If God knows everything, why does Genesis show a God who asks questions?
One of the first things I learned in Seminary was that the gap between biblical and theological studies grew wider as scholars specialized. Even the vocabulary and basic assumptions about belief, faith, and the nature of God differed between the two camps. I was raised in a Christian tradition considered “full Gospel,” meaning any belief should have its basis in the Bible. As a child, I memorized scripture and learned how to locate passages in the Bible that supported my foundational beliefs. However, the answers in specific biblical passages became less clear and straightforward as I read and studied the Bible in its original languages. It turns out that you can find nearly any interpretation of many Bible verses and passages to support various opinions, beliefs, and so-called truths. As original language Bible study has become more widely available and accessible through digital and internet learning, people from diverse backgrounds and fields of study are deconstructing long-held beliefs that are not well-supported in the biblical text. One of those beliefs is the Three Big O’s: God’s Omniscience, Omnipresence, and Omnipotence.
What is omniscience?
Omniscience is Latin for all-knowing. Early Christian church theologians determined that for God to be God, God must be all-knowing. It is a philosophical position that elevates God above humanity and supports other doctrines, such as creation, salvation, and responses to sin and evil. One of the problems with this belief is that the Bible doesn’t keep it well. A systematic theologian could provide a more comprehensive explanation of how this is overcome, but as I mentioned earlier, I am trained in biblical studies. From a biblical perspective, God is not portrayed as omniscient or all-knowing. This description of God was perpetuated by Christians who met in council to define doctrine and thereby define God. These councils were convened by men who have come to be known as “founding fathers.” As far as I can tell, and to give them the benefit of the doubt, they met to refine theological understanding in an open forum so that nothing became hidden or beyond discussion. However, the result, many centuries later, is that their word on the matter is often elevated above Scripture. The danger of this, of course, is that it flattens a god whose understanding is beyond our reach.
Is God Omniscient?
Even as early as in the first chapters of Genesis, God is portrayed as being in a relationship with humans in such a way that implies God is curious, choosy, remembers things, forgets things, and tries things. The concept of God’s omniscience is rooted in the teachings of early Christian church councils. The basis for their reasoning was to create coherence in the religious structure of Christianity. The Bible doesn’t provide a simplistic view of God. Some people describe these complexities as contradictions. A better way to understand it is that Christianity developed as a distinct religion based on, yet different from, much of the Bible.
A Curious God
Genesis 3 gives us a story about human agency, the pursuit of knowledge, and its consequences. In this narrative, God comes to spend time with the man and woman, and asks ‘Where are you?’ (3:9), and follows up with questions of clarification (3:11), waiting for the creatures to respond, inviting conversation and engagement with sincerity. Furthermore, Genesis 11 describes a story about people building a tremendous ziggurat-like structure to communicate with the gods. God became curious about what the people were doing and came down to see the form (11:5). God was concerned about the implications of such an effort, because God said to the other divine beings, “Look, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language there so that they will not understand one another’s speech.” (11:6,7 NRSV). This story accentuates God’s use of power to disrupt an activity that humans began without God’s knowledge.
A Choosy God
There are many stories of God’s seemingly random election in the Bible. One happens in Genesis 4, where God prefers Abel’s sacrifice to Cain’s, which leads to an infamous murder. Although both offerings fit the Levitical descriptions of acceptable sacrifices, God chooses one as favorable and disregards the other (4:4-5). After which, God’s curiosity again appears. In vv. 4:9-10, again God asks ‘Where are you?’ and seeks an explanation from Cain.
When God floods the earth, God chooses Noah in Genesis 6:8 (whose name is tied to the meaning: ‘grace’). God chooses Sarah and Abraham to bless as the ancestors of a great nation (Genesis 12). God’s preferences extend to one and not another, even though, in many cases, there is no particular reason provided for the distinction. God chooses Sarah and Isaac, yet offers a blessing to the outcast, enslaved Egyptian, Hagar, interacting with Hagar with more specific concern for Ishmael than for Sarah, the mother of Abraham’s promised son (Genesis 16-18). God favors and chooses Joseph (Genesis 37-50). Election by God is a recurring theme throughout the Bible. The text does not usually explain, but in one case, the reason is constant, given that God is concerned with rescuing oppressed or enslaved people. As a prime example, many prophets and psalms point to the fact that God chose to liberate the enslaved Hebrew people because they were being oppressed (Exodus).
