God can’t be all knowing, ,because God can’t know what it’s like to fail. If God is all knowing, God can’t learn. If God Can’t learn, God can’t fail, therefore, if God exists, God is not all knowing. So, which is it?




46 Comments

Leave a response

You must be to post a response.

  1. Gina 2 years ago

    God only knows. Actually, god knows what its like to fail. He helped create our 45th prez. Eeewwww. God is a terrible joker.

    A great cover by Natalie Maines of a beautiful Beach Boys song: God Only Knows:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlwU1qOSyMA

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Scarlett 2 years ago

      With all the evidence we have, seems impossible for God to exist in form that is taught in the non secular world.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

  2. mamajoy 2 years ago

    I think it’s unusual how God’s actions are often explained away by easy dismissal with responses like, “We can’t question the acts of God” and “God’s power is to too great for us to comprehend”, etc. But yet, in the same breath we’re also able to speak of things for God, but it’s not blasphemous. I can understand the preaching to share the word of God, but to condemn others with the word of God – when you are not God…and be okay with that, it seems rather odd. I wonder if God would be pleased.

    Perhaps @weenis can shed some light. Wanna have a discussion?

    Also, hello dear. It’s nice to see you again.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • griz 2 years ago

      Religious responses often turn to easy dismissals when we don’t want to bother reflecting on nobler things . . . OR when we don’t want to be reminded that despite our advances in both science AND ego . . . we are still just “children” compared to the Spirit of Life that set all of this in motion.

      Consider though, that if God be perfect, the nature of His word (written- the Bible; Living – the manifestation of Christ; Spirit-inspired – shared by Christians in the Holy Spirit) . . . will be to point out our uncomfortable imperfection by comparison. One of the assigned duties of the Holy Spirit, is to convict us of our comparative imperfection as a prelude to inviting us to start doing something about it.
      Check that out. It’s the Holy Spirit’s job . . . not ours. We share the words and wisdom that MAY convict . . . but it is the Holy Spirit that has the job of convicting — and then of inviting us into the process of doing something about it.

      It’s the difference between pointing out that a path will lead to folly . . . and condemning someone on it as a fool. One seeks to help them. The other only seeks to help ourselves feel superior to them.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        Why are we imperfect, yet the bible’s words/ message perfect? Why if the bible (or its message) is perfect does it still need interpretation and need to have meaning “read between the lines?”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        Why were we born as infants?

        Why can’t we know everything there is to know about relationship, by forming a relationship with a book about it?

        And cue my oft-repeated example of a spoiling parent to gives their kids all the answers.
        Such a child is hated, relegated and retarded into remaining as but an infant with no ability to learn or grow or choose.

        Putting down such a hateful god would be wise. But mis-labeling Lie as Truth, Death as Life, hate as love and evil as good . . . would make one “woeful”.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        I wouldn’t think it hateful at all. I can keep busy by myself, trust me! But at least in this iteration we need something called money (well for *most* things). Now if I were born to a family where I was well-to-do and wouldn’t need to work, I’d do what I wanted to do.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Scarlett 2 years ago

      I listen to preachy people quite frequently through my work. Anymore, I just find them sooo interesting…

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

  3. eric 2 years ago

    God can’t be all knowing, because God can’t know what it’s like to fail.

    Eh, God created a flood that killed most everything because creation was all fucked up. God also cast Adam and Eve out of paradise before that – also a failure. God is also responsible for the devil – the creature that is God’s antithesis.

    If God is all knowing, God can’t learn.

    God eventually learned a lesson and just decided to fuck off after Bible times, thus prayers are no longer answered, and there are no more miracles – at least not until the second coming.

    If God Can’t learn, God can’t fail

    I don’t make the connection between an inability to learn and an absence of failure. Someone that never learns their lesson the first time will likely fuck up again. Like a child that sneaks cookies and is caught, only to be punished, then does it again because they do it more sneakily without realizing the adult can count the cookies to know if any are missing.

    if God exists, God is not all knowing.

