Godly Motivations

[Simon Moon]

God is omniscient, he knew our thoughts and actions before he created us

God, they say, doesn't know things the way people know them. If I say "I know your phone number," that requires the existence of two separate things: me and your phone number. 

Since God is perfect unity and simplicity, there can't be two things. God is omniscient in the sense that all possible objects of knowledge are included in him already. 

 so in what way are we independent beings? 

Our existence isn't independent. We depend on God, who is existence itself. Without existence, nothing would exist. 

As for our choices and behavior, I am asking Brian37 why, if God made us without having to, this would make us of necessity NOT valuable, free, or non-toylike. I don't know what his argument is.

What motivated him to do this? 

God has no motivations. 

As always, I am only describing here the standard theological arguments.

This is the kind of claptrap spouted by theologians, that just demonstrates how truly useless their entire profession is.

They come up with all these lofty sounding concepts; "Since God is perfect unity and simplicity, there can't be two things. God is omniscient in the sense that all possible objects of knowledge are included in him already." Bla, bla f'ing bla.

There is zero, maybe even less than zero, reasons to accept any of that as being true. It is entirely baseless. And I find it hard to understand why anyone would respect someone, no matter how many letters they have after their names, for such useless concepts and attributes they are ascribing to their gods.

During my lunch break at work I was watching the travel channel. Of course one of the many 'ghost hunter' shows was on, and they were talking to a guy who has a psych degree, who was an alleged 'expert' on ghosts and spirits. He was saying things like, "ghosts tend to turn lights on and off, open and close doors, push things off shelves, etc, because that all they have enough energy to do". What is the difference between this ghost 'expert' spouting unsupported attributes to ghosts, and theologians spouting unsupported attributes about gods?

I can't even understand the reason for giving this stuff enough attention to actually 'study'. Theologians do not study gods, they study all the famous theists down through history who also had ridiculous things to say about gods.

Oh, and let me make a late addition:

The reason it seems to me, theologians have to come up with crap like this; "Since God is perfect unity and simplicity, there can't be two things. God is omniscient in the sense that all possible objects of knowledge are included in him already.", is because they have long ago figured out how the omni's are logically incompatible, so they can try to resuscitate the concept.