Omniscience

[Guest shiloh357]

If Satan and sin are synonymous in the same way that God and good are synonymous, (i.e. God IS good, intrinsically and uniquely) it logically follows that Satan IS sin. And God cannot be Satan, thus God cannot sin.

Satan and sin are not synonomous. God and good are not synonomous. God does not sin because it is not in his nature to sin. God cannot even look upon sin (Hab. 1:13). Sin is what separates man from God. Sin is what brings man under a sentence of death.

But does that mean that God cannot, in Jesus, vicariously have experienced our sin on the cross? Not that He sinned, but that He bore our sins.

One can only surmise from the description of Jesus' torment in the Garden of Gethsemane, and His cry from the cross: my God, my God, why hast thous forsaken me? that He must have experienced something terrible beyond measure: was He not experiencing (or bearing) the sin of the whole world?

Jesus did not experience personal sinfulness. Jesus did not experience what it means to be a sinner. The sins He bore were not His own.

The Bible puts it this way: "All we like sheep have gone astray; but God hath laid upon Him the iniquity of us all." Is. 53:6.

What is important to note is that the word “laid” has a more forceful sense in the Hebrew than it does in English. From the Hebrew we find that God caused the sin of mankind to come upon Jesus heavily with great force. I would remind you of v. 5, which tells us that Jesus was crushed for our iniquities. The weight of the penalty of sin crushed Him. This points to the intense punishment Jesus was bearing for us on the cross. God the Father hurled all of his wrath and judgment for sin upon Jesus, and Jesus drank every bitter drop of the cup of God’s wrath.

“…the iniquity of us all.”

God laid upon Jesus the iniquity of us all. We need to be clear as to what this means, as well as what it doesn’t mean.

When we say that Jesus bore our sins, we do NOT mean:

• That He was a sinner;
  
• That He suffered pain of conscience;
  
• That Jesus was, at any time, personally displeasing to God the Father;
  
• That there was any transfer of character or moral qualities.
  
  Jesus bore our sins but he did not become a sinner or sinful in and of Himself. Jesus bore our sins without bearing their power or pollution. Jesus, being sinless, had no need for repentance or contrition. Jesus was always, at all times, pleasing to God and remained so, even on the cross. One commentator has written:
  
  "He bore the wrath of God, but He bore it representatively. He never was more pleasing to God, He never was more righteous, He never was more acceptable and lovely He never was more intensely and immeasurably fulfilling the will God, than when He cried out, Eli, Eli, lama sabacthani!" (J. W. Alexander, D. D.)
  
  When we say that Jesus bore sin, we mean that:
  
  
  • Jesus suffered for our sins (Is. 53:4, 5; Rom. 5:6, 8; 1Cor. 15:3; 1Thess. 5:10; 1Pet. 2:21);
    
  • He bore our sins in the sense that He bore the penalty of sins;
    
  • Jesus bore our sins in order to remove their penal consequences and secure our salvation.

It is important to understand that our sin was imputed to Jesus, just as His righteousness is imputed to us. Jesus bore the penalty for sin, which is death. Jesus has borne everything it takes to send a man to hell. He bore our infirmities, carried our sorrows, He was pierced for our transgressions and crushed for our iniquities. Jesus bore everything it takes to send a man to hell and He did it so man would not have to.

[methinkshe]

If Satan and sin are synonymous in the same way that God and good are synonymous, (i.e. God IS good, intrinsically and uniquely) it logically follows that Satan IS sin. And God cannot be Satan, thus God cannot sin.

Satan and sin are not synonomous. God and good are not synonomous. God does not sin because it is not in his nature to sin. God cannot even look upon sin (Hab. 1:13). Sin is what separates man from God. Sin is what brings man under a sentence of death.

But does that mean that God cannot, in Jesus, vicariously have experienced our sin on the cross? Not that He sinned, but that He bore our sins.

One can only surmise from the description of Jesus' torment in the Garden of Gethsemane, and His cry from the cross: my God, my God, why hast thous forsaken me? that He must have experienced something terrible beyond measure: was He not experiencing (or bearing) the sin of the whole world?

Jesus did not experience personal sinfulness. Jesus did not experience what it means to be a sinner. The sins He bore were not His own.

The Bible puts it this way: "All we like sheep have gone astray; but God hath laid upon Him the iniquity of us all." Is. 53:6.