    Given everything that came after creation, and God’s many attempts and failures to intervene without success, I would say this is correct. God is not all knowing, but God knows what it is like to fail, but I might assume God also can’t learn. Though it is a great big universe so may God is just distracted… :unamused:

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • mamajoy 2 years ago

      I love this response.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • eric 2 years ago

        What!? You didn’t get triggered? I’m so triggered. How dare I assume God. :rolf:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

    • griz 2 years ago

      Is there the presumption that the Garden of Eden took God by surprise, was “a failure” and that Jesus was a hastily-enacted “Plan B”?

      Ditto with Satan. Did this blindside God and set Him into “damage control mode”? Or is there purpose and intent in setting things up (with freedom and not just “programming”), so this could and would happen? We can say, “Well that was a stupid thing to let happen!”. But again there is the presumption of OUR ability to discern all of the balls in play.

      The Bible is split into two Covenants: one complete, over, fulfilled AND with a people-who-is-not-us (it was between God and the Hebrews); the other still living and active, ongoing, and “to ALL Mankind”. Miracles in the first Covenant, were “external” — because that was all people could see/understand. Miracles in the second Covenant were at first still physical but proceeded over time to be more and more spiritual. And it would be a mistake to think God had buggered off and the miracles ceased — because every time someone has a spiritual awakening, it is a miracle (because this is something the physical entity cannot do in and of and for itself). So the miracles have not ceased; the nature of them has just progressed over time.

      When pondering something it is a good idea to have at least some experience with it . . . other than just having watched a proverbial show on TV about it!

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        The point is in all of these assumptions is that we don’t know, and the bible really doesn’t explicitly spell it out in so many words. To what purpose would an inventor invent something to destroy his other inventions (god as the watchmaker). It’s like before anything was created, he said “Before anything else is created, I want this first invention (lucifer/ satan) to have the capacity of attempting to mess up everything… and quite a few will be broken… but it’s a part of the plan.” The bible does echo this sentiment: Romans 9:20 – 24 who are you, O man, who answers [arrogantly] back to God and dares to defy Him? Will the thing which is formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does the potter not have the right over the clay, to make from the same lump [of clay] one object for honorable use [something beautiful or distinctive] and another for common use [something ordinary or menial]? What if God, although willing to show His [terrible] wrath and to make His power known, has tolerated with great patience the objects of His wrath [which are] prepared for destruction? And what if He has done so to make known the riches of His glory to the objects of His mercy, which He has prepared beforehand for glory, including us, whom He also called, not only from among the Jews, but also from among the Gentiles?”

        Some have interpreted this to mean that god not only chooses who to save but ALSO chooses those to discard, to throw away, those verses are among the core of the theology of predestination.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        Consider the relationships you “assumed” were so. Now contrast them against the ones you actually “participated” in. Regardless of whether they proved “good” or “bad”, your assumption didn’t prove them one or the other.
        Your participation did.

        You now know that relationships with religions and rule-books don’t work.

        What God “invented” was primarily Life; and secondarily, freedom. (With red herrings about trying to “color” that freedom, temporarily set aside — for we could go on about them until Eternity passes away! You have choice in whether you are going to use “what is” . . . to your benefit or detriment).

        Choice by it’s nature, includes the ability to choose poorly. Even without deistic belief, we know it a Scientific axiom of Life that only “good choices live”. Bad choices die off.

        And yes, I would re-iterate that the nature of ANY spiritual text, is that one can extract parts from them to service agendas of Death should that be what one has currently chosen to worship.
        But that is a “bad choice” that is destined to die off. (And removing the foolish ego and pride, means we don’t HAVE to see natural consequences . . . as “vengeful punishment”. We can choose to, but we don’t have to. Do you see how that works??)

        Being equally present at all points in the time-stream would simply mean God knows those who will discard themselves. And to “child-proof” reality, indicates the cruel intent of retarding reality into permanent immaturity.

        A cliff presents choice. One can admire the view, or cast themselves off it. Only a fool tries to blame the cliff — or worse, the processes that created it — for their refusal to accept the natural consequences of their actions freely taken.

        What you fear, is personal responsibility. And all of your religions to date have tried (unsuccessfully) to manage this fear.

