JMorris
Democratic Socialist
Pepsi Crstal Lite:areyoucra
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is it possible for you to do anything that God did not already know you would do?
- Thread starter Beaudreaux
- Start date
Pepsi Crstal Lite:areyoucra
rageoftyrael
Veritas
Okay, don't know if i've answered the question you put forward, so i'm going to try now. It is simple to answer your question actually. If he has omniscience, then no, you cannot do something he was unaware of. If he doesn't have omniscience, as some people say the bible states, then yes, you can do something god is unaware of.
As for free will and omniscience coexisting, i would say that logic says that free will and omnisicience coexisting isn't possible. if the future is set in stone, we don't have free will. You may percieve things as you are making decisions, and you are making those decisions, but since your decision was already known, free will is simply an illusion.
As for wiggle room, how? Only if you start redefining the meaning of words can you create a situation where free will and fate are able to coexist. Simply saying, you can act like you know exactly how things really work, and then go from there, but any such argument is nonsense. You have no proof, just assumptions.
We are taking the meaning of both things and coming to a conclusion. Free will is if you can make decisions in your life without something dictating those decisions. You know, like god or fate. Now, you might say free will is impossible then, cause a random person can reduce your choices, thus affecting your free will.
Yes and no.
The difference here is that they used their own said free will, which then reduced some of your choices. They don't have some ability that forces you to make choices, their actions have simply limited some of your choices. That doesn't affect your free will.
eh, i've lost track of where i'm at. I might explain some more of my thoughts later, once i figure out what i want to say, lol. Oh, by the way, don't take any of what i say as if i believe in it 100 percent. I could be wrong, there could be some fundamental aspect in fate or omniscience that still allows for free will. I'm just drawing conclusions based on what i know. So, anything i say, keep in mind that i may defend it, but that is only because i believe it to be the likely answer, based on my own knowledge and logic.
I could be wrong. Holy crap, did a guy just admit the possibility of being wrong?
As for free will and omniscience coexisting, i would say that logic says that free will and omnisicience coexisting isn't possible. if the future is set in stone, we don't have free will. You may percieve things as you are making decisions, and you are making those decisions, but since your decision was already known, free will is simply an illusion.
As for wiggle room, how? Only if you start redefining the meaning of words can you create a situation where free will and fate are able to coexist. Simply saying, you can act like you know exactly how things really work, and then go from there, but any such argument is nonsense. You have no proof, just assumptions.
We are taking the meaning of both things and coming to a conclusion. Free will is if you can make decisions in your life without something dictating those decisions. You know, like god or fate. Now, you might say free will is impossible then, cause a random person can reduce your choices, thus affecting your free will.
Yes and no.
The difference here is that they used their own said free will, which then reduced some of your choices. They don't have some ability that forces you to make choices, their actions have simply limited some of your choices. That doesn't affect your free will.
eh, i've lost track of where i'm at. I might explain some more of my thoughts later, once i figure out what i want to say, lol. Oh, by the way, don't take any of what i say as if i believe in it 100 percent. I could be wrong, there could be some fundamental aspect in fate or omniscience that still allows for free will. I'm just drawing conclusions based on what i know. So, anything i say, keep in mind that i may defend it, but that is only because i believe it to be the likely answer, based on my own knowledge and logic.
I could be wrong. Holy crap, did a guy just admit the possibility of being wrong?
By JMorris...i dont believe in god (of any kind). Then surely you cannot classify yourself as an Agnostic. An Atheist doesn't believe in a God of any kind, an Agnostic does not deny that there could possibly be a god, only that it is impossible to know whether or not god exists. In fact an agnostic is uncommitted on any particular question at issue, they like to sit on the fence with one leg either side.
And if by your own admission you are an atheist, then as to the question, “Is it possible for you to do anything that God did not already know you would do?: your only answer can be, NO! Because you don’t even believe that there is a god who can know anything, let alone what we do before we have done it.
Last edited:
Beaudreaux
Well-Known Member
Well said!!
Oh, BTW, I don't know whether or not I've asked you this already, but what is YOUR answer to the question in the OP?
Comicaze247
See the previous line
. . . so atheists aren't allowed to discuss a theological concept?
