Omnipotence vs Free Will

[Revoltingest]

Well, I didn't realize you were just joking. I'll stop responding to your posts, then.

Alas, I'm too often unclear. I wasn't joking, just being hypothetical by figuring out the consequences of someone else's premises.
I've nothing invested in notions of infallible omniscient supreme beings or in free will.

 

[Thief]

And what determines what that willfulness does?

Note: "I do" or anything similar won't cut it.

Okay....your thoughts are not your own? Your feelings are pressed upon you?

If your hand does anything at all, it's because you thought you should...
or felt like it.

Your words are your own....even if you're just repeating what you've heard.

If you say...'nay'....then you are not in control.
You are 'possessed'.
And you need an exorcist.

 

[Dunemeister]

Alas, I'm too often unclear. I wasn't joking, just being hypothetical by figuring out the consequences of someone else's premises.
I've nothing invested in notions of infallible omniscient supreme beings or in free will.

In that case, I look forward to your response to my arguments rather than your distancing yourself from your own.

 

[Daniel09]

I see someone misinterpreted my point. I was meaning nothing about determinalism. Kind of what I was saying is that God knows exactly what will happen in a person's life, so when someone grows up, does bad things and goes to hell, God knew way before-hand that this person would be going to Hell, yet He does nothing to avoid this fate. Because God knows where everyone is going before-hand, why does He punish them for what they will do no matter what?

I'll try to rephrase it. God knows who is going to Hell and Heaven from the beginning. He supposedly has the power to "help" people, as so many seemed to be saved by His divine influence and thank him for so much "good" in their lives. However, in order to have Free Will, God can have no influence whatsoever in a person's life. In which case, sending people to Hell when God has done nothing to help them seems like one hell of a jerk to me. You'll say He gave the Bible, but since He knew the future of all before-hand, that means He knew the Bible would not work on all these people He is sending to Hell.

I guess part of the point I'm making is that in order for Free Will and Omniscience to exist, God must be a horrible, horrible being with no forgiveness. Either that, or Heaven and Hell are not real in the religion, and God just lets people pass on to their various spiritual locations, no true judgment.

 

[Dunemeister]

I see someone misinterpreted my point. I was meaning nothing about determinalism. Kind of what I was saying is that God knows exactly what will happen in a person's life, so when someone grows up, does bad things and goes to hell, God knew way before-hand that this person would be going to Hell, yet He does nothing to avoid this fate. Because God knows where everyone is going before-hand, why does He punish them for what they will do no matter what?

No, this is exactly the problem of logical determinism. You're saying that there's a truth of the matter about what we will do. Therefore, we will do that stuff "no matter what". "No matter what" is determinism. Therefore my argument is directly on point.

Also, why assume God has done nothing? On the Christian tradition he has gone so far as to incarnate himself, die on a cross, and bestow his holy spirit on the world in order to draw humanity back to himself and thus avoid that fate. Apart from spiritually raping everyone, I can't see what else God could be expected to do. And even if you think he could have done more, the point is that it's simply not true that he has done nothing. All we can say is that people are capable of resisting God's overtures of warning and friendship. That is, they're free!

I'll try to rephrase it. God knows who is going to Hell and Heaven from the beginning. He supposedly has the power to "help" people, as so many seemed to be saved by His divine influence and thank him for so much "good" in their lives. However, in order to have Free Will, God can have no influence whatsoever in a person's life.

WHAT? Influence does not amount to coercion or subversion of free will. I have influence with my colleagues at work. They take me seriously because of the relationship I have with them. That does not undermine their freedom or make me somehow their puppetmaster. If that's true of me at work, why isn't it true of God? God can influence us in a number of ways without subverting our freedom. He might present a choice to us in a particularly appealing light so that, all things being equal, I'd be attracted to that choice. But things are rarely equal. I often have competing agendas and priorities and so I resist God's overtures at times, however prettily presented. Free will is not subverted simply as a result of someone exercising influence.

In which case, sending people to Hell when God has done nothing to help them seems like one hell of a jerk to me. You'll say He gave the Bible, but since He knew the future of all before-hand, that means He knew the Bible would not work on all these people He is sending to Hell.

