How does an infinite, omniscient God create?

[Skandelon]

In another thread there is a lot of speculations about how God makes choices since he has always known all things. Some conclude that God can't make real choices for this reason and such language is only anthropomorphic in nature.

While I would agree that God's makes choices differently than we do, I am not so quick to dismiss the fact that God does indeed make choices.

This brings us to the question of this thread. How does a infinite, omniscient God create something new?

If time and matter has always been perfectly known to God how can time and matter ever be new to Him?

Was their a first time for God to speak to a creature? If so, would that entail God experiencing or learning something new? If not, was there never really a beginning of time and matter?

How can you reconcile these things? Wouldn't such speculations be chalked up to "His ways are higher than our ways?" and just take scripture for what it says instead of speculating as to what God can and cannot do based on our finite reasoning?

What say you?

 

[Allan]

In another thread there is a lot of speculations about how God makes choices since he has always known all things. Some conclude that God can't make real choices for this reason and such language is only anthropomorphic in nature.

While I would agree that God's makes choices differently than we do, I am not so quickly dismiss the fact that God does indeed make choices.

This brings us to the question of this thread. How does a infinite, omniscient God create something new?

If time and matter has always been perfectly known to God how can time and matter ever be new to Him?

Was their a first time for God to speak to a creature? If so, would that entail God experiencing or learning something new? If not, was there never really a beginning of time and matter?

How can you reconcile these things? Wouldn't such speculations be chalked up to "His ways are higher than our ways?" and just take scripture for what it says instead of speculating as to what God can and cannot do based on our finite reasoning?

What say you?

Agreed on the anthropomorphic aspect. Just because imagery is used to help convey in human terms what God is doing (or feeling, ect..) it does not negate the very fact it is done in a similar fashion to our actions (feeling, ect...), and therefore applicable to/for our understanding.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

In another thread there is a lot of speculations about how God makes choices since he has always known all things. Some conclude that God can't make real choices for this reason and such language is only anthropomorphic in nature.

While I would agree that God's makes choices differently than we do, I am not so quickly dismiss the fact that God does indeed make choices.

This brings us to the question of this thread. How does a infinite, omniscient God create something new?

If time and matter has always been perfectly known to God how can time and matter ever be new to Him?

Was their a first time for God to speak to a creature? If so, would that entail God experiencing or learning something new? If not, was there never really a beginning of time and matter?

How can you reconcile these things? Wouldn't such speculations be chalked up to "His ways are higher than our ways?" and just take scripture for what it says instead of speculating as to what God can and cannot do based on our finite reasoning?

What say you?

Didnt God ask those same questions to Job? I dont recall Job ever answering. Am I wrong?

 

[Skandelon]

Didnt God ask those same questions to Job? I dont recall Job ever answering. Am I wrong?

Great point! Maybe we can learn something from Job in that respect and stop with our speculative conclusions?

 

[Skandelon]

Bumped for Luke...

 

[Calv1]

In another thread there is a lot of speculations about how God makes choices since he has always known all things. Some conclude that God can't make real choices for this reason and such language is only anthropomorphic in nature.

While I would agree that God's makes choices differently than we do, I am not so quick to dismiss the fact that God does indeed make choices.

This brings us to the question of this thread. How does a infinite, omniscient God create something new?

If time and matter has always been perfectly known to God how can time and matter ever be new to Him?

Was their a first time for God to speak to a creature? If so, would that entail God experiencing or learning something new? If not, was there never really a beginning of time and matter?

How can you reconcile these things? Wouldn't such speculations be chalked up to "His ways are higher than our ways?" and just take scripture for what it says instead of speculating as to what God can and cannot do based on our finite reasoning?

What say you?

My son used to ask me, "If God can't change, how can we bring him delight"? Great question and similar I think to yours.

I don't think it's "Infinite", as in infinite numerical values, but "Immense". It would seem that God as a immutable being cannot be affected, create. It would at first glace seem that He is like a placid lake instead of a roaring waterfall of glory.

I believe that everything, His creating, His delighting in us, everything are things that flow out of His fullness, you could say part of His fullness. So when He creates something, this thing is not something new to Him, but rather out of Him. An analogy would be me speaking, the words are new, but not to me, they are out of me and from what I already am.

Same deal with God delighting in His creatures, it's not that they do something new or original that delights him, rather He looks at us as a painter does a painting, or a potter over a pot, then rejoices over it.

 

[Skandelon]

I don't think it's "Infinite", as in infinite numerical values, but "Immense".

He is both. When I refer to his infinite nature I mean that He is "impossible to measure, not bound by time or space."

I believe that everything, His creating, His delighting in us, everything are things that flow out of His fullness, you could say part of His fullness. So when He creates something, this thing is not something new to Him, but rather out of Him

I agree to an extent. But what about evil? Was Satan's intent to "become like God" something God created? Did it originate in Satan or God? If God, then how do you defend the notion that God is not the author of sin? If Satan, then was God informed by Satan's intent somehow?

