Religious free will and predestination

[Robin]

Tomorrow you wake up and there is an envelope on your mantlepiece, on the envelope is:

Dear (your name),
Inside this envelope is a precise and detailed account of what you will do today and what will happen to you.

Signed God

PS - try to act surprised

Supposing this is really from God who knows the future and you will try to test this by doing different things than the letter predicts - will you find yourself following the schedule in the letter like a zombie, or will you be able to act differently? Remember the account is detailed and precise, so there cannot be Greek tragedy solution to this.

If you can act differently then free will creates an exception to omniscience, but if you are forced into acting according to the letter you have no free will.

This is what I take to be the contradiction involved in religious free-will, omniscience, predestination and an interventionist God. I would be interested in perspectives on whether free-will trumps omnipotence or vice versa from various theological perspectives.

 

[Alkatran]

Why you will choose the only thing you, as a theist, can do: You follow the letter to the letter so as not to endanger your beliefs!

 

[Robin]

Why you will choose the only thing you, as a theist, can do: You follow the letter to the letter so as not to endanger your beliefs!

OK, but I specifically said you try to do differently. Oh and I said that the letter really was from God, so for the purpose of the exercise an omniscient God exists.

 

[jmercer]

Why you will choose the only thing you, as a theist, can do: You follow the letter to the letter so as not to endanger your beliefs!

Boy, and they accuse me of being cynical.

Tomorrow you wake up and there is an envelope on your mantlepiece, on the envelope is:

Supposing this is really from God who knows the future and you will try to test this by doing different things than the letter predicts - will you find yourself following the schedule in the letter like a zombie, or will you be able to act differently? Remember the account is detailed and precise, so there cannot be Greek tragedy solution to this.

If you can act differently then free will creates an exception to omniscience, but if you are forced into acting according to the letter you have no free will.

This is what I take to be the contradiction involved in religious free-will, omniscience, predestination and an interventionist God. I would be interested in perspectives on whether free-will trumps omnipotence or vice versa from various theological perspectives.

Sorry, but there is no violation of omniscience. All you've stated is "God's presentation of a person's future actions to them makes them subsequently choose different actions." Basically, you're saying that God's intervention altered what was going to happen. That hardly means a failure of God's omniscience. It just means that God's intervention has an impact on His surroundings.

You can suggest that God could have anticipated the changed actions, and listed them, too. Unfortunately, that creates a paradox because that also would have had an impact on events as well, etc., etc., etc.

So the argument of "Free Will" versus "Omnscience" is problematic at the start. Interesting question, though... I'm curious to see what other's also think.

 

[ReFLeX]

Re: Re: Religious free will and predestination

You can suggest that God could have anticipated the changed actions, and listed them, too. Unfortunately, that creates a paradox because that also would have had an impact on events as well, etc., etc., etc.[/B]

Shouldn't an all-knowing god have the last 'etc.' on hand? After enough re-hypothesizing, a situation would arise in which knowing your fate would have no effect on the actual possible outcomes of your day. Wouldn't it?

 

[uruk]

Sorry, but there is no violation of omniscience. All you've stated is "God's presentation of a person's future actions to them makes them subsequently choose different actions." Basically, you're saying that God's intervention altered what was going to happen. That hardly means a failure of God's omniscience. It just means that God's intervention has an impact on His surroundings.

True free will means that god cannot know in advance what our choices will be. If god knows in advance what choices we will make would mean that, from his perspective, our path is pre-chosen at the moment of our creation. From god's perspective we have no free will. All our acts are pre-determined. From our perspective we will believe that we have free will because we don't know our future, but from god's perspective we don't. Our choices are already made, we just don't know them yet.

If god does not know in advance what our choices we will make would mean that god does not know what future outcomes will be. Not knowing the outcomes would mean that god is not omnicient and our free will would be true free will. (although the nature of our existance severly limits our choices)

I believe that for free will to be true free will, god cannot know what we will choose and cannot force or coerce us any more that what he already has in the intial set up of the universe. And if god cannot know what choices we will make, God cannot by definition be omnicient.

 

[Pahansiri]

I am sure if you break any laws that day the judge will be OK with you saying "God made me do it"...lol Just show him the note.