        (Religion depends upon a) people having this fear and b) perpetuation of it. The immature are hardly a credible threat to any agenda.)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        Archaeology may give us some ideas… but do we really have any of the modern day descendants of the Amorites, Midionites, Moabites, etc. to get their own words as far as the nature of the conflict?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        I hear what you’re saying. Science tries to tell us that this is the ONLY way to learn about past cultures.

        But what core aspect of Human nature has changed in all these years? Our greed and selfishness? Avarice? Our desire for pleasure? Our need to “overcome” and control others? Our penchant for the worship of physical objects as a bid to exert control over the uncontrollable? Do we have less of a tendency to think our current way of thinking and believing is “supreme”?

        We are NOT invalids without the priests of science to tell us what is and is not and is OK to think and what is “blasphemy-against-doctrine”. We are not babies that have to be spoon-fed everything as pre-chewed mush.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        I’m saying I would need to interview someone from their culture to know what was going on. So you’re saying all these populations that were wiped from existence, that everyone was so irredeemably evil that there’s no way in which that level of brutality could have been avoided?

        Look at things from a RPG standpoint. Is an orc evil for being an orc, when it’s not going about doing the things that the “civilized” races of elves, dwarves, gnomes, and humans object to: the murder, rape, and pillaging they are well-known for? But at the core that’s what the bible says, that in and of ourselves we are irredeemable.

        So some woman feeding her baby is so evil that she needs to be killed and her baby as well. This just puts a bad taste in my mouth. And on top of it, when some WERE saved, they end up being taken away into captivity… what ends up happening is that the child has Stockholm syndrome, which is also bad mojo.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        My thought is that we’ve become SO dependent upon the “exact answers” of Science (that often are not really!), that many have utterly lost their own ability to intuit, to walk a mile in another’s shoes, to formulate a reasonable hypothesis (that the human organism really hadn’t changed that much psychologically in eons) and then use this in an exercise of connecting with the context of the times.
        Or maybe it’s just a lack of imagination? (Though you do talk about RPG’s where presumable you have to put yourself in the shoes of mythical things with no commonality and not just real people from a different time and culture!)

        Actually, I don’t think I’ve said anything about irredeemable evil wiping them from existence! Baggage should be checked at the door.

        What the Bible says is that we as physical organisms are incapable of redeeming ourselves spiritually. That is why “a bridge” was needed: something firmly anchored both in the Spirit and in the flesh. And even if one might have issues with the how and where and why it’s anchored where it is and what color it’s painted, one can still use it to get from one side of the gorge to the other.
        And miserable is the person who refuses to use it “on principle” because of the how and why and color of it.

        You still want to cling to the child’s notion of reward and punishment rather than recognizing natural consequence and taking personal responsibility for yourself. You speak of a random non-descript mother and baby dying.
        I’m talking to the person who is right here, right now, who is finding endless fault with the bridge so they can feel more justified in refusing to use it on principle!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        The problem is that intuition can only go so far. As some point, there are too many questions, problems, concerns that arise from our unfounded assumptions without full knowledge – or at least only one sided lnformation.

        In one sense i get it. Wars suck. People do messed up things in wartime. Tragedies happen. But there’s something that’s recognized in the warfare of today: you don’t purposely harm non-combatants. To have such a “natural consequence” of being killed simply because you happen to be born the wrong nationality. The echoes of this mentality still can be felt today with ethnic cleansing. It’sls also like the people today who seek to kill those of a specific profession.

        But to have god command, require this of his people… no, just no.

        You say that man needs a bridge. Yet those people who were slaughtered to the man by God’s command had no access to such a thing, will never be afforded such a thing simply because they happened to be born to the wrong people and by no means would their (the Jewish people) hands would be stayed.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        Did any of your training involve the spiritual gifts? Consider the intuition, or discernment, that Jesus exercised. Consider that we are told we will do these things and greater things.

        Things that we try to power of our own limited self are going to meet with limitations.
        Things done by the power and authority of a child meet with childish results.

        So consult your biblical training. What is the next step; weather for the child or are limited physicality?