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
im an atheist in that i dont believe in any man-made god or religion. as far as a higher consciousness that we cant percieve, im agnostic. tho i wouldnt call him a god, because he didnt create us (or anything), and isnt concerned or possibly even aware of us. just simply is. so nice try, but you can be an athiest and an agnostic at the same time.
but yea, NO would be my answer. but that dosent mean that the future still isnt set in stone. which is what would happen if a god (or anyone or anything) had omniscience. if the future is knowable in anyway, then it negates free will.
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
not well said, not at all.
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
im also an agnostic about free will. im an agnostic about a few other things as well, so what do you think i am? i dont think my 1 athiest belief outweighs my agnosticism
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
Matey, atheists can do what ever they want, except give any other answer to the question, “Is it possible for you to do anything that God did not already know you would do?" other than NO; for as I have already said, an atheist doesn't believe that there is a god who knows anythig at all, let alone knows what you will do before you have done it.
Last edited:
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
*edit* i take that back, i misunderstood what you were saying. what your saying actually dosent make any sense. a simple "no" to the question means its impossible to do anything god didnt already know you would do. so actually an athiest wouldnt be able to answer that at all. because the question dosent have any meaning to an athiest, as we dont believe in god, there is no answer to give other than "there is no god".
Last edited:
There are several threads going on about omniscience and free will and I have asked this question in them all. To date, no one has answered. So, I am starting a thread dedicated to the question in the hopes that someone will have the intellectual integrity to respond honestly. The question is not loaded, leading or a trick question. It is straightforward and is properly answered with a "yes" or a "no" with follow up explanation welcome. The question is:Is it possible for you to do ANYthing that God did not already know you would do?I eagerly await responses.
No, it is not possible for me to do anything that God did not already know I would do.
A quote from the Bible.......Before they call, I will answer.....
Comicaze247
See the previous line
Granted, they don't really believe what they're arguing. Even if you don't believe something exists, you can argue about the concepts that relate to it. I could argue whether or not Dumbledore was the most powerful wizard in the world. I don't believe he exists. He's a character in a book. But we can still debate about it, can't we?
It seems to me that you're trying to completely disregard an atheist's logic based solely on the fact that they're an atheist. The reason some people are atheists is because they used logic to really think about whatever faith they were raised to be in. For example, I can't logically believe that any supposed "God" who is omniscient would allow for free will, because the two concepts cannot logically coexist. I can't logically believe that an all-loving and all-forgiving "God" would send people to eternal punishment, because it doesn't make logical sense (unless he's crazy).
Even if you don't believe in something, you can still debate it.
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
i guess instead of trying to prove his point that omniscience and free will can co-exist, he'd rather attack our right to debate it. well, he did take my advice to stop saying the same line over and over, and come up with his own thought. i see now why he relies on his book to give him his thoughts, his own thoughts arent so good
rageoftyrael
Veritas
Kay, gonna clear this up. Not all agnostics believe that god is unprovable. I think it could be proven, by god, if there is a god. Also, if you think about it, agnostics don't believe in god. The difference is that not believing in something is not the same as disbelieving in something. Okay, don't come to any conclusions based on what i just said, it could be wrong, but let me explain what i mean. I do not believe in god, but neither do i have a belief that there is no god. Deists believe in a god, athiests believe there is no god. Most agnostics(or maybe just me, idk) simply decide that they cannot make a decision because there is not enough proof either way. Thus, you have an agnostic. Ummm..... i think people won't understand me completely, so i think i'll start a thread and explain agnosticism, it's prob been done before, but i'm gonna do it anyway. At least, i should say i'll explain my own personal beliefs, and maybe other agnostics will feel the same way.
rageoftyrael
Veritas
oh, and since i threw in a comment that had nothing to do with the actual question of the thread, im gonna do it again to apologize for it. Sorry for possibly derailing the thread! Just wanted to try to clear up some misconceptions(well, what i think is a misconception).
Comicaze247
See the previous line
Don't worry. S-Word derailed it first
It seems to me that you're trying to read into my words that which is not there.
I have already said that atheists can do whatever they wish, but what they cannot do, is, in relation to the question Is it possible for you to do anything that God did not already know you would do? can give any other answer than No, or as JMorris has said, "There is no god", which in fact is saying No, because there is no god.
So can you please show, where you believe that I'm trying to completely disregard an atheist's logic based solely on the fact that they're an atheist?
JMorris
Democratic Socialist
*sigh* "no" would not be a possible answer for a person who dosent believe in god. to give either answer, you have to believe god exists.