 

[Z]

Actually, this is another 'square circle' problem.

It does, however, demonstrate the logical paradox of omnipotency, though - Can God tell you what you are about to do without changing what you are about to do?

The very moment God conceives of telling you about your future, that future would change necessarily - Personally, I see omnipotence and omniscience as incompatible anyway, and free will is incompatible with either.

So the question is essentially incoherent. But extremely interesting, nonetheless - See, this question is not about omniscience and free will, but another demonstration of the illucid nature of omnipotency. It invokes another paradox, like time travel/murder. So can God cause a paradox?

 

[Pahansiri]

So can God cause a paradox?

If he has 2 boats.

Sorry a bad joke I just had to use, ( God made me do it)

 

[Z]

If he has 2 boats.

Sorry a bad joke I just had to use, ( God made me do it)

I understand - you had no choice.

 

[jmercer]

Re: Re: Re: Religious free will and predestination

Shouldn't an all-knowing god have the last 'etc.' on hand? After enough re-hypothesizing, a situation would arise in which knowing your fate would have no effect on the actual possible outcomes of your day. Wouldn't it?

Perhaps.

 

[jmercer]

True free will means that god cannot know in advance what our choices will be. If god knows in advance what choices we will make would mean that, from his perspective, our path is pre-chosen at the moment of our creation. From god's perspective we have no free will. All our acts are pre-determined. From our perspective we will believe that we have free will because we don't know our future, but from god's perspective we don't. Our choices are already made, we just don't know them yet.

If god does not know in advance what our choices we will make would mean that god does not know what future outcomes will be. Not knowing the outcomes would mean that god is not omnicient and our free will would be true free will. (although the nature of our existance severly limits our choices)

I believe that for free will to be true free will, god cannot know what we will choose and cannot force or coerce us any more that what he already has in the intial set up of the universe. And if god cannot know what choices we will make, God cannot by definition be omnicient.

Not necessarily. God knowing something is irrelevant to our choices if we don't know what God knows about it. Let's take God out of the equation for a minute.

A friend of yours comes up to you and tells you that s/he had the weirdest dream last night... they dreamt that you went fishing on Saturday and drowned. They give you a chilling recital of the dream, which appears to be fairly detailed and convincing. You both laugh it off, and walk away.

Saturday morning, you get up and prepare to go fishing as you do every weekend, and then you remember the conversation. Do you change anything in your routine? Are you extra-cautious during the trip?

If you're like most people I know, then the answer is "Yes". You'll pay more attention to safety, or perhaps wear a life-jacket instead of leaving it on the seat next to you, etc. If your friend hadn't had the dream, or hadn't spoken to you about it, it's unlikely you probably would have followed your routine.

Obviously, I could give many more similar examples using all sorts of situations... but I hope I've made my point. The act of intervention will always have consequences, albeit perhaps forseeable.

Now, I happen to believe in free will, although I'm hard pressed to provide absolute proof... but whether or not free will exists, interventions of any kind (information or physical) will have an effect.

 

[Pahansiri]

Not necessarily. God knowing something is irrelevant to our choices if we don't know what God knows about it.

It is totally relevant as to “punishment” and the idea that a God is a loving father.

If you know you child will at noon kill another child in a fight. Will you do nothing to stop it?

If you knew your child would kill themselves today due to great depression, would you help the child long before it came to this or stand by and watch the child die?

If you knew your child would be taken, raped, tortured and killed would you simply stand by and do nothing?

 

[username]

It is totally relevant as to “punishment” and the idea that a God is a loving father.

If you know you child will at noon kill another child in a fight. Will you do nothing to stop it?

If you knew your child would kill themselves today due to great depression, would you help the child long before it came to this or stand by and watch the child die?

If you knew your child would be taken, raped, tortured and killed would you simply stand by and do nothing?

It feels odd to take the position of an apologist for god being an atheist, but if god exists and is roughly as the christian faith describes him then I don't think it is proper to compare a human father with finite knowledge and wisdom with the 'eternal' father who is the source of all knowledge and wisdom.

It is covered under the 'god moves in mysterious ways' clause.

As far as free will is concerned omniscience doesn't seem compatible with it. As was pointed out above, if the omniscient creator knows everything that will be if a person is created then that omniscient being who goes ahead and creates that person would be responsible for all actions of that person according to any understanding of responsibility I have ever heard of.

