06 Dec 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles" .... God's knowledge is the same at all moments since all moments are the same."
Because it formally asserts (A and Not-A) among its claims.
In particular, it asserts that God doesn't know things until they happen, and that God's knowledge is the same at all moments since all moments are the same.
😕
06 Dec 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesOkay—just to extrapolate from the simple die example—given a computer with sufficient information feed, and sufficient computing capability, such a computer could both know (a) what are all the potential outcomes of my deciding to write these words, and (b) exactly what is the present, ongoing actual outcome of that. So that postulating an “extra-natural” being “outside of time” is unnecessary with regard to (1) and (2)?
Then we are all omniscient if (3) isn't required.
For example, I am going to roll a die. I know the possible outcomes. Do I have omniscience with regard to the die's roll? If I do, then omniscience is a trivial property.
06 Dec 05
Originally posted by vistesdI think I agree with your conclusion, subject to some futher contemplation about the recursive consequences of a being having total knowledge about the universe in which it resides.
Okay—just to extrapolate from the simple die example—given a computer with sufficient information feed, and sufficient computing capability, such a computer could both know (a) what are all the potential outcomes of my deciding to write these words, and (b) exactly what is the present, ongoing actual outcome of that. So that postulating an “extra-natural” being “outside of time” is unnecessary with regard to (1) and (2)?
Can the universe contain a scale model of itself? I'm not sure.
How does the answer to that question lend insight to the informational counterpart? I don't know.
06 Dec 05
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesWell, the questions you don't know the answers to here, are questions I don't know enough to ask... 🙂
I think I agree with your conclusion, subject to some futher contemplation about the recursive consequences of a being having total knowledge about the universe in which it resides.
Can the universe contain a scale model of itself? I'm not sure.
How does the answer to that question lend insight to the informational counterpart? I don't know.
06 Dec 05
Originally posted by DarfiusI am interested in how you came to this conclusion...is it through your own life experience?If so then other people could also relate to it in many different ways.What is written in the Bible is not always for a specific purpose but sometimes many...however there should be a dominant reason which with Job i think is faith.
He didn't test Job to find out the result, He did so to display to Satan that people were capable of loving God for who He was, and not material blessings.
I of course believe God is omniscient.
He was not perfect like all of us yet for no particular reason had his life stripped away.It did not stop there because his own family(God's Children)were the ones who gave him the most pain.He was betrayed by the ones he loved because they thought to highly of themselves.When other Christians read about Job they can see that through hard times you can still make it through with your faith in the Lord.Also he did get blessed a lot more than before so it also gives Christians hope.
06 Dec 05
Originally posted by vistesdI have never said He does not know what will happen. He does. But He only knew because YOU chose to do it. I don't understand why this is so difficult to perceive.
Why is it incoherent? It seems that the term “omniscience” has been limited (from what might be a usual understanding) to one of “omniscience of potential,” rather than omniscience of actuality, until such actuality is manifest.
Just so you know where I’m coming from, I don’t believe that there is an “extra-natural” God who is omniscient in any sense. ...[text shortened]... n are three different things. It seems to me that Darfius is claiming (1) and (2), but not (3).
Despite Doctor's insistence, it is not self-refuting to say that a being that transcends time both can only know something after it occurs within time, and yet be said to have always known it. And he cannot display how it is.
06 Dec 05
Originally posted by windmillJob 1: 9 "Does Job fear God for nothing?" Satan replied. 10 "Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. 11 But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face."
I am interested in how you came to this conclusion...is it through your own life experience?If so then other people could also relate to it in many different ways.What is written in the Bible is not always for a specific purpose but sometimes many...however there should be a dominant reason which with Job i think is faith.
...[text shortened]... ith in the Lord.Also he did get blessed a lot more than before so it also gives Christians hope.
Satan gave God an honor challenge. "I think you only have followers because you bought them." God accepted the challenge and embarrassed Satan when Job continued to fear Him despite his hardships.
The outcome was always known by God.
06 Dec 05
Originally posted by DarfiusIt isn't about love....it's about faith.
Job 1: 9 "Does Job fear God [b]for nothing?" Satan replied. 10 "Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. 11 But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face." ...[text shortened]... an when Job continued to fear Him despite his hardships.
The outcome was always known by God.[/b]
06 Dec 05
1 edit
Originally posted by DarfiusI may have misunderstood when you said: “God knows all the potential outcomes, but does not know what you will choose until you choose it.”
I have never said He does not know what will happen. He does. But He only knew because YOU chose to do it. I don't understand why this is so difficult to perceive.
Despite Doctor's insistence, it is not self-refuting to say that a being that transcends time both can only know something after it occurs within time, and yet be said to have always known it. And he cannot display how it is.
There are choices in my life that I haven’t made yet. Some of them, for me, may seem to be difficult choices: “If I do this, that might happen; but if I do that, this might happen.” Now, if God knows that I will, in fact choose this—even though I do not know it—then there is no possibility of my choosing any other action, is there? In which case, what I might view is a free choice, is a forgone conclusion.
You further said: “But since He is not restricted by time, the moment He "found out" is the same moment as now, or now, or now. All the same "moments" to Him. So He has really always known.”
I choose in time. You’re saying that God sees it all at once, so to speak. I understand that. Nevertheless, the fact seems to remain that I cannot choose in time what God knows that I will not choose. I think this is what Dr. S. means by “illusory free will.”
Coletti, for example, bites the bullet on this with his Calvinist “double predestination.” He bases this, as I understand him anyway, more directly on God’s omnipotence—and that God has predestined everyone to either salvation or condemnation. This is not your position, as I understand it. However, if God knows now what I will in fact choose tomorrow—whether God’s omniscient perspective is all-at-once (outside of time) or not—how can I possibly choose otherwise? Is it not simply a matter of me, in time, looking back to see what I have chosen—which is what God knows I will choose all along?