        You are right that Old Testament times are a very difficult challenge for Spiritual intuition and discernment. But if you maintain that any good assessment I make is invalid . . . What shall we say of your bad assessments my friend?!
        Can your judgments of God be any more valid?! If knowing would a person of another time is beyond us even though we share a common Humanity . . . By what understanding are you assessing God a bastard?

        Physical death is the ultimate blow to Ego. But ego is one of the first things one has to master to accept Christ’s gift.

        As for no access to the bridge, how was salvation accomplished in Pre Christ times? Nobody was cut out or excluded. Even those not specifically under God’s covenant with the Hebrews received God’s mercy. Consider the Ninnevites and Rahab to mention just two.

        God may not be the bastard you are currently driven to make Him.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 years ago

        But neither is he all puppies, rainbows and unicorns that you do. Following god has a terrible price that has cost me friend’s lives, had dangerously crazy strangers live with us, which could have cost my mom her life, a price, given my difficulties in service to him has made all too clear. A price i will not, cannot, and moreover MUST not incur!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

    • weenis 2 years ago

      This isn’t what “all knowing” means. Failing and knowing what it’s like to fail is subjective knowledge based on experience.

      The knowledge of God relates to knowing all things, past and present, OBJECTIVELY, in a way that fully and infallibly corresponds to all reality.

      Your entire post is full of incorrect premises and incorrect definitions.

      One of my favorite theologians, and author of my favorite Systematic Theology, Louis Berkhof wrote the following regarding God’s knowledge, please note the scriptural texts as well to back up his assertions-

      1. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD. The knowledge of God may be defined as that perfection of God whereby He, in an entirely unique manner, knows Himself and all things possible and actual in one eternal and most simple act. The Bible testifies to the knowledge of God abundantly, as, for instance, in I Sam. 2:3; Job 12:13; Ps. 94:9; 147:4; Isa. 29:15; 40:27,28. In connection with the knowledge of God several points call for consideration.

      a. Its nature. The knowledge of God differs in some important points from that of men. It is archetypal, which means that He knows the universe as it exists in His own eternal idea previous to its existence as a finite reality in time and space; and that His knowledge is not, like ours, obtained from without. It is a knowledge that is characterized by absolute perfection. As such it is intuitive rather than demonstrative or discursive. It is innate and immediate, and does not result from observation or from a process of reasoning. Being perfect, it is also simultaneous and not successive, so that He sees things at once in their totality, and not piecemeal one after another. Furthermore, it is complete and fully conscious, while man’s knowledge is always partial, frequently indistinct, and often fails to rise into the clear light of consciousness. A distinction is made between the necessary and free knowledge of God. The former is the knowledge which God has of Himself and of all things possible, a knowledge resting on the consciousness of His omnipotence. It is called necessary knowledge, because it is not determined by an action of the divine will. It is also known as the knowledge of simple intelligence, in view of the fact that it is purely an act of the divine intellect, without any concurrent action of the divine will. The free knowledge of God is the knowledge which He has of all things actual, that is, of things that existed in the past, that exist in the present, or that will exist in the future. It is founded on God’s infinite knowledge of His own all-comprehensive and unchangeable eternal purpose, and is called free knowledge, because it is determined by a concurrent act of the will. It is also called scientia visionis, knowledge of vision.

      b. Its extent. The knowledge of God is not only perfect in kind, but also in its inclusiveness. It is called omniscience, because it is all-comprehensive. In order to promote a proper estimate of it, we may particularize as follows: God knows Himself and in Himself all things that come from Him (internal knowledge). He knows all things as they actually come to pass, past, present, and future, and knows them in their real relations. He knows the hidden essence of things, to which the knowledge of man cannot penetrate. He sees not as man sees, who observes only the outward manifestations of life, but penetrates to the depths of the human heart. Moreover, He knows what is possible as well as what is actual; all things that might occur under certain circumstances are present to His mind. The omniscience of God is clearly taught in several passages of Scripture. He is perfect in knowledge, Job 37:16, looketh not on outward appearance but on the heart, I Sam. 16:7; I Chron. 28:9,17; Ps. 139:1-4; Jer. 17:10, observes the ways of men, Deut. 2:7; Job 23:10; 24:23; 31:4; Ps. 1:6; 119:168, knows the place of their habitation, Ps. 33:13, and the days of their life, Ps. 37:18. This doctrine of the knowledge of God must be maintained over against all pantheistic tendencies to represent God as the unconscious ground of the phenomenal world, and of those who, like Marcion, Socinus and all who believe in a finite God, ascribe to Him only a limited knowledge.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • eric 2 years ago

        Your entire post is full of incorrect premises and incorrect definitions.

        > In Scarlett’s post, she identified the character of God using 4 statements. I then made a response that I felt fit those 4 statements, including what I found to be a logical progression of those statements. This is why you see me break out each line and respond directly.

        > No further criteria for a response was given. A point that I think is important when we consider responses that use appeals to faith and authority as a means to attempt and discredit my response and validate their own viewpoints.

        > As for the premises that I state incorrectly, I don’t see where any premise is wrong because none of my premises are credible. I present not evidence. If you would like, you are free to use the format I am using here to respond directly to the part of my response that is wrong.

        This isn’t what “all knowing” means.

        > Right, it means knowing everything. Did I incorrectly use the term?

        Failing and knowing what it’s like to fail is subjective knowledge based on experience.

        > I agree. Did I incorrectly use the word failure in the context of what I wrote?

        The knowledge of God relates to knowing all things, past and present, OBJECTIVELY, in a way that fully and infallibly corresponds to all reality.

        > You are free to set up the premise however you wish. I do not agree with your premise of God. In fact, my premise of God obviously fits what I initially responded, not that it is credible.

        > I am happy to consider what Louis Berkhof wrote, and how it backs up your assertions, then consider it as a basis for an objective reality that includes a one true God when you show me what makes these viewpoints credible. As you know, quoting the bible to prove your beliefs is circular reasoning, so don’t try and go that route. But I imagine you will. But if you are bored, I welcome it. :wink:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • weenis 2 years ago

        You present an argument, and I will show you its inherent circularity.

        All arguments are circular at their core.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • eric 2 years ago

        Taken from https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/66/Circular-Reasoning

        “Some philosophies state that we can never escape circular reasoning because the arguments always come back to axioms or first principles, but in those cases, the circles are very large and do manage to share useful information in determining the truth of the proposition.”

        The key element: manage to share useful information in determining the truth of the proposition.

        If I am a farmer and someone argues that using a certain type of fertilizer will help me yield a crop with more vegetables, I can look at their crops at the end of season, then look at my own, and agree that the use of fertilizer would benefit me.

        The argument is circular because it supports the preposition that fertilizer helps crops grow, given that they used fertilizer and it would appear they have more vegetables.

        Now the evidence in this situation isn’t very scientific. Observation that they have more vegetables isn’t enough. Now, I can go and take soil samples to determine that their soil does have desirable nutrients not found in my own. I could cross reference the soil against biological research to determine whether this could impact crop growth. I could parcel out areas of my field to test the fertilizer over different seasons and with different crops, and so on.

        The difference is an argument about fertilizer’s affect on crop yield and the subsequent research that can make the initial claim credible is much different than saying that God is all knowing because the Bible tells us God is all knowing; plus here are some people that study the Bible and reaffirm the bible’s claim of God’s knowing.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Scarlett 2 years ago

      If God is all knowing, there is nothing for God to learn. If you can’t learn, you can’t fail. There is never anything to learn, because God is all knowing.
      You are labeling the flood a failure? What if we didn’t have the word failure? What if we didn’t have language to label the flood, what would you say?
      Anyway, just because some guys told a bunch of people that God exists and that God is all knowing, all powerful, and benevolent doesn’t make it so. There is no proof that God doesn’t exist, just like there’s no proof aliens don’t exist. However, after reading these responses, there is still no rationality to believe that God is all knowing.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

  4. Spitfire3dC 2 years ago

    As long as God is perceived in human terms people will be confused. Biblical descriptions add to the confusion. Yeah, this massive entity of All is gonna get pissed off at something with less capacity of an ant in relativity and flood the planet. That’s like you seeing a mosquito landing on a baby and because you’re mad, you’re going to burn down hectares of forest as you stomp off says, “That showed that little bastard! Betcha they won’t ever try that on a baby while I’m on watch”

    Let’s start by imagining that God is the compilation of all. Your molecules count and so does that freakin’ mosquito’s.

