Originally posted by wolfgang59Why didn't you just ask that question in the beginning, instead of beating around the bush?
The detail of "seeing" is a triviality to my point. How god detected the light
is of no consequence. My query is that the simple passage strongly implies
that god was experiencing the light for the first time and thus was able to
make a value judgement on it.
I see that as contrary to omniscience.
Just wondering - is the omniscient, omnipotent god ...[text shortened]... t a modern add-on?
Some of the OT makes god look more like one of the Olympians ... more human.
I answered that question for sonhouse before. I foget exactly what I told him, but it is obvious that God was not omniscient in the beginning when he was creating the physical universe.
God has the capacity to search out all things according to scripture. That also implies His abilty to learn all things. That means to me that He did not know all things and I don't recall ever reading a translation of the Holy Bible in which "omniscient" is used. This does not mean He will never be omniscient.
But, yes omniscient is an add-on at the time of formulating early Christian doctrines.
Originally posted by RJHindsHow does that fit in with assertions that god is outside time?
Why didn't you just ask that question in the beginning, instead of beating around the bush?
I answered that question for sonhouse before. I foget exactly what I told him, but it is obvious that God was not omniscient in the beginning when he was creating the physical universe.
God has the capacity to search out all things according to scripture. That ...[text shortened]... cient.
But, yes omniscient is an add-on at the time of formulating early Christian doctrines.
and "unchanging"?
1 edit
Originally posted by wolfgang59I can only speculate. God created the system by which we tell time, therefore God was before all things and can be considered outside as well as inside time. I do not see why God can not be unchanging in some ways and changing in others. So I believe it would depend on the context, such as all things are possible with God.
How does that fit in with assertions that god is outside time?
and "unchanging"?
HalleluYaH !!!
Praise the LORD!
Holy! Holy! Holy!
Originally posted by wolfgang59Probably a medieval add-on is my guess.
The detail of "seeing" is a triviality to my point. How god detected the light
is of no consequence. My query is that the simple passage strongly implies
that god was experiencing the light for the first time and thus was able to
make a value judgement on it.
I see that as contrary to omniscience.
Just wondering - is the omniscient, omnipotent god ...[text shortened]... t a modern add-on?
Some of the OT makes god look more like one of the Olympians ... more human.
Originally posted by wolfgang59There was no change. God does not change. He is the same, today, yesterday and tomorrow. This is what happens when you listen to Mr. Hinds.
Suzi - I don't know what you are trying to say.
I'm suggesting that originally the god of the OT was not omniscient and that
Gen 1:4 is just one clue to that. If there was a change when/how did it happen?
Originally posted by SuzianneThe chicken thought the farmer would not change because every day the farmer gave the chicken corn to eat. The chicken loved the farmer.
There was no change. God does not change. He is the same, today, yesterday and tomorrow. This is what happens when you listen to Mr. Hinds.
Then one day the farmer wrung the chickens neck.
Originally posted by SuzianneIf god does not change he knew what light was like before creating it.
There was no change. God does not change. He is the same, today, yesterday and tomorrow. This is what happens when you listen to Mr. Hinds.
So why bother with Gen 1:4 ?
It should be "He knew it was good"
not "He saw that it was good".
There is a strong implication that god was experiencing
light for the first time and making a decision on it.
Originally posted by wolfgang59I read a science fiction story once, the Earth is visited by aliens, the only piece of Earth science they are interested in is Hamilton's principle where a quantity known as the action is minimized over the entire history of the dynamics. The linguists decode the alien language and learn it. They start perceiving their lives differently, they "remember" their futures so they know their entire lives before they happen. The narrative is from the point of view of one of the linguists, who explains that one feels the need to go through the motions. One knows what is going to happen, but when what would have been a surprise comes along they act with surprise. Possibly omniscience is like that, one is omniscient, but behaves in a manner as if one is not. After all, Genesis 1:4 does not state that seeing the light was good came as any surprise to God.
If god does not change he knew what light was like before creating it.
So why bother with Gen 1:4 ?
It should be "He knew it was good"
not "He saw that it was good".
There is a strong implication that god was experiencing
light for the first time and making a decision on it.
3 edits
"And God saw that the light was good and God separated the light from the darkness." (Gen. 4:1)
I gather from this that God is communicating with us that He agrees with us that light is good. We do like light and can hardly live well without it.
He communicates it with us in such a way that humans from varied ages, varied cultures, varied levels of human maturity can comprehend. A child can understand. An aged adult can also understand. The greatest number of people can understand.
Of course God had to know what light is to say "Let there be light". So I see no reason to think He had to create light to know what it was.
Of course we are latter told that God is eternal and dwells in unapproachable light.
" ... only Sovereign who will show the King of those who reign as kings and Lord of those who rule as lords, Who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen nor can see, to whom be honor and eternal might, Amen." (1 Tim. 6:15b,16)
He dwells in light and should know what light is.
He is also said to BE light. Or what light symbolizes as a type He is the total reality of. God is light -
" .. God is light and in Him is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:5b)
He should know what light is and not have to create light to know.
He is also called "the Father of lights".
"All good giving and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variation or shadow cast by turning." (James 1:17)
Genesis 1:4 shows He is a God of purpose preparing the stage for something important. Creation of the universe is all preparation. He is a God with a plan. The creation is being "booted up" as an operating system would be booted up. The preparation is good. All the details furnished by God, He wants us to know are [edited] good.
It is not written in Genesis as systematic theology. It is communicative and simple, not to be mistaken for naivete. He saw that the light was good. The light would furnish His further plans and serve His purpose.