What is important to note is that the word “laid” has a more forceful sense in the Hebrew than it does in English. From the Hebrew we find that God caused the sin of mankind to come upon Jesus heavily with great force. I would remind you of v. 5, which tells us that Jesus was crushed for our iniquities. The weight of the penalty of sin crushed Him. This points to the intense punishment Jesus was bearing for us on the cross. God the Father hurled all of his wrath and judgment for sin upon Jesus, and Jesus drank every bitter drop of the cup of God’s wrath.

“…the iniquity of us all.”

God laid upon Jesus the iniquity of us all. We need to be clear as to what this means, as well as what it doesn’t mean.

When we say that Jesus bore our sins, we do NOT mean:

• That He was a sinner;
  
• That He suffered pain of conscience;
  
• That Jesus was, at any time, personally displeasing to God the Father;
  
• That there was any transfer of character or moral qualities.
  
  Jesus bore our sins but he did not become a sinner or sinful in and of Himself. Jesus bore our sins without bearing their power or pollution. Jesus, being sinless, had no need for repentance or contrition. Jesus was always, at all times, pleasing to God and remained so, even on the cross. One commentator has written:
  
  "He bore the wrath of God, but He bore it representatively. He never was more pleasing to God, He never was more righteous, He never was more acceptable and lovely He never was more intensely and immeasurably fulfilling the will God, than when He cried out, Eli, Eli, lama sabacthani!" (J. W. Alexander, D. D.)
  
  When we say that Jesus bore sin, we mean that:
  
  
  • Jesus suffered for our sins (Is. 53:4, 5; Rom. 5:6, 8; 1Cor. 15:3; 1Thess. 5:10; 1Pet. 2:21);
    
  • He bore our sins in the sense that He bore the penalty of sins;
    
  • Jesus bore our sins in order to remove their penal consequences and secure our salvation.

It is important to understand that our sin was imputed to Jesus, just as His righteousness is imputed to us. Jesus bore the penalty for sin, which is death. Jesus has borne everything it takes to send a man to hell. He bore our infirmities, carried our sorrows, He was pierced for our transgressions and crushed for our iniquities. Jesus bore everything it takes to send a man to hell and He did it so man would not have to.

Thanks for the reply, Shiloh.

Re the phrase above that I have bolded.

What about 2 Corinthians 5:21

God made him who had no sin to be sin[a] for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

[joi]

The problem here, as I see it, is that we must approach this from the standpoint of being humans, while God does not have our limitations.

I hardly think He would answer these questions as being presented here, nor would I try to say just how He would answer them. Some things are just beyond our understanding.

1 Corinthians 2:9

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

Perhaps one of the prepared things will be to explain the answer to these questions.

[Guest shiloh357]

Thanks for the reply, Shiloh.

Re the phrase above that I have bolded.

What about 2 Corinthians 5:21

God made him who had no sin to be sin[a] for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

In the Greek, it is referring to Jesus as a sin offering. That doesn't come across really good in the English. This is in keeping with Hebrew. 10:10-14. Our sins were imputed to Jesus. He did not become sinful. Similarly, His righteousness is imputed to us (Rom. 4:24-25). We have not yet been made righteous; we are only declared righeous at this time. We will experiece the fullness of be made righteous when we recieve our glorified bodies and our sin is fully and finally eradicated.

Paul is saying that the end result of Jesus being our sin offering is that we will one day be made the righteousness of God.

[Openly Curious]

name='godrulz' timestamp='1311964216' post='1701951'

name='Believer112' timestamp='1311898218' post='1701763'

name='shiloh357' timestamp='1311721352' post='1700925'

Tell me this...

The omniscience of God. Do you think it means that God has all possible knowledge (which would include all propositional and all experiential knowledge)? Or would it include only propositional knowledge?

1 John 3

²⁰For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things.

I'm going to take this scripture by faith. God created a tree of knowledge (good and evil), so if He can create knowledge He is all knowing. Humans trying to figure out what God knows is like monkeys trying to figure out how we build cars.

You are not using faith, but presumption. The context shows that he knows all things in relation to something specific, our hearts (present knowledge; past knowledge). Other principles/passages/thinking would bring in limitation as to the extent of his future knowledge. Your view cannot be based on one verse out of context that contradicts other verses/concepts (where God does not know the future exhaustively).

[godrulz]

name='godrulz' timestamp='1311964216' post='1701951'

name='Believer112' timestamp='1311898218' post='1701763'

name='shiloh357' timestamp='1311721352' post='1700925'

Tell me this...

The omniscience of God. Do you think it means that God has all possible knowledge (which would include all propositional and all experiential knowledge)? Or would it include only propositional knowledge?