One less than completely satisfactory counter I have heard is that while god does in fact know everything that was, is and will be as well as could be, he is still not responsible for what we do since we still freely choose to do what we do. If I decide to kill someone tonite, it is me making that choice. It might be true my creator knew I was going to do this, but I wasn't forced to do it, I chose to do it.

It's the kind of thing one can turn their brain into a pretzel over.

 

[Pahansiri]

It feels odd to take the position of an apologist for god being an atheist, but if god exists and is roughly as the christian faith describes him then I don't think it is proper to compare a human father with finite knowledge and wisdom with the 'eternal' father who is the source of all knowledge and wisdom.

It is covered under the 'god moves in mysterious ways' clause.

As far as free will is concerned omniscience doesn't seem compatible with it. As was pointed out above, if the omniscient creator knows everything that will be if a person is created then that omniscient being who goes ahead and creates that person would be responsible for all actions of that person according to any understanding of responsibility I have ever heard of.

One less than completely satisfactory counter I have heard is that while god does in fact know everything that was, is and will be as well as could be, he is still not responsible for what we do since we still freely choose to do what we do. If I decide to kill someone tonite, it is me making that choice. It might be true my creator knew I was going to do this, but I wasn't forced to do it, I chose to do it.

It's the kind of thing one can turn their brain into a pretzel over.

It feels odd to take the position of an apologist for god being an atheist, but if god exists and is roughly as the christian faith describes him then I don't think it is proper to compare a human father with finite knowledge and wisdom with the 'eternal' father who is the source of all knowledge and wisdom.

Why?

The greatest goal of people who believe in Gods is to be like God, yet acts seen as evil in humans are seen as good in a god or something not to be judged because we can’t know his ways.

If a God or human father stands by and allows his child to suffer it is wrong.

It is covered under the 'god moves in mysterious ways' clause.

That is the “ I can’t explain why what you said is logical but am too afraid of God to ask why or question my beliefs”

As far as free will is concerned omniscience doesn't seem compatible with it. As was pointed out above, if the omniscient creator knows everything that will be if a person is created then that omniscient being who goes ahead and creates that person would be responsible for all actions of that person according to any understanding of responsibility I have ever heard of.

That is right. If I hand a gun and drugs to someone I know is not stable, knowing the drugs will push him to where he will kill with my gun and he kills someone, I am also responsible but even more so.

The problem with Christian free will is if a child molester takes a child rapes and kills them, many will say
“ it was his free will God could not interfere”

Then what of the free will of the child not to be take, raped and killed?

What of the free will of the parents, and other family, friends etc.

Does “evil” free will carry more weight then non “evil” free will?

One less than completely satisfactory counter I have heard is that while god does in fact know everything that was, is and will be as well as could be, he is still not responsible for what we do since we still freely choose to do what we do. If I decide to kill someone tonite, it is me making that choice. It might be true my creator knew I was going to do this, but I wasn't forced to do it, I chose to do it.

What of the free will of the person you kill and all who love him?

 

[username]

Why?

The greatest goal of people who believe in Gods is to be like God, yet acts seen as evil in humans are seen as good in a god or something not to be judged because we can’t know his ways.

If a God or human father stands by and allows his child to suffer it is wrong.

Well sure, but again, if a creator god exists who is all knowing we have to accept that our ability to understand is almost irrelevant in comparison to the omniscient diety's. This isn't something that requires faith by itself. If said diety exists, by definition this diety would have to be wise and knowledgable beyond any human comprehension. Also, in the eye's of an eternal god who created people who will live eternally, physical death is pretty much a non issue. The soul, according to western theistic traditions, is eternal. Losing one's body therefore is of no real signifigance in the scheme of eternity.

As such human evils against each other like wars as well as natural disasters like tsunamis and diseases like cancer just aren't terribly important. It is generally accepted that suffering builds character and makes people stronger (except those who die from it obviously). Perhaps this is more valued by this hypothetical diety than the desire to spare us from temporary suffering in this physical existence.

That is the “ I can’t explain why what you said is logical but am too afraid of God to ask why or question my beliefs”

I think it depends upon the individual holding the beliefs. Some people hold to demonstrably irrational beliefs out of fear, but I don't think that everyone who accepts a belief on faith does so because they are afraid to ask questions. It might simply be that they don't believe themselves or any other humans as being capable of understanding the answer.

That is right. If I hand a gun and drugs to someone I know is not stable, knowing the drugs will push him to where he will kill with my gun and he kills someone, I am also responsible but even more so.

Yes, *you* would be. What you have to explain though, is why a a being who knows infinitely more than you and who views the entire, short physical existence we are granted morally ought to behave according to our sense of right and wrong. You have to show how you can be certain that your notion of morality even applies to this supreme being.

The problem with Christian free will is if a child molester takes a child rapes and kills them, many will say
“ it was his free will God could not interfere”

Then what of the free will of the child not to be take, raped and killed?

What of the free will of the parents, and other family, friends etc.

I don't know that their free will was violated, perhaps we need to define terms. I have no free will to flap my arms and fly no matter how much I might want to. Free will as I understand it simply means I am free to perform any action I am capable of performing without external limitations placed upon me. My actions are not directed by god. In other words if I am physically capable of murdering someone, I am free to do it. If I am attacked by a would be murderer I am free to defend myself to the utmost of my ability. Being free to attempt to defend myself doesn't mean I will succeed any more than I will succeed at flying by flapping my arms. Free will doesn't mean free to have all my desires fulfilled, I am just free to act in whatever manner I wish in attempting to satisfy my desires.

Does “evil” free will carry more weight then non “evil” free will?

I wouldn't think so.

What of the free will of the person you kill and all who love him?

See above, I don't think free will is violated by this. I think it is desire that is frustrated, not free will.

 

[Pahansiri]

Well sure, but again, if a creator god exists who is all knowing we have to accept that our ability to understand is almost irrelevant in comparison to the omniscient diety's.

if’ if’s and buts were cake and nuts then everyday would be Christmas.

Why would we have to except that is wrong to kill an innocent person but for God it is OK to kill an innocent person?

This isn't something that requires faith by itself. If said diety exists, by definition this diety would have to be wise and knowledgable beyond any human comprehension.

and, how would this great knowledge justify making some people suffer so greatly all their lives and then some very little?

Also, in the eye's of an eternal god who created people who will live eternally, physical death is pretty much a non issue.

I have to ask again then and, how would this great knowledge justify making some people suffer so greatly all their lives and then some very little?

The soul, according to western theistic traditions, is eternal. Losing one's body therefore is of no real signifigance in the scheme of eternity.

again I ask how would this great knowledge justify making some people suffer so greatly all their lives and then some very little? Great birth defects and so on?

As such human evils against each other like wars as well as natural disasters like tsunamis and diseases like cancer just aren't terribly important.

my 40 year old brother will die from cancer within a month tell him and my mother that.

It is generally accepted that suffering builds character and makes people stronger (except those who die from it obviously).

and they who die?

Perhaps this is more valued by this hypothetical diety than the desire to spare us from temporary suffering in this physical existence.

and they who die?

So God is like a child with a magnifying glass on a sunny day with ants.

Yes, *you* would be. What you have to explain though, is why a a being who knows infinitely more than you and who views the entire, short physical existence we are granted morally ought to behave according to our sense of right and wrong. You have to show how you can be certain that your notion of morality even applies to this supreme being.

It would by this being setting down commandments and punishments.

Do you as a father tell your child not to kill another then you kill his mother?

I don't know that their free will was violated, perhaps we need to define terms.

??? they had the will to life free from being taken, raped and killed. Their parents also have the free to want this for themselves and the child.

I have no free will to flap my arms and fly no matter how much I might want to.

But you do have a free will not to want to be killed by another right?

Free will as I understand it simply means I am free to perform any action I am capable of performing without external limitations placed upon me.

Like not being raped and killed?
How about eating? 26000 people each day starve to death, most 5 and under they have the free will to eat but cant.

My actions are not directed by god.

allow by “him”.

In other words if I am physically capable of murdering someone, I am free to do it.

and if he is physically capable of not being killed your free will wins out over his?

