and competence to do whatever needs to be done in any situation that arises.
Sufficient to show that being omniscient is unnecessary re the idea that we exist within a created thing and that a creator of that thing would necessarily HAVE to be omniscient.

Do you think otherwise? If so, please share those thoughts.

[The Tanager]

[Replying to William in post #19]

By all means, if you have such good reasons please share them if you think they would be important to the subject.

I’m thinking of how just knowing everything isn’t the same as having a relationship with another being. Take Genesis for example. Yahweh asks the adam where he is even though Yahweh knows where he is in order to have interaction and allow the adam to tell the truth, lie, etc.

I’m not saying that is important to what you want to talk about here, just answering the questions you’ve asked as nuanced as I can.

Sufficient for agreement, for one.
Sufficient for existence, overall. Having the capability and competence to do whatever needs to be done in any situation that arises.
Sufficient to show that being omniscient is unnecessary re the idea that we exist within a created thing and that a creator of that thing would necessarily HAVE to be omniscient.

Do you think otherwise? If so, please share those thoughts.

I must know what context it is meant in to know if I agree with that context or to think otherwise. I do not think a creator must necessarily be omniscient or that existence requires omniscience.