screwtape had this same type of thought about knowledge... that the more we know the fewer areas God has to hide. but again, with each piece of new knowledge comes a new set of questions. is knowledge indefinitely progressive...? i believe one day i will know that of which i am now ignorant,
This is certainly true.
but are we capable of complete knowledge, of becoming omniscient ourselves..." that's an interesting idea to me.
No. That state is not possible. It is the speed at which data can be assimilated that prevents it. Unfortunately, the question is a little vague: for example, you would have to understand the final intricacies of photosynthesis in plants and
know what an Amazonian tribesman were thinking, just in case it was important.
I take it that by the we”
in “we capable of complete knowledge” to mean “there would be a set of people, whose individual knowledge, when added together, would amount to all that could be known.”
It may be that, by “knowledge” you mean “how things work.”
Based upon the growth of knowledge since the Enlightenment, knowing “how things work.” has been pretty stupendous, but we may never understand some things fully.
That said, I invented a way to pick the winner 9 times out of 10 in a horserace, even if I did not understand it, it would work. Obviously, however, I would not attribute it to a god.
… but if we're talking about an omniscient being, the all powerful alpha & omega, the beginning and the end... we have to ask not only why this supreme being doesn't heal amputees, but why do i have to encounter traffic on my way into the office... or why do i have to go to the office at all...? why should i have to work, or eat, or breath, or anything...
Well, we might have to ask these things, but we know the answers.
why God doesn't heal amputees would be way down on my list of questions.
If you were an amputee or a medical insurance company, it might be somewhat higher. You can, of course, reply as to where your priorities are but that does not explain WWGHA?
I hope you have seen “Monty Python and The Holy Grail." Early in the film a witch is being tried. The John Cleese character calls out from the crowd “She changed me into a newt!”
There is sudden silence and the crowd start looking at him. “John Cleese adds, “…I got better!”
The lack of amputees being healed in the Bible is because the crowd would not have believed it. There is a limit to falsehoods if you wish to be believed
. A more Biblical example is from one of the gospels that did not make it into the Bible: Jesus is approached by two sisters who claim that their brother was turned into a donkey by a witch -> Jesus restores the man to his normal self.
We can see why it ended up on the cutting-room floor at Nicaea.
but i think the "heart" of this "God" would be somewhere in the arena of "deciding to be better"... but deciding to be better also infers a "free will" it sounds like a statement in which you have a "choice"... as if WE are the source of our own thoughts and actions. yet the facts tell us that free will is an illusion...
I agree, the NT comprises some stories that say, “Be reasonable”. It is massively marred (i) by others saying “or else you burn forever.” (ii) an inability to move with the times.