Tarski wrote:You have low standards then. Even I can't do a bit of future prediction. A weather man would have impressed a caveman right?
We are talking about knowing EVERYTHING, not just having some surprising knowledge (surprising to you).
?? Do you believe whatever you are told?
Yes, but when the predictions come from voices in your head coupled with sensations your options for explanation are limited.
No, I don't believe what I'm told. However if someone has shown themselves to be reliable in the past then I am much more likely to take their word at face-value.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
The Nehor wrote: Yes, but when the predictions come from voices in your head coupled with sensations your options for explanation are limited.
They aren't as limited as I would have previously believed, given to what you seem to be attributing them.
I would recommend seeing a good therapist, though. I don't say that to be flippant, either. You really should consider it (if, indeed, you're giving us an honest description of your experience).
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
You need to read up on the Encyclopedia of Mormonism's definintion of the three big O's (Omnipotence, Omniscience, and Omnipresence). I think you'd be surprised at what you find. LDS doctrine does not work well under the idea of an omniscient god. I don't have the definition with me, but when I get home tonight I'll post it.
Tarski wrote:In another thread, Nehor responded to a question about why God would allow horrible suffering by saying
“If an omniscient being considers it worth it then it is.”
Now I object to the idea that whatever an omniscient being says is "worth it" is in fact worth it (worth it to whom?) But there is another pressing question (especially for those who have supposedly met or communicated alleged gods):
Q: How does a being that is decidedly not omniscient, nevertheless determine that another being is omniscience?
(I myself might appear omniscient to a sufficiently unsophisticated creature if I only interact for a short time.)
Groovy question Tarski. This is why I adhere to the heresy that G-d is increasing in knowledge and does not know "all."
One that I've been toying with lately is: "G-d revealed through scripture that He cannot lie. But, how do we know He wasn't lying when He said that?"
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
Some Schmo wrote:They aren't as limited as I would have previously believed, given to what you seem to be attributing them.
I would recommend seeing a good therapist, though. I don't say that to be flippant, either. You really should consider it (if, indeed, you're giving us an honest description of your experience).
Thank you for your concern but I'm happy and everyone around me thinks I'm quirky, smart, and fun. Not seeing a problem. The therapist might tell me I'm delusional, I'll disagree, they'll disagree. They charge too much to just have circular arguments.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
You need to read up on the Encyclopedia of Mormonism's definition of the three big O's (Omnipotence, Omniscience, and Omnipresence). I think you'd be surprised at what you find. LDS doctrine does not work well under the idea of an omniscient god. I don't have the definition with me, but when I get home tonight I'll post it.
Okay, I don't have that book so would love to see it. Be forewarned, I might disagree with it.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Doctor Steuss wrote:Groovy question Tarski. This is why I adhere to the heresy that G-d is increasing in knowledge and does not know "all."
One that I've been toying with lately is: "G-d revealed through scripture that He cannot lie. But, how do we know He wasn't lying when He said that?"
If you could prove that God is not omniscient I would no longer strive to obey him completely. I'd view him as a great counselor and friend but if he doesn't know everything then I can not have faith in him. He might have made a mistake and be unable to fulfill his promises. He might make a mistake and destroy himself. At that point he becomes a wise spiritual being I would probably consult with and trust he is trying to do right thing....but worship him? No.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
The Nehor wrote:Thank you for your concern but I'm happy and everyone around me thinks I'm quirky, smart, and fun. Not seeing a problem. The therapist might tell me I'm delusional, I'll disagree, they'll disagree. They charge too much to just have circular arguments.
I'm not sure a therapist would be useful, but I just thought I'd mention that even some smart people have problems. John Nash was a brilliant schizophrenic man. I really like A Beautiful Mind.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Doctor Steuss wrote:Groovy question Tarski. This is why I adhere to the heresy that G-d is increasing in knowledge and does not know "all."
One that I've been toying with lately is: "G-d revealed through scripture that He cannot lie. But, how do we know He wasn't lying when He said that?"
If you could prove that God is not omniscient I would no longer strive to obey him completely. I'd view him as a great counselor and friend but if he doesn't know everything then I can not have faith in him. He might have made a mistake and be unable to fulfill his promises. He might make a mistake and destroy himself. At that point he becomes a wise spiritual being I would probably consult with and trust he is trying to do right thing....but worship him? No.
If you could prove that G-d is omniscient, I would lose all respect for Him for sending me to the crap-hole of an existence and for putting me through all of the never-ending mental suffering when He already knew the outcome and could have simply consigned me to a kingdom without putting me through so much crap to begin with.
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
Doctor Steuss wrote:Groovy question Tarski. This is why I adhere to the heresy that G-d is increasing in knowledge and does not know "all."
One that I've been toying with lately is: "G-d revealed through scripture that He cannot lie. But, how do we know He wasn't lying when He said that?"
If you could prove that God is not omniscient I would no longer strive to obey him completely. I'd view him as a great counselor and friend but if he doesn't know everything then I can not have faith in him. He might have made a mistake and be unable to fulfill his promises. He might make a mistake and destroy himself. At that point he becomes a wise spiritual being I would probably consult with and trust he is trying to do right thing....but worship him? No.
Interesting take on that, but I view it differently. I could completely trust a being who wasn't omniscient so long as His knowledge was absolute in the things relevant to His promises and His advice to me. One wonders, for example, what God uses His Urim and Thumim for upon which He resides which reveals things (D&C 130) if indeed God already knows the answer. Sure, maybe it's for God's servants or maybe it helps us study to become omniscient.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO