Christ-posse Non Peccare -able Not To Sin Or Non Posse Peccare - Not A

[Dr T]

Thanks for your thoughts AK. Some questions, his omniscience, did it include complete knowledge of everything (literally knowing all)? Like the thoughts that are only in my mind? If yes, how did He acquire such knowledge? Did He grow into the knowledge of EVERYTHING that He knew? Every aspect of everything on Earth? I'm also interested in the idea of Him always being obedient. In the preexistence that you talk about, how is it that He (only him?) was able to attain that? Was He different from everyone else? Have special privileges? What made Him able to hold that position/characteristic? Why nobody else (if that was the case)?

Thanks

[Guest ApostleKnight]

...[Christ's] omniscience, did it include complete knowledge of everything (literally knowing all)? Like the thoughts that are only in my mind?

I believe so. To accurately judge mankind, intent and not only actions must be taken into account. Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ must know everything to judge perfectly and justly, and be able to perceive the thoughts of men and women. The New Testament has many fine examples of Jesus knowing the thoughts of people.

If yes, how did He acquire such knowledge? Did He grow into the knowledge of EVERYTHING that He knew? Every aspect of everything on Earth?

I imagine that Christ--being the creator of the Earth--knows laws of science and physics we can't even dream of! I believe that Christ learned line up on line, precept upon precept. We have no revelation about how long the pre-mortal existence was...could have been a thousand years, could have been a trillion years (measured in terms of Earth-time). I believe that obedience brings greater knowledge, and since Jesus was perfectly obedient, he attained a perfect knowledge from our Heavenly Father.

In the preexistence that you talk about, how is it that [only Christ] was able to attain [perfect obedience]?

I honestly don't know. It's just the way he was. I won't cook up a theory in lieu of revelation, I just don't know. But I do know that he was perfectly obedient then and now and for ever. That's why only Jesus was fit to be our Savior...he's not great just because he died for us...but because he was literally the only one who could die for and save us. I mean that only a sinless sacrifice could satisfy justice, and Jesus being perfectly obedient was the only one who could place a sinless sacrifice at Heavenly Father's feet.

These are areas of knowledge where the pickings (read: revelations) are few. I know that Jesus is omniscient, knows me perfectly, loves me perfectly, is my Savior from death and hell, and is worthy of eternal praise. Those things I am sure about. :)

[Ray]

My comments to you have not been mild, veiled, or forgiving. They have been direct and harsh, frustrated and irritated... The worst adjective that can be leveled against me is perhaps vituperative, or scathing, or excoriative, or other related words that refer to harsh censure, forceful chastisement, or sharp critique. For this I ask no pardon.

If this is the way you really feel, ApostleKnight, these comments are also a waste of my time, but I'll say it again to share how I feel and to try to help you again.

You have basically admitted to being deliberately rude to me while also saying that you aren’t asking for any pardon (neither mine nor God’s) about acting that way to me, and later you even went so far as to say you would welcome me to be as rude to you as long as I defend my position with scriptures… while I have simply said (and said repeatedly) that if you (or anyone else) disagrees with me on something, that you (or anyone else) should simply ask God to know the truth about that issue for yourself.

And the fact that I also tell you (and other people) that I know what I know to be true, while telling you that you should ask God to know the truth for yourself, doesn’t mean I have a superior attitude in telling you what I know to be true.

I’m simply telling you (and other people) what I know to be true, while saying you can ask God for yourself… and you can take my advice or leave it but I know I am not being rude.

And btw, even if all I ever did was to tell people what I know to be true, without EVER sharing or explaining how or why I know the things that I know to be true, (and I have often shared some thoughts from other people who know what I know to be true), it would be no different than the way some people wrote some scriptures to tell you (and me) what they all knew to be true, because all of those people who wrote what they knew also learned the way I do… and the way I think all of us should learn the truth instead of “talking about” some scriptures while being rude with people as if that would help anybody know anything.

Anyway, you can go ahead and have your fun being rude to people while “talking about” some scriptures with them. I’ll just spend my time with some other people who I believe know “What Jesus Would Do”.

p.s. And btw, I aired this in public because it happened in public. He did not come to me privately.

[Dr T]

Hello Ray,

I am fascinated by you. Do you have a picture of yourself somewhere online that I can see?

