I'm still not sold on this. I'm no quantum mechanics expert, but I do have a philosophy background, and it seems as if true omniscience -- possessing all possible knowledge -- seems like it should transcend this limitation.
Maybe I'm thinking about a form of omniscience that exists outside of time, in which case, of course an omniscient being would know what happens next, because they would know the future just as well as the past. (Example: Any omniscient being will know which photons will pass through a polarizing lens not based on prediction but based on already knowing the outcome.)
What difference does it make what happens outside of our reality? Omniscience and omnipotence need not be limited to our reality, but they do have to include our reality, and that it all that is required to make them logically incompatible.
I agree with all of that but none of those verses use the term omniscient.
The idea of omniscience leads to paradoxes like the one above. Can you know what it is to be non omniscient and be omniscient.
I think God can choose to understand and know what He wants to know. If he chooses to forget sin, He can. Meaning the strict definition of omniscience would not apply.
I'm no theologian or philosopher so there is a good chance I'm simply missing something or don't understand these words.
You can just claim that omniscience and omnipotence do not require that you can do logically impossible things. For instance, God couldn't will that 2+2=5, or that he could create something so heavy that he could not move it.
> Because even God can't skip ahead in those calculations just because its 'deterministic'. Something actually has to do the work to do the "determining".
I think you haven't internallized what "omniscient" actually means. Your statement is probably true about non-omniscient beings but I don't see how you can make that assertion about an omniscient state. More likely I suspect that you just don't believe omniscience is possible. There has been a LOT of theological discussion of this topic, most of which I am not familiar with.
I do believe in something like "omniscience", but base it in the ubiquity of math, not the omnipotence of an alleged creator. Mathematical structure exists independent of the human mind. When we calculate the result of a calculation or prove a new theorom, we are not creating something new, but uncovering pre-existing structure. This is why such truths can be independently discovered and verified. I think this mathematic structure is the fundemental nature of reality. Every possible variation of every possible simulation exists without needing any specifc "reality" to be running that simulation inside it. (Though, for every finite simulation, there would be infinite other finite simulations that contain it.)
> Jesus was God in flesh so he purposely limited himself to experience all that we experience, to suffer all that we suffer. There is nothing that He can't empathize with.
This implies that God is incapable of fully knowing the experience of humans without becoming human, hence God is not omniscient; since now his omniscience is contingent on becoming contingent.
reply