    Now let’s take it up a notch and imagine the feelings you have for your children are just as real in molecularity. another notch you look at a sunset and go wow while that energetic exhale adds more to the overALL.

    Win? Fail? Time? Meaningless. That is reserved for the inconsequential minors who contribute at the lowest end of the scale. Us.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Scarlett 2 years ago

      Has religion evolved to protect against truly knowing God?

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Spitfire3dC 2 years ago

        Religion itself has not evolved. It is like all law. It is the expression in words used to identify structure that those of the less evolved mentality can relate to. It is for the “DUH?!” mentality that is incapable of abstract thought.

        Forms of religion have changed. Capitalism is a form of religion. Communism, Socialism. Darwinism…In some religions Money is worshiped. In others Equality to the point that there is no incentive to become a better individual. And of course there is the Big P (Power or Penis; you choose, same thing anyway)

        God is not our Boss. He is our Senior Partner who understands we need to learn the ropes and is willing to mentor us as an equal, with the understanding that we are far from it. It’s like a parent who sincerely gives a shit for their kid and is willing to allow them the right to walk to the edge of the cliff if that what it takes to provide for the experiential development to become closer to Whole.

        We don’t need to be protected from God. We just need to know God and that is our choice. We “know” by believing the same way we believe that the sun is going to come around as we rotate. We create that God as much as anything and that is how we create a relationship that is just as real as the relationship a mother has with the fetus in her womb. They are the same AND they are different.

        The people who choose to not know God won’t because they make no contribution to the relationship. Maybe our relationship with God is only for the time we have this degree of consciousness that allows us to consider the possibility. I’d rather have that than none at all. If there’s more; cool. If there isn’t…It’s better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  5. griz 2 years ago

    “By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” — Confucious

    Just because we tend to opt for the bitterest method of knowing something (experience). . . doesn’t mean God does! This is perhaps just another case of us trying to create God . . . in OUR image.

    (Also consider that since God doesn’t “imitate” He “creates”, His wisdom would not come by imitation. Which, IF we can continue applying a finite Human understanding to an Infinite God . . . would mean God’s “omniscience” must come from the noblest of processes!

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Jear77 2 years ago

      Actually wisdom is the practical application of knowledge. If you can’t *do* anything in the real world with a piece of information, i.e. it only remains in your head, what use is it? While the saying that experience is “bitterest” I ask you … if given a choice by god before your birth in eternity past, between simply being in heaven with him or the current life you have, knowing the difficulties you would face, would you have it any other way? If you would consider your experience something you wouldn’t do without, not for any gain in heaven, why is it “bitter?”

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        “ie, if it only remains in your head”. Or as just dead words on paper?

        That is the purpose of the Holy Spirit. Participation and fellowship unto growth and the maturing of the infant. There is plenty of analogy in physical children who are raised without participation in adult fellowship (whether feral children, or simply children of “adults” who never matured beyond selfish childhood themselves).

        One cannot deny that choosing poorly can be bitter. The job of a loving parent or teacher is to then nurture wisdom from this. So what was once bitter now has positive purpose and is “sweet”.

        Again with the “why didn’t we spring forth from the womb of creation Fully Realized Gods”? As someone lacking the arrogance to assert myself as fully realized . . . I don’t know.

        But it possibly has something to do with how treacherously a spoiled child will treat a gift car . . . compared with someone who had to go through “natural process” to acquire it.

        Ask yourself why you almost constantly crave . . . a hateful spoiling parent/god?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Scarlett 2 years ago

      God is the creative force that moves through all? The Godhead?

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        For now that’s as valid an understanding as any. To “seek God’s face” (and not just His hand!) means abandoning the classic human hubris that WE are the “all-knowing, all-seeing” ones.

        In my growing spiritual relationship, God is the very “Spirit of Life”. Or Spirit of Truth. The natives recognize The-spirit-that-moves-through-all-things.

