Kathy, Why is God's Knowledge So Limited?

[wolfgirl]

I've often wondered why God's knowledge seems to be limited to exactly the amount of knowledge that the people of the time had and no more. Wouldn't an omniscient being have been able to provide some detail, however small, that wasn't available to the people of the time? For example...

I disagree with you about the flood..but this is a totally different topic.

Okay, so let's talk about this flood. Do you have ANY idea how much rain would be required to totally cover up every bit of Earth, to the highest mountain tops? There is evidence of some local floods that happened throughout history. To the people of the time, it would have appeared as though all the world was covered in water. After all, they didn't know how big the world was, so how could they be expected to take that into account in their story? But isn't the bible inspired by God? Surely he must have known. Maybe this book was just written by people of the time with no help from God at all.

Is there any way that salt-water species can live in fresh water or vice versa? Generally speaking, each species can only live in a certain range of salinity. So once the rain had covered the Earth and mixed with the water from the oceans, the salinity of that water would be less than what the oceans had been but more than the fresh water lakes, rivers and streams had been. Probably very few species of fish or mammal could have survived in this new salinity level. What happened to them? Oh, wait, the people of the time didn't know about salinity and species-specific requirements, so how could they be expected to include them in their story? But isn't the bible inspired by God? Surely he must have known. Maybe this book was just written by people of the time with no help from God at all.

And we now know that it's virtually impossible to build a species population from just two individuals; a much larger gene pool is necessary to sustain a species. Even today with all our knowledge of genetics and population management, once a species gets below a certain critical number (not sure what that number is, but it's much more than two!), it is almost inevitable that that species will become extinct. Oh, wait, the people of the time didn't know about genetics, so how could they be expected to include them in their story? But isn't the bible inspired by God? Surely he must have known. Maybe this book was just written by people of the time with no help from God at all.

Two of every animal, huh? We always see the pictures with some elephants, horses, ducks, etc. But in reality there are millions of species of animal on Earth? Do you really believe that a boat could be built that could hold two of each of them? Oh, wait, the people of the time didn't know how very many species existed, so how could they be expected to include them in their story? But isn't the bible inspired by God? Surely he must have known. Maybe this book was just written by people of the time with no help from God at all.

And how exactly did Noah go about getting penguins from the South Pole, polar bears from the North Pole and duck-billed platypus from Australia? Oh, wait, the people of the time didn't know those things existed, so how could they be expected to write about them in their story? But isn't the bible inspired by God? Surely he must have known. Maybe this book was just written by people of the time with no help from God at all.

Many animals have to eat other animals to survive. Most cat species, for example, must consume animal protein. So not only did we need two of everything, we needed lots more of some to feed the others. How did that work out? Oh, wait, the people of the time didn't know about the nutritional requirements of every animal, so how could they be expected to include them in their story? But isn't the bible inspired by God? Surely he must have known. Maybe this book was just written by people of the time with no help from God at all.

So very many questions, but they all seem to be answered by the concept that...maybe this book was just written by people of the time with no help from God at all. Because if he helped write it (or inspired it or whatever it is you think he did), either he made up a lot of lies, or he's not nearly as smart as you seem to think he is!

 

[Freethinker]

Many animals have to eat other animals to survive. Most cat species, for example, must consume animal protein. So not only did we need two of everything, we needed lots more of some to feed the others. How did that work out?

Not to mention that after the flood waters receded, these same predators would have started feeding on the survivors. As soon as they ate the first meal, a species most likely went extinct.

Maybe this book was just written by people of the time with no help from God at all.

 

[El Greco]

What, do you expect to make her think ? For people like KK, the explanation is very simple: Godditit. God temporarily changed the cats' physiology so that they didn't require protein. God made all animals able to survive in an ark. God shrinked the animals or created a few extra hidden rooms in the ark so that they would all fit in it and also have plenty of space to play hockey. And God chose not to let people know about the scientific details because they were not ready for them. Why they were not ready ? Because God didn't ready them, that's why.

See ?

 

[JLam]

Folks...the Bible is true because it's the word of God. It says so in the Bible. It's obvious that God suspended the rules so that all the animals could fit onto the unimaginably large boat.

You people need to start thinking.

 

[Johnny Pixels]

Folks...the Bible is true because it's the word of God. It says so in the Bible. It's obvious that God suspended the rules so that all the animals could fit onto the unimaginably large boat.

You people need to start thinking.

How about the bible is the word of satan, masquerading as god, that's why none of the facts fit. It's to drive us away from god. Anyone got any proof this isn't true?

 

[slingblade]

What I don't get (among many things) is: why the cosmic game of peek-a-boo?

God seems like such a child. Why this entire game in the first place? Why even do any of this? Why not just create the cosmos, create our little blue ball, put us on it, and live here with us?

I mean, it sounds like God is retarded. "I'm lonely, so I'm going to make two people. They won't know right from wrong, but that doesn't mean they can't do wrong--they just won't know it when they do it. Then I'm going to put this tree here where these two live, and the fruit of this tree, when eaten, will give them the ability to know right from wrong.

