Free Will Vs. An All-knowing God

[bigkg 0]

then God didnt know.maybe you can elaborate some, but i dont see this as a very interestingquestion.one point that is somewhat related is that "knowing" with certainty is impossible, at least for humans. even if something can be exactly predicted every time, all you can be sure of is that your predictions correlate with what happened 100 percent of the time. you still cant be certain that they will continue to do so.so how can god be certain when humans cant? who knows?i cant think of any conceivable way that any being could be absolutely certain.however, since if in fact God did exist, it would be so far beyond human conception as to be inconceivable, then i cant really rule it out.on a sidenote, this is one of the reasons why i dont believe in any major religion- any true God would be so far beyond human experience that any speculation about the attributes or motivations of that God would be useless.

I'm saying that if God sees that I do a certain thing tomorrow, then how do I have the free-will to do it or not?If he really sees something then it doesn't happen, then doesn't that prove God wrong? Which, like can't happen.

[crowTrobot 2]

yes that outside influence is Him. As the creator of everyhting He knows everything. The problem is that we try to compare things to Him but the problem is that nothing is His equal so we have nothing to compare to Him. Your second theory is not correct. yes there are infinite possibilites..but for each decision you will only make one. Theres no way around it. So in that sense each of us go down one path. God knows this He knows the choices we will make. but so what. Your still the one making them. Your free to make your choices but God knows what will be made...

i give up. you're not even addressing the issue.

Quantum mechanics allows for a certain randomness, but this is not will either, just a game of chance.

there are arguments that our brains function quantum mechanically, which leads to a form of free will as an emergent property. they are over my head, though.

You obviously don't have kids, because what I said was true... you CAN see what kids will decide, and the younger the kid the more easy to spot.

i have an 18 year old son, so i've been there. you can't KNOW what kids will decide, you can only make educated guesses based on behavioral patterns - which is fundamentally different from being "all-knowing".my son frequently surprised me.

[SilentSnow 1]

I'm saying that if God sees that I do a certain thing tomorrow, then how do I have the free-will to do it or not?If he really sees something then it doesn't happen, then doesn't that prove God wrong? Which, like can't happen.

you dont have free will if God sees it- see my posts in this thread for a brief explanation.yes, it would prove him wrong. but i dont think this theoretical has any important implications since it can easily be solved in a way that doesnt upset any fundamental beliefs. if you dont like God being wrong, just say your statementis an impossibility.

[CobaltBlue 662]

and irregardless isn't a word

Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&sFunction: adverbEtymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardlessnonstandard : REGARDLESSusage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance.http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/irregardless

you dont have free will if God sees it

Let's say for a moment that there's a physicist that knows for a fact that gravity dictates that a ball will always fall off this table to the floor. (We're ignoring unusual gravitational exceptions.) Now you roll the ball off the table. The physicist knew/knows what's going to happen. Did he necessarily 'cause' it through his knowledge? No.Also, there are people that believe that God's not omniscient. I don't see why it's so hard to give him credit for omniscience given his other supernatural qualities...but there are those that make that case.In a Christian worldview, God created time. He exists outside of it. We exist inside of it. It's why concepts like this are difficult to grasp.

there are arguments that our brains function quantum mechanically, which leads to a form of free will as an emergent property. they are over my head, though.

So are you arguing that we have free will or not?

I'm curious if there are any calvinists on here on this board just for the sake of debate.

Yes...but I'm a reluctant calvinist. I really don't like the guy that it's named after, and my desire to be in control resists a number of concepts. I think it's a doctrine that is usually better reserved for discussion within Christian circles. Considering that it's controversial enough between denominations, non-Christians typically hate it.

[crowTrobot 2]

webster: "Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead" this is what i meant, but whatever lol

Let's say for a moment that there's a physicist that knows for a fact that gravity dictates that a ball will always fall off this table to the floor. (We're ignoring unusual gravitational exceptions.) Now you roll the ball off the table. The physicist knew/knows what's going to happen. Did he necessarily 'cause' it through his knowledge? No.

just like matt you are off on a tangent of whether god causes things or not, which is irrelevant. no matter what causes the ball to fall IT DOES NOT HAVE A CHOICE whether it falls or not.

Also, there are people that believe that God's not omniscient. I don't see why it's so hard to give him credit for omniscience given his other supernatural qualities...but there are those that make that case.

the ultimate point is it makes more sense that the concept of god being omniscient is man made, than that the logical conflict of omniscience and free will is "solved" by some man-invoked metaphysical method we can't comprehend. occam's razor cuts deep here - any time you have to fall back on "man cannot comprehend the ways of god" to explain illogics in the nature of god you are just copping out.

In a Christian worldview, God created time. He exists outside of it. We exist inside of it. It's why concepts like this are difficult to grasp.

difficult but not impossible. if there is an outside of (our) time in which our time can be viewed in it's entirety as finalized - what is within our time must be unchanging - sequences of events within time must always lead to the same resolutions (everything that happens is inevitable). this is the philosophical concept of block time.

So are you arguing that we have free will or not?

that's also irrelevant - nobody knows whether we do or not or can prove that either way (although it's commonly attempted). the point that should be obvious from the thread title is that if we have free will god can't logically know with 100% certainty what we will decide ahead of time.

[natewood3 0]

I am a Calvinist...What is "free will"?

[Mattnxtc 0]

the ultimate point is it makes more sense that the concept of god being omniscient is man made, than that the logical conflict of omniscience and free will is "solved" by some man-invoked metaphysical method we can't comprehend. occam's razor cuts deep here -

any time you have to fall back on "man cannot comprehend the ways of god" to explain illogics in the nature of god you are just copping out. Im not sure anybody has used it that as a cop out. Merely do we understand all that is God? no...do you understand everything yet? no thats the point of science...to try to comprehend things. We dont have an answer yet for stuff..neither does science...Why are we being held to a double standard?

just like matt you are off on a tangent of whether god causes things or not

see no..i have already said God doesnt cause things

[natewood3 0]

see no..i have already said God doesnt cause things

What does God do then if He does not cause all things? Also, what is your definition of free will?

[LongLiveYorke 38]

There are arguments that our brains function quantum mechanically, which leads to a form of free will as an emergent property. they are over my head, though.

Agreed. Free will is an illusion. We can attack free will using the same arguments that have been used above simply by replacing god with the “laws of physics.” This is easy to understand using only classical (non-quantum) mechanics. The probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics doesn't remove the dilemma. Just because an outcome is uncertain doesn’t mean that it can be controlled.

[CobaltBlue 662]

just like matt you are off on a tangent of whether god causes things or not, which is irrelevant. no matter what causes the ball to fall IT DOES NOT HAVE A CHOICE whether it falls or not.

My point is that someone having foreknowledge of events doesn't establish lack of choice. I'm not arguing that we have free will. I'm arguing that this is a crappy argument against it.

the ultimate point is it makes more sense that the concept of god being omniscient is man made, than that the logical conflict of omniscience and free will is "solved" by some man-invoked metaphysical method we can't comprehend. occam's razor cuts deep here - any time you have to fall back on "man cannot comprehend the ways of god" to explain illogics in the nature of god you are just copping out.

If God is omnipotent and omnipresent, how is omniscience going out on a limb? I believe that God created the universe and time. If he's able to do something of such a grand scale, is it unbelievable to think that he's all-knowing?

difficult but not impossible. if there is an outside of (our) time in which our time can be viewed in it's entirety as finalized - what is within our time must be unchanging - sequences of events within time must always lead to the same resolutions (everything that happens is inevitable). this is the philosophical concept of block time.

That's a possible line of reasoning, yes...and I think quite a few Christians would agree with that.

that's also irrelevant - nobody knows whether we do or not or can prove that either way (although it's commonly attempted). the point that should be obvious from the thread title is that if we have free will god can't logically know with 100% certainty what we will decide ahead of time.

It's not irrelevant. You're asking Christians whether they believe in free will. I'm asking you what you think.

[crowTrobot 2]

My point is that someone having foreknowledge of events doesn't establish lack of choice.

why not? where does the concept of choice come from if what's chosen is inevitable?

I'm not arguing that we have free will. I'm arguing that this is a crappy argument against it.

i'm not arguing against free will. i'm pointing out 2 common christian concepts that are logically incompatable.

If God is omnipotent and omnipresent, how is omniscience going out on a limb?

it's not - if you ASSUME the others, but there are logical challenges to all of them.

You're asking Christians whether they believe in free will.

no i'm not. someone who didn't believe in free will would find this thread pointless.

[crowTrobot 2]

Im not sure anybody has used it that as a cop out. Merely do we understand all that is God? no...do you understand everything yet? no thats the point of science...to try to comprehend things. We dont have an answer yet for stuff..neither does science...Why are we being held to a double standard?

science doesn't allow logically contradictory theories to both be true. there is no double standard.

see no..i have already said God doesnt cause things

which is irrelevant to this thread, not to mention contradicts the bible.

[Mattnxtc 0]

science doesn't allow logically contradictory theories to both be true. there is no double standard.which is irrelevant to this thread, not to mention contradicts the bible.

you must not read ur posts first...the first statement is in direct response to you saying that when christians dont know something they say "we cant comprehend God and so we shouldnt try" I said that nobody says that...Scientists and you more specifically have used the exact same reasoning to say why you dont know how the earth began. The second response was directly to this statement:

just like matt you are off on a tangent of whether god causes things or not

and my point was that God does not make the choices for you. You make the choices not God...He doesnt control your choices. Only you do. It was the only way that you could freely accept or reject God

[fckthis 0]

My theory on freewill.Your life is full of checkpoints. However, the path to this checkpoint is upto you.

[crowTrobot 2]

the first statement is in direct response to you saying that when christians dont know something they say "we cant comprehend God and so we shouldnt try" I said that nobody says that...Scientists and you more specifically have used the exact same reasoning to say why you dont know how the earth began.

you lost me.

The second response was directly to this statement:and my point was that God does not make the choices for you. You make the choices not God...He doesnt control your choices. Only you do. It was the only way that you could freely accept or reject God

i'm not arguing with you about that. this thread isn't about that.

[CobaltBlue 662]

why not? where does the concept of choice come from if what's chosen is inevitable?i'm not arguing against free will. i'm pointing out 2 common christian concepts that are logically incompatable.

Where does the concept of choice come from in your worldview?And, the concepts that you're pointing out have been highly contested in Christian circles for centuries...though more directed towards the working of salvation. Ultimately, the answer may not matter - if you chose Christ and/or if Christ chose you. Either way, if the relationship is true, you're saved.I was given a bridge analogy on this, but pardon me if my explanation isn't very good.Let's say we're arminian and we walk half-way up a bridge. We don't see the rest of it, but we have faith and "jump" (free will). We make it to the other side.Now let's say that we're calvinist and we walk half-way up the bridge. We see the rest of the bridge and continue on our way (predestination), reaching the other side.From the arminian perspective, the calvinist "jumped" (made a choice of free will) while thinking the rest of the bridge was there.From the calvinist perspective, the rest of the bridge (predestination) was always there for the arminian even though he didn't see it.Either way, the important point is the destination.

[crowTrobot 2]

Where does the concept of choice come from in your worldview?

i'm not sure it exists at all, although at some point i'll probably try again to study why some deep thinkers (penrose etc) seem to think QM allows it while classical mechanics doesn't. not sure, but perhaps it's also possible (classical) chaos theory might have something to say about it as an emergent property of complexity.

Ultimately, the answer may not matter - if you chose Christ and/or if Christ chose you. Either way, if the relationship is true, you're saved.

christ didn't like me enough to choose me apparently.

Let's say we're arminian and we walk half-way up a bridge. We don't see the rest of it, but we have faith and "jump" (free will). We make it to the other side.

i don't see how this applys. there is no question that we at least have the illusion of free will (we THINK we are choosing to jump or not). the issue is whether if *god knows* we will jump before we choose to jump or not, how can we not jump?

Either way, the important point is the destination.

the important point is logical contraditions in the bible are evidence that the christian god might not exist.

[Mattnxtc 0]

christ didn't like me enough to choose me apparently.

wrong...u spend how much time on christian posts about God? You know exactly what God asks of you? It has nothing to do with God not choosing you

i don't see how this applys. there is no question that we at least have the illusion of free will (we THINK we are choosing to jump or not). the issue is whether if *god knows* we will jump before we choose to jump or not, how can we not jump?

what i cant comprehend is this. Lets say you have to choose A or B. Your goign to chose A or B no matter what. Now lets say God has the ability to travel through time since He can do it if He is outside of time. So he knows you are going to choose A. Well you in fact as God knew...do choose A. Its not a matter of God forced you to choose A or for the matter that you could have chosen B. Its that your were always goign to choose A. Not b/c God willed it but b/c that was the choice you were goign to make at that moment no matter what. You havent lost free will b/c you were always going to freely make that choice.

the important point is logical contraditions in the bible are evidence that the christian god might not exist.

logic doesnt do anything for the bible...some of the greatest christian apologetics are extremely well versed in philosophy.

[crowTrobot 2]

You know exactly what God asks of you? It has nothing to do with God not choosing you

that was a sarcastic response to CB saying it doesn't matter whether we are saved by predestination or free will.

You havent lost free will b/c you were always going to freely make that choice.

i think you would understand this more if you leave god completely out of it and just look at cause and effect. you keep saying there is only one path we can take - if it is inevitable that we take that path *something* has to be determining the path we take BEFORE WE GET THERE. it doesn't have to be god - it can be sequences of prior events or other external causes.

[Mattnxtc 0]

that was a sarcastic response to CB saying it doesn't matter whether we are saved by predestination or free will.i think you would understand this more if you leave god completely out of it and just look at cause and effect. you keep saying there is only one path we can take - if it is inevitable that we take that path *something* has to be determining the path we take BEFORE WE GET THERE. it doesn't have to be god - it can be sequences of prior events or other external causes.

on the first part its hard to tell sarcasim online so i just answered it..sorry if it wasnt what u wantedon the second. yes we can play the what if game. Thats fine. You can insert anything in for all i care...but that doesnt change anything...according to the bible its not something else it is God who knows all things...so while it doesnt have to be God the bible says it is God

[bigcoled 1]

This topic is a discussion on the existance of fate. The way I view fate is that the human reaction is very predictable, and very natural. I believe our enviornment tempers us to decide either with or against the grain or sociological "norm". Many decisions in our life are very binary(referenceing binary code), what i mean is that our decisions can be broken down into simple yes, no questions, and our answers to those questions are swayed by our present enviornment mixed with our past conditioning. Therefore would predicting someone's future or "fate" be all that impressive if it is broken down to a science? If the course of your life is placed infront of you in the form of millions, billions or trillions of yes, no (1,0) questions would you really be all that impressed? As poker players you see people read someone's hand blind all the time based on various factors which are considered. So wouldn't predicting the course or fate of someone's life be the job of a glorified card player? If you think in the context of life as being dealt a hand of poker, you would spend your life attempting to decieve your opponent, which in itself is predictable, right, so then you play your hand straightforward, but depending on your opponent is that too predictable...and this is the cycle many of us find ourselves in, trying to defeat fate...trying to create some sort of excitement, some sort of unpredicatable path or ending to our life... Like the job of a writer or producer, when in actuality all your writing is the same story that's been told a millions times with the same meaning, whether is be a story of a football team, a marching band, cheerleaders, baseball players, of a volleyball team... So no matter what we do, no matter how much we occupy our time trying to deceive fate, in actuality we are only living the same lives, and fullfilling the same stories of the people that have came before us, only with a few different twists? In that light, isn't life so simple? Doesn't life seem so tasteless? We live, we attempt to make things interesting (friends, love, family, hobbies) and we die. And now we understand why people can't deal with the fact that our lives are predictable...because it's depressing....

[Abbaddabba 0]

If God is omnipotent and omnipresent, how is omniscience going out on a limb? I believe that God created the universe and time. If he's able to do something of such a grand scale, is it unbelievable to think that he's all-knowing?

An all knowing god basically implies that the universe CAN be known and CAN be predicted. And if that's the case, it doesnt operate on 'maybes' at the most basic of levels. Quantum mechanics implies that everything rests on randomly determined probabilities rather than a series of concrete events, which makes it incompatible with the idea of an all knowing god simply because the future is unknowable until it happens. If the universe is deterministic, the future can be known based on the position of every atomic and subatomic particle - and in creating a universe just as it was, a god would be sealing the fate of the universe.If the universe is probabilistic, the future cant be known.If god knows it, then the knowledge exists. If the knowledge exists, there's some basis for it. If there's a basis for the knowledge, the universe is deterministic.

[copernicus 0]

An all knowing god basically implies that the universe CAN be known and CAN be predicted. And if that's the case, it doesnt operate on 'maybes' at the most basic of levels. Quantum mechanics implies that everything rests on randomly determined probabilities rather than a series of concrete events, which makes it incompatible with the idea of an all knowing god simply because the future is unknowable until it happens. If the universe is deterministic, the future can be known based on the position of every atomic and subatomic particle - and in creating a universe just as it was, a god would be sealing the fate of the universe.If the universe is probabilistic, the future cant be known.If god knows it, then the knowledge exists. If the knowledge exists, there's some basis for it. If there's a basis for the knowledge, the universe is deterministic.

An all knowing god only says he knows everything that was and is. That doesnt require him knowing the future if there is free will.

[natewood3 0]

This may have already been answered, but for those arguing for free will, what exactly is free will? What is the definition of the sovereignty of God?If everything is based on chance, then I am not sure how anything at all can be known? If everything going on is by chance, then what you are thinking is the result of chemical reactions in your brain, so that it is by "chance" that you are thinking what you are thinking. There is no basis for knowledge. How can there be any causal relationship between any events at all if everything is random and by chance?

[Mattnxtc 0]

I watched the Matrix 1 and 2 this weekend and there is some deep philosophy stuck in the scenes with the Oracle. Makes a great case for why free will and all knowing can coexist