If I am attacked by a would be murderer I am free to defend myself to the utmost of my ability. Being free to attempt to defend myself doesn't mean I will succeed any more than I will succeed at flying by flapping my arms.

But a “loving god” stands by and allows the free will of the weaker one to be ignored, very loving great plan.

Free will doesn't mean free to have all my desires fulfilled, I am just free to act in whatever manner I wish in attempting to satisfy my desires.

the desires of the killer are filled?

I respect your thoughts and see some of your points.. be well

 

[username]

Why would we have to except that is wrong to kill an innocent person but for God it is OK to kill an innocent person?

For the same reason that a 2 year old has to accept he can't play in the road or take candy from strangers.

and, how would this great knowledge justify making some people suffer so greatly all their lives and then some very little?

I dunno. That's the point. If there is a god and if he has a really, really good reason for the seemingly screwy, unjust, unfair things we see going on we might not be able to comprehend the answer any more than the above mentioned 2 year old understands that eating candy from a stranger might cause death. 2 year olds don't get the concept of death yet, it is beyond their ability. If god is so far above human adults in comprehension it seems rational to expect that most of what god knows is beyond human comprehension.

Please keep in mind I am atheist, not theist. I just enjoy arguing. I don't actually believe anything I say concerning god.

I have to ask again then and, how would this great knowledge justify making some people suffer so greatly all their lives and then some very little?[/quot


Again I ask how would this great knowledge justify making some people suffer so greatly all their lives and then some very little? Great birth defects and so on?

Again I say that if an omnipotent, omniscient being exists, this being, by it's very nature, is incomprehensible to humans. It can't be otherwise.

All these questions concerning how can this be justified have the same answer. They probably can't be justified according to human thinking. I am certain that the 2 year old sucking on the lollipop from the stranger will get quite upset when his mother rips it out of his mouth. The 2 year old won't comprehend why something so yummy was taken away.

Again, I am atheist, not theist, I want to be clear on that so folks don't think they are arguing with another lifegazer or 1inchrist or something.

I am just saying that if an omniscient, omnipotent being exists, it will be impossible for humans to comprehend this being and almost all knowledge of this being will have to be given to us in the form of stories told at a level we can understand (necessarily sacrificing details) and most knowledge will need to be accepted on faith, not by reason and evidence as reason is an inadequate tool to use when trying to understand evidence which is incomprehensible by nature. In such a case it is faith or lack of faith which are the only reasonable options.

 

[Pahansiri]

For the same reason that a 2 year old has to accept he can't play in the road or take candy from strangers.

?????????????

Please explain.

I dunno. That's the point. If there is a god and if he has a really, really good reason for the seemingly screwy, unjust, unfair things we see going on we might not be able to comprehend the answer any more than the above mentioned 2 year old understands that eating candy from a stranger might cause death.

That would be a blind faith, you are way above such thinking.

2 year olds don't get the concept of death yet, it is beyond their ability. If god is so far above human adults in comprehension it seems rational to expect that most of what god knows is beyond human comprehension.

I would not agree but respect you believe this way.

Please keep in mind I am atheist, not theist. I just enjoy arguing. I don't actually believe anything I say concerning god.

I understand.

 

[username]

?????????????

Please explain.

That would be a blind faith, you are way above such thinking.

I would not agree but respect you believe this way.

Ok, I will try to explain this. We are finite creatures with limitted knowledge. God, if one exists, is infinite and possesses all knowledge.

Thus there is an unbridgable knowledge gap between us and god.

Think of some instructor or book that you tried your best to understand, but just couldn't. The material was simply too advanced for you at your current level of knowledge.

That instructor was a human and that book was written by a human yet you couldn't understand the material presented because the knowledge being communicated was too far beyond your current level of understanding.

Now imagine god who knows everything every human has ever known, plus infinitely more. This entity is so advanced that he can create entire worlds, ecosystems and the rules that govern them 'invisibly'.

Now imagine how hard it would be understanding this god when he lectured you on ethics or physics. Not only would you not understand the lesson, it is unlikely you(or anyone else) would ever be capable of advancing to the point where it became comprehensible.

Again, not saying I believe any of this, but I think that what I have said is logically deduced if we assume the existence of an omniscient being.

The finite cannot hope to ever comprehend the infinite.