"But, I'm going to tell them not to touch the tree, and then I'll take off and leave them alone for a while with it, to see what they'll do.

Except I'm omniscient, so I already know they'll fail. But what the heck, only their immortal souls, which I gave them in the first place, are at stake. After they screw up, as I know they will, I will then give them the power to reproduce. I'm going to make this really fun for the guy, but I'm going to make it hurt like hell for the woman, since she actually picked the fruit, just as I knew she would do. All he did was eat it, which was what I said they shouldn't do, but hey, I like guys better. Sue me. Anyway, then they can make more stupid, wrong-and-right knowing morons just like themselves!

"Pretty soon, the world I made will be overrun by these cretins, and at some point, I'm going to have to get myself an avatar, go down there, kill myself, and maybe a few of them won't go to the eternal damnation I created and set up. Most of them will, however, because eventually I'll stop showing myself at all, and they'l be left to guess if I really exist or not. And if they don't guess right...well, to hell with them! Literally! Bwaahahahahaha! Oh, I kill me!

"Yeah. That sounds like the perfect cure for my loneliness! Or was I trying to cure my boredom? I can't remember, now."

 

[geetarmoore]

What I don't get (among many things) is: why the cosmic game of peek-a-boo?

God seems like such a child. Why this entire game in the first place? Why even do any of this? Why not just create the cosmos, create our little blue ball, put us on it, and live here with us?

I mean, it sounds like God is retarded. "I'm lonely, so I'm going to make two people. They won't know right from wrong, but that doesn't mean they can't do wrong--they just won't know it when they do it. Then I'm going to put this tree here where these two live, and the fruit of this tree, when eaten, will give them the ability to know right from wrong.

"But, I'm going to tell them not to touch the tree, and then I'll take off and leave them alone for a while with it, to see what they'll do.

Except I'm omniscient, so I already know they'll fail. But what the heck, only their immortal souls, which I gave them in the first place, are at stake. After they screw up, as I know they will, I will then give them the power to reproduce. I'm going to make this really fun for the guy, but I'm going to make it hurt like hell for the woman, since she actually picked the fruit, just as I knew she would do. All he did was eat it, which was what I said they shouldn't do, but hey, I like guys better. Sue me. Anyway, then they can make more stupid, wrong-and-right knowing morons just like themselves!

"Pretty soon, the world I made will be overrun by these cretins, and at some point, I'm going to have to get myself an avatar, go down there, kill myself, and maybe a few of them won't go to the eternal damnation I created and set up. Most of them will, however, because eventually I'll stop showing myself at all, and they'l be left to guess if I really exist or not. And if they don't guess right...well, to hell with them! Literally! Bwaahahahahaha! Oh, I kill me!

"Yeah. That sounds like the perfect cure for my loneliness! Or was I trying to cure my boredom? I can't remember, now."

Sig worthy - if it would fit.....

Nice work. Who could believe this garbage?....

I mean...

Other than 77% of the American population.....

 

[kmortis]

That's why I like a lot of the African tribal creation stories. God made the world (in some case it came out wrong), he took one long look at what he had wrought, and left in shame.

 

[David Swidler]

The loneliness bit is actually not too far off the mark from some serious scholarly interpretation. Exploiting that angle might also address some of the questions in the OP. Kathy's unlikely to provide a serious answer, but I join the JREF collective in the dim hope that she might really think about these issues.

Based on, among other things, nearly identical verse structure in the verse describing man's creation and the one in which man looks for a companion among the animals, it's not unreasonable to say that God's goal in creating the world was to create someone with whom a relationship is possible (just as man didn't find true companionship with creatures with whom he couldn't identify, God's goal was to create someone who shared at least some important characteristics, such as free will, higher thought, speech, etc.). But forcing man into the relationship would be counterproductive, because it would be one-sided. So man has the opportunity to choose such a relationship. Overwhelming the world with evidence of God would consitute coercion, and defeat the purpose.

This is hardly the only fruitful approach by which Genesis makes sense, but it's certainly a good starting point.

Something else to keep in mind vis-à-vis the OP is that the Bible is not meant to provide scientific insight, or anything alse that would distract from the philosophical, moral or spiritual content it has to convey. Nor is it meant as a history book - certainly not the first few chapters of Genesis.

 

[Corpse Cruncher]

Something else to keep in mind vis-à-vis the OP is that the Bible is not meant to provide scientific insight, or anything alse that would distract from the philosophical, moral or spiritual content it has to convey. Nor is it meant as a history book - certainly not the first few chapters of Genesis.

I disagree with you here. I do believe that the Bible does hold some historical and scientific aspects. The wording maybe off-key and I am also of the mind that far too many people take words to literally. Nonetheless those aspects remain in-situ. I am also of the belief that the Bible was meant to include historical and scientific data as well as the philosophical. My own personal thoughts on the Bible are, that it is a reference book of a culture that once, perhaps still, lived. The Bible is their legacy.