Thanks

[Guest ApostleKnight]

You have basically admitted to being deliberately rude to me...

Never said rude Ray. Harsh is not rude.

...you even went so far as to say you would welcome me to be as rude to you as long as I defend my position with scriptures...

Never said be rude Ray, I said you can be harsh in critiquing my ideas if you have scriptural basis for doing so.

...the way...[we] should learn the truth instead of "talking about" some scriptures...

Talking about scriptures isn't a waste of time. By that standard, Paul and Nephi and anyone who discussed scripture at length with others was wasting time. I disagree. Before you can ask God if something's true, you have to read/learn it. All I'm asking is that if you disagree with an idea you show me what scriptures God told you were true that refute the idea you disagree with.

...other people who I believe know “What Jesus Would Do”.

Jesus would discuss scripture with those wanting to learn more, as he did all through his ministry in explaining his role as Savior and the reality of his divine Sonship.

[Ray]

<div class='quotemain'>

You have basically admitted to being deliberately rude to me...

Never said rude Ray. Harsh is not rude.

...you even went so far as to say you would welcome me to be as rude to you as long as I defend my position with scriptures...

Never said be rude Ray, I said you can be harsh in critiquing my ideas if you have scriptural basis for doing so.

...the way...[we] should learn the truth instead of "talking about" some scriptures...

Talking about scriptures isn't a waste of time. By that standard, Paul and Nephi and anyone who discussed scripture at length with others was wasting time. I disagree. Before you can ask God if something's true, you have to read/learn it. All I'm asking is that if you disagree with an idea you show me what scriptures God told you were true that refute the idea you disagree with.

...other people who I believe know “What Jesus Would Do”.

Jesus would discuss scripture with those wanting to learn more, as he did all through his ministry in explaining his role as Savior and the reality of his divine Sonship.

Yes, Nephi and Peter and other prophets of our Lord, and even our Lord Himself, often used scripture to support what they said, ApostleKnight, but they didn't always do that, and you don't always do that either, and yet you come down on me as if I am wrong by sharing what I think and believe and know with you and other people while advising you to learn from God... not me, but God, the "one" I am learning from.

And basically, you came down on me, "harshly", because I advise and keep advising people to learn from God, and for not providing scriptural references, and even if you know you should learn from God it still is not wrong to say that... and it is certainly not condescending to say that we should all be learning from God.

Anyway, you can say what you want, and be how you want, including being "harsh" with me if you want to be, but I know that is not the way that my Lord would want me to be with you or other people, and I will never do that to you or to others while sharing what I know is the truth.

I hope you enjoy your life. :)

Hello Ray,

I am fascinated by you. Do you have a picture of yourself somewhere online that I can see?

Thanks

Heh, I'm not interested in starting a fan club, Doc. Let's all learn the truth from God. :)

[Dr T]

Hey Ray,

Heh, I'm not interested in starting a fan club, Doc. Let's all learn the truth from God.

Hilarious response Ray! Thanks for that.

[Dr T]

Hello all,

This is sort of long (and probably boring) but I was doing some reading on the concept of God's omniscience and thought I'd share with you.

Omniscience

On the most superficial level, this means that God knows/has knowledge perfectly, eternally, etc. all that is or can be known (both possible & actual knowledge)—past, present & future. Though the word is not used in scripture (omniscience or omniscient) it is clearly portrayed or communicated in passages describing the length/breadth/depth of God’s knowledge, revealing that he “sees”, “hears”, and “knows” all things/nothing is hidden from him, etc.

Or

For any person S, S is omniscient if and only if S knows every true proposition [for all logically knowable proposition(s)] and believes no false proposition.

(1).

Or

For any person S, S is omniscient, defined:

For all propositions p, if p (is true) and p is (logically) knowable to S, then S knows that p (is true)

1. Words and Usage:

In the Old Testament it is expressed in connection with such words as da'ath, binah, tebhunah, chokhmah; also "seeing" and "hearing," "the eye" and "the ear" occur as figures for the knowledge of God, as "arm," "hand," "finger" serve to express His power. In the New Testament are found ginoskein, gnosis, eidenai, sophia, in the same connections.