        Just how “big” is that? Or the reverse, just how small a box are we wanting to put that in just so we can maintain the delusion of our god-like cognitive abilities?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  6. Yin 2 years ago

    If a god exists, maybe it isn’t all-knowing. Some people have said that God knows all potential outcomes but doesn’t know which one it will be. I personally wouldn’t consider that all-knowing in that case. It is close, but not all. I feel if one exists, it either doesn’t care or it doesn’t have the capacity to care. If I entertain that idea that maybe God doesn’t fail and everything is going according to some plan, I just don’t see the need to worship that type of being. I’m not a fan of its careless nature and its destructive allowance. It doesn’t seem to worry about us with all of its power to do something and to actively plan all of this, so why should I worry with it? This all goes back to the question of it even existing in the first place though. I’d need proof, which I don’t think it is much to ask of a all-powerful creature to give to some (arguably) low intelligent apes on a space rock.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • griz 2 years ago

      I’ve journeyed through more spiritual belief-systems than most people tend to. Here is a combined perspective.

      God allegedly exists outside of what we call “time”. God is 100% present at all points in what we would call the time-stream. Perhaps even at all points-and-times in all “alternative dimensions . . . but that REALLY messes with the finite mortal mind! With perhaps some sense in the notion that everything started from a single point — exploded outwards into all kinds of scenarios and possibilities — and will some day be drawn back and contracted into that single point again? (The idea that some day all those who worship God will be “One with God”.

      The “worship” thing. There are perhaps far many more aspects to it than just the most demonstrative ones associated with corporate group (church) worship. There is the notion that we are perhaps “hard-wired” to hold things in “worshipful esteem” as our “almighty”. Career, family, capital, possessions, drugs, leisure, entertainment, gossip, politics, religion, the physical book of the Bible, games and sports etc. We flip from one to another; or sometimes we meet a truly “scary” person who focuses on just one, like “money at all costs” or “ethnic cleansing”. We don’t have to intend to assign this “worshipful esteem”: it “just happens”.
      So the worship of God (the Spirit of Life if one prefers) is simply taking charge of this process and directing it where it will have the most benefits and fewest side-effects for self and the greater whole.

      **Provided “God is God-the-Author-of-Life” . . . and not just some little parading god-of-the-flesh that we create of imagination, baggage, agenda, mistaken notion.** These false-gods cannot help but generate the cruel, careless, destruction you mention.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Scarlett 2 years ago

      And most certainly God is not benevolent. It is possible these stories evolved to protect ego?
      I am aware of no proof that God does or does not exist.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Yin 2 years ago

        I guess it depends on who evolved them. The church and state? Could be that and/or to protect their power and cash flow. I mean, their power leaves if people start poking holes in the stories and doubting it. You have to be ready to evolve it and to “interpret” it differently to keep people interested. It can also be used to group people. There are many different versions of Christianity and Islam, which usually judge each other. Then, you have all of these Christians and Muslims thinking we’re in a religious war against each other. The powerful people within these want you to think that. They like and “need” the control. I just see it as an unneeded barrier separating us. We are separated, a jerk decides to murder people, and then we hate our Muslim brothers and sisters. We drop a missile in the Middle East, and then that produces hate towards us. In is a never ending cycle. It’s all just so tiring.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 years ago

        I don’t think there is any proof to be found in dragging God into our reality. ( other than the fact He won’t fit!)

        But I would assert there is compelling evidence when one applies themselves to enter God’s reality through the portal provided.

        God not benevolent? Maybe we need a more mature definition? A child will have a hard time finding the benevolence in a parent insisting they go to bed or eat something they don’t like or have surgery done. Or in one that lets them struggle with a hard lesson so they may never have to repeat it?

        Plus I’m reminded of all the other terms that have found a more mature definition in God’s revelation of Christ: love, joy, peace, forgiveness. . .

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  7. weenis 2 years ago

    This is akin to saying “God can’t be all knowing, because he doesn’t know what it’s like to not know something.”

    God is all knowing, which does necessarily mean he can’t learn. If he could learn, he couldn’t be all knowing.