 

[Roboramma]

Whether it was meant as a scientific book or not, don't you think that a god that was trying to describe creation would leave some hint that he actually knew what happened?

I mean, if I were to go back and try to describe it (as well as I know), even very simply, with use of metaphor, to people who don't have any background knowledge, you'd be able to tell that I knew what I was talking about.
Well, sort of knew, anyway - after all, I'm not all that well versed on astrophysics. And god knows everything. You'd expect him to get something right.

 

[David Swidler]

That all depends on the goal of the author(s). Consider that the ancient audience would be familiar with contemporary mythology and the imagery in the surrounding cultures. Framing the message in those terms was an efficient way of communicating ideas. The fact that they were myths doesn't detract from the moral or spiritual message.

 

[Corpse Cruncher]

God didn't write the book. Man did. Are they myths or just woolly coated references?

 

[David Swidler]

Believers won't disagree with you, CC.

 

[Corpse Cruncher]

Believers won't disagree with you, CC.

They should do seeing, as God dictates to his followers what to write down. As far as I am aware of, I maybe wrong here, God has never wrote anything down personally, he just speaks. Again, I maybe wrong in my assumption here, the Bible is about what God did, not what God wrote? Or has everybody forgotten that fact and got caught up in the religious runaway train?

 

[David Swidler]

IIRC the only thing the Bible said that God "wrote" directly is the text of the first set of tablets with the Ten Commandments. Everything else was actually written by someone else, whether through direct "dictation" (Moses and the Pentateuch), through prophecy (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the twelve minor prophets) - in which case the scribe has leeway to express the prophecies in his personal style - or divine inspiration (the rest of the books), in which the writer has divine "assistance" in composing the work. So from the believer's perspective, as a whole it could still be called "God's word."

 

[geetarmoore]

IIRC the only thing the Bible said that God "wrote" directly is the text of the first set of tablets with the Ten Commandments. Everything else was actually written by someone else, whether through direct "dictation" (Moses and the Pentateuch), through prophecy (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the twelve minor prophets) - in which case the scribe has leeway to express the prophecies in his personal style - or divine inspiration (the rest of the books), in which the writer has divine "assistance" in composing the work. So from the believer's perspective, as a whole it could still be called "God's word."

One would assume that God - creator of all and encoder of DNA - would have a little better handle on his QA department. The work in the bible is sloppy, and doesn't conform to any QS standards that I'm aware of.

Seriously, though. With as much ignorance that is contained within that book, how can one honestly believe that it's a coherent guide for life from a supreme being? I want my manual to be written by someone at LEAST as smart as I am.....

I guess what I'm saying is - he really didn't put the reigns down on his copyists at all, did he?.....

 

[David Swidler]

You'd have a point if the written bible were the only claimed source of divine guidance. In fact without some separate information it certainly does seem glaringly incomplete and occasionally incoherent. But there are separate "keys" to interpreting the text, and that's where the bulk of Israelite law comes from. Take a look at any page of the Talmud and you'll see detailed analysis of the proper application of those keys.

As an example, take the passage in Deuteronomy (not sure where exactly) containing the commandment to cover the blood of a slaughtered fowl or wild beast (e.g. deer, buffalo). There the text says to slaughter the animal "as I have commanded you." But the commandment describing the proper slaughter of animals doesn't appear anywhere. It was orally transmitted. Same thing with the little black boxes and straps that Jewish men wear during morning weekday services, called t'fillin. The Torah says in three places to put "totafot between your eyes." Without the separate oral tradition no one would know what the heck a totefet is, let alone that "between your eyes" actually refers to just above the hairline, not actually between the eyes.

Provide some examples of the ignorance you perceive in the OT - beyond that which can be easily explained as metaphorical or figurative, such as the first parts of Genesis - and we'll see if they can be explained.

ETA: Actually, the examples I gave above don't quite fit as illustrations, since they are separate things, not details derived from the text. A better example would be how to determine the proper methods for betrothal - i.e. aquiring the exclusive right from a woman to marry her. The text (Deuteronomy 23, I think)says, "When a man shall take a woman..." as a wife. The oral tradition indicates that there is a link between this instance of "take" and the instance of "take" used in Genesis when Abraham purchased Ephron's field for 400 silver shekels. That link is where the Talmud finds the source for money as a valid betrothal method.

 

[geetarmoore]

Herein lies the problem..

Why can't *I* read the bible?

Why does everything in it always need to be explained away as a misunderstanding of metaphor or figurative nuance, as if God's book can only be comprehended by theologians with PHD's?.....

Shouldn't the bible speak to the common man?

The bible speaks to me. I'd expect no less from a God with such great power. What it says to me - just a guy who God created and can read - is that he doesn't exist.

A God as great as the one who made life, the universe, and everything would have a book that spoke to me directly, without the need for apologists, theologians and translators getting in there and telling me what he really meant.

I would expect no less.

 

[David Swidler]

I don't have a PhD. I don't even have a master's degree. I'm not a theologian. And your objections are perfectly valid. If you're not an Israelite, why should the OT concern you at all?