 

[Calv1]

He is both. When I refer to his infinite nature I mean that He is "impossible to measure, not bound by time or space."

I agree to an extent. But what about evil? Was Satan's intent to "become like God" something God created? Did it originate in Satan or God? If God, then how do you defend the notion that God is not the author of sin? If Satan, then was God informed by Satan's intent somehow?

What is sin? Is it not the absense of good? If so, how do you create the absence of something?

 

[Skandelon]

What is sin? Is it not the absense of good? If so, how do you create the absence of something?

So, are you saying that Satan's intent to become like God didn't really ever have an origin or come to exist?

 

[Calv1]

So, are you saying that Satan's intent to become like God didn't really ever have an origin or come to exist?

What verse in the bible says that Satan intended to become like God?

PS: I put up that long post because so many questions are directed in this direction, one read should help immensely.

 

[Skandelon]

What verse in the bible says that Satan intended to become like God?

Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28

 

[Calv1]

Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28

That's human folklore and has zero scriptural basis, those verses refer to Nebuchadnezzar.

 

[Skandelon]

That's human folklore and has zero scriptural basis, those verses refer to Nebuchadnezzar.

Ok, I'll choose not to address that point for the sake of focusing the debate back onto the question at hand. Certainly you are willing to concede that some creature (whether Lucifer, Neb, Adam) at some time intended to "become like God." Right?

That intent had an origin, did it not?

 

[Calv1]

Ok, I'll choose not to address that point for the sake of focusing the debate back onto the question at hand. Certainly you are willing to concede that some creature (whether Lucifer, Neb, Adam) at some time intended to "become like God." Right?

That intent had an origin, did it not?

I'll tell you what. I've debated all my life, and these sound bite exchanges go nowhere, I promise you the point won't come through.

If you don't mind, can you just get to your point, ask a big, long question. I'm not interested in hearing about MacArthur, or whether creatures want to be like their Creator, if you don't mind. Thanks.

 

[Skandelon]

I'll tell you what. I've debated all my life, and these sound bite exchanges go nowhere, I promise you the point won't come through.

I have no idea what you are referring to.

I'm asking you about the origin of sin, a very straight foward and often discussed topic in theological circles. The intent or desire to be in control, or be "like God" is mentioned often in scripture. It is seen in the Fall account as well. I focused my question with regard to Satan, because that is where the initial origin of pride is most typically acknowledged. You refuse to acknowledge it, so I moved on to man and I get this reply instead? I'm not sure you really want to discuss the topic of the original post, do you?

If you don't mind, can you just get to your point, ask a big, long question. I'm not interested in hearing about MacArthur, or whether creatures want to be like their Creator, if you don't mind. Thanks.

MacArthur is being discussed in another thread, its best not to confuse the two. The point is to follow up with the point you made about the origin of evil being merely the absence of good. I did so by questioning you regarding the intent or desire of God's creatures to be in control (often called pride) and its origin.

That is the very meaning of a discussion: You make a point and I make a point ...questions for clarity are asked along the way... If you don't want to engage in a discussion with me, that is fine. I understand. If I were a Calvinist, I wouldn't want to debate me either. (<--- the winking guy means I'm just kidding)

 

[Calv1]

I have no idea what you are referring to.

I'm asking you about the origin of sin, a very straight foward and often discussed topic in theological circles. The intent or desire to be in control, or be "like God" is mentioned often in scripture. It is seen in the Fall account as well. I focused my question with regard to Satan, because that is where the initial origin of pride is most typically acknowledged. You refuse to acknowledge it, so I moved on to man and I get this reply instead? I'm not sure you really want to discuss the topic of the original post, do you?


MacArthur is being discussed in another thread, its best not to confuse the two. The point is to follow up with the point you made about the origin of evil being merely the absence of good. I did so by questioning you regarding the intent or desire of God's creatures to be in control (often called pride) and its origin.

That is the very meaning of a discussion: You make a point and I make a point ...questions for clarity are asked along the way... If you don't want to engage in a discussion with me, that is fine. I understand. If I were a Calvinist, I wouldn't want to debate me either. (<--- the winking guy means I'm just kidding)

Debate you? Are you joking???? Oh, I see you are...I will destroy, sorry I mean debate you any day of the week:tongue3:

You lost me on your topic, you start at one point and now we are way over talking about pride. I was going to go to sleep, let me re-read this and answer you.

 

[Calv1]

I just re-read the post, it is pretty vague, seems you are asking if God is the author of sin, or where did sin come from, is this right?

 

[Skandelon]

I just re-read the post, it is pretty vague, seems you are asking if God is the author of sin, or where did sin come from, is this right?

Right. You argued, "What is sin? Is it not the absense of good? If so, how do you create the absence of something?"

And I replied by asking you about the origin of the desire for God's creatures to become like God (pride). That intent had to begin somewhere, did it not? The desire to be God, or be in control, is not merely the absence of something, it is an actual desire and it had to have an origin. Did it originate in God or in a creature?