1 John 3

²⁰For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things.

I'm going to take this scripture by faith. God created a tree of knowledge (good and evil), so if He can create knowledge He is all knowing. Humans trying to figure out what God knows is like monkeys trying to figure out how we build cars.

You are not using faith, but presumption. The context shows that he knows all things in relation to something specific, our hearts (present knowledge; past knowledge). Other principles/passages/thinking would bring in limitation as to the extent of his future knowledge. Your view cannot be based on one verse out of context that contradicts other verses/concepts (where God does not know the future exhaustively).

A verse about God knowing our hearts totally (past/present knowledge) cannot be extrapolated to defend exhaustive definite foreknowledge of future free will contingencies (omniscience issue). Likewise, the verse that says that all things are possible with God is in a context of salvation and cannot be extrapolated to mean that He can create square circles (relates to omnipotence).

Your 'faith' becomes presumption and error if you misuse Scripture to beg the question about your own wrong views.

[other one]

name='godrulz' timestamp='1311964216' post='1701951'

name='Believer112' timestamp='1311898218' post='1701763'

name='shiloh357' timestamp='1311721352' post='1700925'

Tell me this...

The omniscience of God. Do you think it means that God has all possible knowledge (which would include all propositional and all experiential knowledge)? Or would it include only propositional knowledge?

1 John 3

²⁰For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things.

I'm going to take this scripture by faith. God created a tree of knowledge (good and evil), so if He can create knowledge He is all knowing. Humans trying to figure out what God knows is like monkeys trying to figure out how we build cars.

You are not using faith, but presumption. The context shows that he knows all things in relation to something specific, our hearts (present knowledge; past knowledge). Other principles/passages/thinking would bring in limitation as to the extent of his future knowledge. Your view cannot be based on one verse out of context that contradicts other verses/concepts (where God does not know the future exhaustively).

A verse about God knowing our hearts totally (past/present knowledge) cannot be extrapolated to defend exhaustive definite foreknowledge of future free will contingencies (omniscience issue). Likewise, the verse that says that all things are possible with God is in a context of salvation and cannot be extrapolated to mean that He can create square circles (relates to omnipotence).

Your 'faith' becomes presumption and error if you misuse Scripture to beg the question about your own wrong views.

In the seventh or eighth dimension he may well be able to create square circles..... Outside the fourth dimension you may well have already decided to get up late tomorrow.... You have some very rigid views and I don't think they are as nearly as definite as you seem to express...... but that's my personal opinion and you're certainly owed the same privilege.

[Openly Curious]

As I was thinking about this yesterday - I was pondering how there are Scriptures that indicate God knows the future - but the Scripture never states how He knows, just that He does - and yet there are Scriptures that indicate God had to search a matter out (i.e. the test of Abraham).

I had previously been in a discussion with a friend about the differences between Hebraic thought and Hellenistic thought.

And I realized that this whole attempt we have of rationalizing God out, make sense of His nature and His power, create a descriptive box to put Him in . . . is our attempt to bring God down to the level of our minds.

Hello! God is bigger than our minds and our rationalizations, and any attempts to fit Him into our rationalization is to put our minds above Him.

Sorry, but He is greater than anything we can figure out. And if you miss feeling a sense of facing a Being that is too vast to wrap your mind around, you are missing out on who He is.

So to create a definition of "omniscience" with definable borders and tagging God with this label is in essence bringing God down to the rational plane and keep Him here. You can't do that!

Why can't we just marvel and wonder at God having abilities (and knowledge and means of knowing) we can never comprehend.

Hallelujah~!

He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.

Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.

The LORD lifteth up the meek: he casteth the wicked down to the ground. Psalms 147:4-6

A Big &

[Openly Curious]

Yes, God has "experienced" what it is like to not be God." For God "experienced" this when he came down to this earth in the form of his Son Jesus Christ. Even though Christ was crucified it in no way meant that God ceased being God for that will never ever happen.

Isn't this self contradictory???

No, I do not think there are any contradiction.

Would you care to elaborate further ?

[~candice~]

Yes, God has "experienced" what it is like to not be God." For God "experienced" this when he came down to this earth in the form of his Son Jesus Christ. Even though Christ was crucified it in no way meant that God ceased being God for that will never ever happen.

Isn't this self contradictory???

No, I do not think there are any contradiction.

Would you care to elaborate further ?

You said that God has never ceased to be God, and yet He has experienced what it is like to not be God. How? It can't be both.