Why would an all Knowing being not know how to reach an imperfect being that he had created?
That brings up the question of who declared it to be a Holy Book?
This does assume that a actual All Knowing Being and a hypothetical All Knowing Being have the same level of “all knowingness”.
Also, maybe All Knowing Beings know how to reach their created imperfect beings but simply aren’t able to do it.
CMC fnord!
Which would then seem to fly in the face of All Powerful, one would think. 
I don’t subscribe to the notion that there’s an Almighty being at work in the world, but I don’t find it difficult to accept such a being would be beyond the scope of our understanding if that being existed. I do, however, struggle with the default “He works in mysterious ways” response to any challenge to that belief that can’t be readily addressed by the faithful.
If this being exists, and if this being is almighty, and if this being really gives a damn (literally even) what we do or don’t do down here on our little chunk of rock, then how could this being not possess some clear and effective way to convey this to us. Something that doesn’t rely on some dude having a dream or seeing things or hearing voices. Reductive, I know, but still pertinent in my estimation. Once upon a time, that might have sufficed, but clearly that’s no longer the case.
Upon review, I should probably indicate I speak to the broader point in this discussion, not crowmanyclouds’ post specifically.
Great Og on a stick, that passage blew my mind. Luckily, SAB summed it up with this:
I can think of no sane reason why THE LORD offered this as a cure for leprosy. Actually, He doesn’t really say it’s a cure. He just told Moses to use it. THE LORD apparently has a sense of humor and sent Moses on a snipe hunt.
Upon seeing the code, I see you found a clever way of hiding fnord.
The bible has Jesus telling the followers —
“Whatever you ask in my name…”
“Faith as small as a mustard seed…”
both of those are then qualified by other users as “having to be in the right frame of mind, or you don’t have enough faith…” - but the Bible is clear on what the expectations are.
Since Jesus (in the bible) is “Son of God” and “God himself” (depending on a couple of viewpoints)- it seems you have right there as simple a statement as could possibly be made - and yet it still “never happens”.
That is one possibility.
Isn’t there something about an OmniMax god being logically impossible? (The Problem of Evil?)
Not that I care, since I hate¹ the logical arguments for a god² with a passion!
¹ I have a logical argument for X, therefor X exists, have you met the dragon in my garage? His name is Carl!
² I’ll never understand how those making those arguments can go from logical argument for a god to therefore Jesus and his Dad without showing their work.
In the end though, just as with “nothing”, until we actually get a All Knowing and/or All Powerful being “in the lab” our definitions of All Anything are mere placeholders.
CMC fnord!
You don’t even need omnibenevolence - omnipotence and omniscience are logically impossible. If at time X God knows he is going to do Y, he is powerless not to do Y, and is is thus not omnipotent. If he can do Y or not Y, then he doesn’t know what he is going to do, and is not omniscient. The common argument against this is that he just doesn’t choose to change his mind, but that is irrelevant - what is important is that he can’t.
Omnibenevolence works also since God is constrained to not to anything not maximally benevolent. However, since we are clearly not living in the best of all possible worlds, it does not matter.
For 15 years or more I’ve had a challenge out for anyone using the cosmological argument for god to get from there to any god mentioned in a human religion. No takers. Such a creator god could at least inspire a holy book with something resembling the correct information.
Maybe the creator created for a totally different planet - and they got an accurate Bible. We just showed up by accident, without a clue as to what went on.
It seems that many - perhaps most - believers still think the earth is the center of the universe deep down in their hearts.
I don’t believe that “omniscient” is generally meant to include knowing the future. In God’s case, I think his “omniscience” is held to be a side effect of his omnipresence, but he lives within the same time stream as us. The Bible makes it fairly clear that God judges people in real-time, punishing the Jewish tribes as they obey and disobey him, throughout the OT. And then the whole purpose of the NT is to change the rules, so clearly he wasn’t forecasting the future, or he’d have been able to be more proactive and prevent all the things that piss him off, beforehand.
Of course, I would have liked to have seen Jesus draw a map of the Earth, reveal some of the equations behind quantum physics, or simply to have told people to rub themselves on cow teets every once in a while to prevent Smallpox. There’s plenty of things he could have done that would have been far more miraculous than changing a river into wine while no one but the one guy who chronicled it was watching the river. God’s omniscience be what it may, there’s certainly no evidence that Jesus had any of it.
I don’t think hares qualify. Their noses go up and down, but not because they’re chewing cud.
They also eat their own droppings, but I don’t think that counts, either.
I’m not sure if it’s saying it will heal him, or just that if he becomes healed, this is what to do make him ceremonially clean. Sort of like there are ritual things to do after a woman’s period stops, but doing the things doesn’t stop her period.
Supposedly the prophecies coming true are evidence of god. Do you you think they are just luck? Would God lose money at the racetrack?
A god who did not know the future is just as blind as we are. And various “proofs” of god define god as the greatest there can be. An omniscient deity knowing the future is greater than one not knowing it.
The problem is: which is greater - a fully omniscient but not omnipotent god or a fully omnipotent but not omniscient god?
We could probably run several hundred posts discussing the issues surrounding prophecy. The primary problem is that a prophetic declaration cannot be validated until after the prophesied event has transpired, and often the event or result is subject to interpretation, because divine prophecies are not even as clear as particulate material in a dense colloidal suspension. Then, of course, there is the question of whether an actor was influenced by the prophecy itself. In the end, the metric for assessing the legitimacy of a prophet is as :dubious: as that of any other evidence for the existence of any given superbeing.
The latter is logically impossible, since an omnipotent being could by definition just grant itself omniscience.
I had the same answer, by a slightly different route: the omnipotent being causes events to come out the way he wants, and so he has “omniscience” in a passive sense.
“You see that glass window? It’s going to be broken in just a moment.” Puts fist through window. “See? I knew that was going to happen.”
It’s generally accepted that omnipotence does not extend to logically impossible things, so if the bi-omni situation were logically impossible (which it is) then an omnipotent god couldn’t give herself omniscience.
The claim of legitimate and fulfilled prophecy is pretty clear. How they actually did was not so good.
I could probably write a Biblical-type prophecy about the outcome of a horse race which would be correct (under certain interpretations) no matter which horse won.
Why is omnipotent + omniscient logically impossible?
If you already know what you are going to do then you can’t chose to do anything else.
CMC fnord!
That doesn’t strike me as a contradiction. The entity can do anything it wants to do. That it knows in advance what it is going to want is not a violation of that principle.