when I said the book of moses I meant the story of moses.
but nice try.

God probably wouldn’t enjoy reading. When you’re all knowing it spoils the ending.

Then where does his knowledge comes from?

You don’t seriously propose that God got to be omniscient by reading books, do you? Consider this; God created man, the world, the universe, and everything in it. And presumably he was around for quite awhile before it occured to him that a universe needed to be made at all. Also, I think we can safely assume he was pretty damn smart even back then. So with just Him around, who the hell was writing any books? He’d have had to write them himself! And how much are you gonna learn from reading something your wrote?

If you’re talking about the J/C God (or “real God”, as Christians call him) then you should also know flat out that he knows everything and always has. Like a teenager he just magically knows it all.

To suggest otherwise is just really gauche.

somebody fucking ban this guy. What kind of stupid as post is this. Does God read books? seriously.

OWNED!

OH MY GOD. I hope that was a joke. You must be pre pubescent. I’m thinking 10 or 11. Like God actually gets books written by HUMANS. How could he learn knowledge from his own creations? Are you retarded?

Jeez are all christians this stupid.

I’m new to this forum and i think your supposed to be “nice” and if your not you get warnings but i seriously see nothing wrong with my post. So dont ban me. Or warn me. Come on now everyone can consent that the title of this thread is a stupid question. Period. Charllleyyy here obviously ate to many paint chips as a kid.

god damn this was a stupid post. I think i’m gonna make a thread of stupid threads. This will go right under “Why are Atheists nice to people”

LOL!

Calm down.

You know his name, don’t read his threads.

Exhale.

edit: Dan, this thread is a little bonkers, even for you.

dan020350 is eccentric, but by no means a consistent time-waster. I have my suspicions that his innocuous, almost niave manner of inquirey is designed to draw out deeper thoughts in those who read him. Of course, the thing most typically drawn out of me is sarcasm, but it’s a gentle, innocuous sarcasm meant to draw out the deeper thoughts, too.

Perhaps his idea is to force us to examine our unquestioned acceptance of God’s omnicience?

Hi Phaedrus,

You said,

That statement is not supported. Jesus even says, “But of that day and [that] hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” (Mark 13:32) when talking about when He would return to Earth.

Also, I’ve never heard any Christian call Jesus “The real God.”

Connect

You misunderstand that passage- I believe it must be read to say no one but the Father. Plus, that was meant as Onionesque sarcasm meant to rib Dan, not an airtight theological arguement.

I’m not positive I’ve heard anyone use those exact words, but between the lines most Christians I know consider their God the real one. Not that that’s unique to Christians, of course.

I here to ask stupid questions, so in later life you don’t have to ask it, when you mumble alone in the nursing home.

Hi Phaedrus,

The quote was direct from Mark in the New American Standard Version. You might be thinking of the parallel verse found in Luke I think. The quote is accurate. Since “only the Father knew” and Jesus is not the Father, then it follows that Jesus did not know.

Connections

Yes, the quote it accurate but I never said Jesus was omnicienct- I said God was.

Hi Phaedrus,

I must have been wrong in interpreting you J/C God as Jesus Christ. Sorry for my error.

Connections

No problem. On a related note, I think the prevailing theological opinion is that while Jesus was fully God and fully man, when he wore human form he limited himself to that form. After he died and was resurrected, he apparently regained his omnicience and full ‘godhood,’ for lack of a better word.

Hi Phaedrus,

That is an issue that I’ve spent some time thinking about. The “emptying” that you talk about is known as Kenosis. This spurs a lot of heresy to justify it.

Phaedrus, I understand that we are limited by words but if we say that Jesus was fully God yet did not possess 100% of a particular attribute, that seems to be illogical. Specifically it flies in the face of the law of noncontradiction. If we hold

God is omniscient
Jesus is God
Jesus was not omniscient It would follow
Jesus was not God

We can’t hold to Him being two things in the same way at the same time with this issue and still think it comes to a logical conclusion. Other things such as 100% red and 100% rubber would not be a contradiction when talking about a ball. But when we say Jesus was 100% God (omniscience being one characteristic) and 100% man (non omniscient) I run into difficulty reconciling that contradiction.

Maybe we can take this to another thread?

Thanks,

Connect

Note that these are the same tactics that Socrates deployed in engaging his adversaries - he purposely put himself in the position of one who knows nothing, in order to antagonize those who claimed to possess knowledge. This actually worked, hence the Dialogues, until they got annoyed and fed him some hemlock, hence the trial.

Admittedly, Socrates’ questions were more to the point than Dan’s, but given our modern standpoint it is understandable.

Everytime when someone judges me I feel like I have level up and a battlefield, in a video game. There is this sense that I felt delighted when someone understands me and oddness when some critcize me, yet I feel delighted too.

Thanks for the harsh ones and the gentle ones

Posted: Wed Aug 09, 2006 5:54 am Post subject: Does God read books?

I was thinking if god read books,

God is the author.

So he does then?