2. Tacit Assumption and Explicit Affirmation:

Scripture everywhere teaches the absolute universality of the divine knowledge. In the historical books, although there is no abstract formula, and occasional anthropomorphic references to God's taking knowledge of things occur (Gen 11:5; 18:21; Dt 8:3), none the less the principle is everywhere presupposed in what is related about God's cognizance of the doings of man, about the hearing of prayer, the disclosing of the future (1 Sam 16:7; 23:9-12; 1 Ki 8:39; 2 Ch 16:9). Explicit affirmation of the principle is made in the Psalter, the Prophets, the chokhmah literature and in the New Testament. This is due to the increased internalizing of religion, by which its hidden side, to which the divine omniscience corresponds, receives greater emphasis (Job 26:6; 28:24; 34:22; Ps 139:12; 147:4; Prov 15:3,11; Isa 40:26; Acts 1:24; Heb 4:13; Rev 2:23).

3. Extends to All Spheres:

This absolute universality is affirmed with reference to the various categories that comprise within themselves all that is possible or actual. It extends to God's own being, as well as to what exists outside of Him in the created world. God has perfect possession in consciousness of His own being. The unconscious finds no place in Him (Acts 15:18; 1 Jn 1:5). Next to Himself God knows the world in its totality. This knowledge extends to small as well as to great affairs (Mt 6:8,32; 10:30); to the hidden heart and mind of man as well as to that which is open and manifest (Job 11:11; 34:21,23; Ps 14:2; 17:2 ff; 33:13-18; 102:19 f; 139:1-4; Prov 5:21; 15:3; Isa 29:15; Jer 17:10; Am 4:13; Lk 16:15; Acts 1:24; 1 Thess 2:4; Heb 4:13; Rev 2:23). It extends to all the divisions of time, the past, present and future alike (Job 14:17; Ps 56:8; Isa 41:22-24; 44:6-8; Jer 1:5; Hos 13:12; Mal 3:16). It embraces that which is contingent from the human viewpoint as well as that which is certain (1 Sam 23:9-12; Mt 11:22,23).

4. Mode of the Divine Knowledge:

Scripture brings God's knowledge into connection with His omnipresence. Ps 139 is the clearest expression of this. Omniscience is the omnipresence of cognition (Jer 23:23 ff). It is also closely related to God's eternity, for the latter makes Him in His knowledge independent of the limitations of time (Isa 43:8-12). God's creative relation to all that exists is represented as underlying His omniscience (Ps 33:15; 97:9; 139:13; Isa 29:15). His all-comprehensive purpose forms the basis of His knowledge of all events and developments (Isa 41:22-27; Am 3:7).

This, however, does not mean that God's knowledge of things is identical with His creation of them, as has been suggested by Augustine and others. The act of creation, while necessarily connected with the knowledge of that which is to be actual, is not identical with such knowledge or with the purpose on which such knowledge rests, for in God, as well as in man, the intellect and the will are distinct faculties. In the last analysis, God's knowledge of the world has its source in His self-knowledge. The world is a revelation of God. All that is actual or possible in it therefore is a reflection in created form of what exists uncreated in God, and thus the knowledge of the one becomes a reproduction of the knowledge of the other (Acts 17:27; Rom 1:20). The divine knowledge of the world also partakes of the quality of the divine self-knowledge in this respect, that it is never dormant. God does not depend for embracing the multitude and complexity of the existing world on such mental processes as abstraction and generalization.

The Bible nowhere represents Him as attaining to knowledge by reasoning, but everywhere as simply knowing. From what has been said about the immanent sources of the divine knowledge, it follows that the latter is not a posteriori derived from its objects, as all human knowledge based on experience is, but is exercised without receptivity or dependence. In knowing, as well as in all other activities of His nature, God is sovereign and self-sufficient. In cognizing the reality of all things He needs not wait upon the things, but draws His knowledge directly from the basis of reality as it lies in Himself. While the two are thus closely connected it is nevertheless of importance to distinguish between God's knowledge of Himself and God's knowledge of the world, and also between His knowledge of the actual and His knowledge of the possible. These distinctions mark off theistic conception of omniscience from the pantheistic idea regarding it. God is not bound up in His life with the world in such a sense as to have no scope of activity beyond it.

http://www.bible-history.com/isbe/O/OMNISCIENCE/