    Many people over the years have postulated moronic nonsense like this question.

    “Can God make a rock so heavy he couldn’t lift it?”
    “No.”
    “BOOOOOOM! Gotcha! Then God isn’t all powerful because there’s something he can’t do!”

    The Bible is full of those who mock God, and attempt these silly parlor trick games, but when it comes down to it, the claims the Bible makes concerning the attributes of God are logically sound.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Jear77 2 years ago

      The grammar of your parallelism is off. you should have said “not omniscient, because there’s something he can’t know” to keep the parallelism proper.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Scarlett 2 years ago

      I don’t feel like you answered the question, except to criticize the question.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

  8. Lucifer Rising 2 years ago

    Good question, as it opens some doors for some potentially interesting conversation. But, it is also the sort of “contradiction” that ultimately is not really a contradiction.

    In short, where there are any problems in Scripture for truly major contradiction it is understanding the Law of Moses contrasted against the teachings of Jesus. This is difficult to understand. Next to that, I would say, evolution and the scientific discoveries there and how they go against the books of Moses. (Neither a mystery to me, really, but different subjects.)

    On this, the universe is in God’s mind, just as our imaginings are in our own mind, and very much like how it is when we dream.

    No coincidence, as we are ‘made in God’s image’, and ultimately, God’s children.

    This said, I find a lot of people do not know much about dreams, and rarely have spent time digging into their own dreams… nor, especially, looking at dreams as a mirror to compare against reality.

    For the later, you generally need to have read up on lucid dreaming efforts, on hypnosis, and on such topics as dream journaling. Where dream journaling is necessary to really get started in being able to consciously remember your dream in the afterworld — “reality”.

    Indeed, dream worlds are realities, too. And the reason we forget them so easily is because when we are in them we are completely unaware we are dreaming.

    Unless we are practiced and trained at doing so.

    So, shifting realities, when you are aware of your dreams you start to realize “reality”, its’ self is of the same substance. A reality.

    And, then, there are the concepts of how everyone has their own reality, or own world.

    Finally, drugs, hypnosis, and the like, can also help distort your perceptions of “reality”, which is really always your reality, your world, to view other realities… which typically are other people’s realities, other people’s worlds. In this way we can begin to start to strive for finding God’s reality, even though we are all in it. What philosophers might call the elusive “objective reality”.

    All that is necessary to say here, because all realities are in God’s mind.

    Likewise, it is extremely likely that, as we are, God does not pay attention to everything, all realities *consciously*, or “consciously”, but certainly they all happen in his mind.

    That is how we are. Our unconscious mind creates our own dream worlds, for instance, though we are unaware of it at the time. Everything. All the buildings, all the landscapes, all the stories, all the people, all the reactions. And where are we? First person, present tense, inside the dream. But, we are also the entire substance of everything in the dream world.

    The two “we’s”, the best earth language we have here, is “unconscious mind” and “conscious mind”.

    For us humans it is very difficult to shift and explore our unconscious, making it conscious. Like a light beam of focus moving about. But, when we have that capacity, such as with dreaming awareness or lucid dreaming, or in methods otherwise described above (and others)… we can take control and perceive (happens at the very same time), these otherwise hidden parts of ourselves.

    For God, by design, this is much easier.

    Is what I have found. God created this finite reality, world, universe, whatever you want to call it with this in mind. More like how software developers and architects build virtual worlds. Such as massive online multiplayer worlds. So, he has nodes (angels and the like) and other control mechanisms all over.

    I mean… using the above, I could start to exactly dissect your statement, and so provide explicit answers, but the above covers the material implicitly, and can be dug through for the various possible solutions.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Scarlett 2 years ago

      I actually have explored lucid dreaming and have been able to go lucid a handful of times. However, I believe the dream is while we are awake, too. Why bother waking up, if the awareness is there of the dream? Why not just relax into the dream?

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Lucifer Rising 2 years ago

        I have not taken control of my dreams in a long time, but what I do strive to do is remember them and look at them consciously, as there is often interesting discoveries there for me to do so.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

©2019 Soul Sequel | All Rights Reserved

 
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account