A God who Forgets … and Remembers
God is characterized in the Bible as a divine being who remembers and forgets things. God is surprised and delights in human ingenuity. The word for ‘remember’ (zachar) has a range of meanings with nuance for engagement or enactment. However, remembering still connotes an intention that was lost or forgotten and then found at a particular time. It is also translated as thinking about or spending time in thought about a thing. In Exodus 2:24, God responds to the groans, or cries for justice, of the enslaved people in Egypt and remembers the promise made to the patriarch Abraham. Other references are in Genesis. Genesis 8:1 refers to God’s remembrance of Noah and the animals, thereby stopping the flood. Genesis 19:29 describes God’s remembrance of a negotiation with Abraham to save Lot and his family. In Genesis 30:22, God remembered Rachel, who had been struggling to conceive, and opened her womb.
The Bible portrays a God capable of thinking, forgetting, and remembering things. God considers and thinks about engagements with humans.
A God Who Tries Things
God is creative. In Genesis 2, God creates a human out of clay and uses divine breath from Godself to spark life. God threatens to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, but is willing to compromise when Abraham argues against it. In Exodus, God guides the Israelites by night with fire and by day with a pillar of cloud. This creative sign is not seen anywhere else in the Bible. When God has trouble getting through to someone, God gives a speech through a donkey to stop a prophet from cursing Israel in Numbers. God’s creativity is less confined than God’s knowledge in biblical accounts.
Is God still God Without Omniscience?
Many popular culture and casual definitions of God presume omniscience is a prerequisite for a faithful God. This is problematic when people read the Bible, in which God genuinely and personally interacts with humans. One way the biblical God differs from many other deities is that God doesn’t lord power over humans like other gods.
The biblical portrayal of God emphasizes God’s awareness of essential metaphysical states and natural knowledge of all possible outcomes. Still, God’s interactions with humans demonstrate a limited perspective of individual human agency. This view also supports the idea of free will. Theologians refer to this as Molinism or middle knowledge. In Psalm 139, the Psalmist claims that God knows every thought and attitude and requests God to search his heart to understand what is there. The Psalmist’s request supports the middle knowledge view. God has access to perfect perception and knowledge of all that is possible, but the Psalmist does not assume that God knows without the request and participation of human agency.
A God who is omniscient is distant, removed from humanity, and inaccessible. The portrayal of God as omniscient best serves the interests of religious leaders who want people to rely on them as intermediaries. The Bible, however, is written by and for minorities. The text portrays God as personable, engaging, approachable, and willing to negotiate with humanity, considering human creativity. It is more challenging to build and standardize a religion around a God who participates in the time and culture of humanity. Perhaps this is why there are so many different interpretations of the Bible.
This blog is part of a series: The O’s Have It. Check out The O’s Have It Part II: God’s Omnipresence in the Bible.
Come wander with us.
Subscribe to follow along with my work and be notified about new posts. As you wait, drop a comment naming the passage that most unsettles your view of God’s knowledge; your questions will help shape where this series wanders next.
Dr. Erica Mongé-Greer is a writer, biblical scholar, and consultant passionate about the intersections of faith, ethics, and storytelling. With over a decade of experience in higher education, she brings deep insight into scripture, theology, and the narratives that shape our understanding of justice and identity. Through her writing, teaching, and consulting, she helps others engage with biblical texts, develop their own voices, and navigate the world of publishing with clarity and purpose. She is the founder of Retreat Write Repeat, a space dedicated to fostering community and creativity for writers. Follow her work at scholarlywanderlust.com.
Hi Erica. I saved this last year to come back to for the other parts. Are they still forthcoming or did you publish them somewhere else?
I’m curious about the specific problems caused by the omnis and whether Christians have come up with any satisfactory alternatives that preserve a classical view of God.
Thank you for your interest! I have been sidetracked with another project, which I am building on Substack, but I intend to work on this series this month. Please feel free to reach out with specific questions or thoughts on the matter. In short, I think many efforts to define God have sprung out of a need to consolidate ideas for simplicity of teaching and uniformity in churches. The unfortunate result is that it flattens the character of God by removing an extraordinary complexity.
I was always taught that OT stories were written by a person who wished to send a message. Whether or not they were true stories wasn’t the point, lessons learned from them was. Having been born and raised Catholic, I struggle with your thesis on Omniscience, i am intrigued by it as well.