I've addressed the issue of "doing nothing" already. But here you move the goalposts. Now the complaint isn't that God did nothing but that he didn't do enough. I'd simply point out that everyone knows that there is a creator to whom they will one day have to give an account. I realize atheists will howl their disagreement, to which I merely shrug my shoulders. Further, on a Christian view, for those who are interested in friendship with God, the door is wide open, the invitation is sent. Even those without access to the bible and the church know these things and are able to respond if they want to. The fact that there is a truth about who will and won't respond and that God happens to know, doesn't change the fact that our choice is available and free.

I guess part of the point I'm making is that in order for Free Will and Omniscience to exist, God must be a horrible, horrible being with no forgiveness. Either that, or Heaven and Hell are not real in the religion, and God just lets people pass on to their various spiritual locations, no true judgment.

I hope you can see why this doesn't follow. The fact is that God is forgiving. He could have simply let us all go to hell (which is where we are all bound, anyway). Instead, he made a way for us to be restored to health and friendship with God such that our freedom remains intact. Perhaps you would have preferred spiritual rape?

 

[Revoltingest]

In that case, I look forward to your response to my arguments rather than your distancing yourself from your own.

Distancing? Hardly...it just looked necessary to explain my perspective, since some appeared miffed about a lack of free will.
However, this horse has been beaten to death. No one has taken my argument apart, & I've nothing to add.

 

[Skwim]

Okay....your thoughts are not your own? Your feelings are pressed upon you?

When I said "'I do' or anything similar won't cut it." I meant just that; a two to four word answer that goes no further, which would be a wholly inadequate answer..

What I was implying is that the reason one does anything is because they were caused to do it. In the free will debate the implication that sits behind the assertion that free will exists is that a person could have done otherwise. However, the question then becomes one of "How could you have done otherwise?" In order to do so the causes that led you up to doing what you did would have to have been different, but not being so you could not have done differently, which means that doing otherwise is never an option. The will cannot do other than what it has been dictated to do. Dictated by all the causative factors leading up to the moment of doing.

 

[Thief]

When I said "'I do' or anything similar won't cut it." I meant just that; a two to four word answer that goes no further, which would be a wholly inadequate answer..

What I was implying is that the reason one does anything is because they were caused to do it. In the free will debate the implication that sits behind the assertion that free will exists is that a person could have done otherwise. However, the question then becomes one of "How could you have done otherwise?" In order to do so the causes that led you up to doing what you did would have to have been different, but not being so you could not have done differently, which means that doing otherwise is never an option. The will cannot do other than what it has been dictated to do. Dictated by all the causative factors leading up to the moment of doing.

You're just trying to hang on to an argument of words...not answering the actual question.

Are your thoughts your own?
You believe your actions are controlled internally?
To control your actions....the deeds of your hand....Someone would be in your head...not allowing you to even consider alternative actions.

If you believe your actions are controlled externally....
Then you are a similar to a leaf on water.
Your direction is not your decision.

And why discuss decision, with someone who does not posses his own mind?
Why ask direction...and description of direction...from someone who makes denial that direction cannot be controlled?

Might as well talk to a rock.

 

[logician]

True prophets cannot exist in a chaotic/random universe. Nobody can predict with 100 certainty what will happen to them an hour from the present, or even a minute from the present.

Therefore, if a supposed god created this universe, it made sure that it itself could not be omniscient.

 

[Skwim]

You're just trying to hang on to an argument of words...not answering the actual question.

*sigh* but I'll go along with you here.

Are your thoughts your own?

No one else's.

You believe your actions are controlled internally?

By my brain and mind? Yes.

And why discuss decision, with someone who does not posses his own mind?

Not sure what you mean by "posses his own mind."

Why ask direction...and description of direction...from someone who makes denial that direction cannot be controlled?

Because one cannot do otherwise. I can only do what all the causative factors have lead me to do. Same as with yourself.

 

[Wandered Off]

Well technically, it's not the future that is known but propositions ABOUT the future. A proposition is merely an abstract object that has truth value. The proposition's content is true insofar as it expresses the way the world is (in the case of propositions about the future, the way the world will be).

A proposition's truth value is only as real as its referent. If a proposition can be accurately judged as true, then it must have an actual referent to judge truth against. If there is an actual truth value (as opposed to a speculated truth value) about the future, then the future has to exist in some form. If the future truly does not exist in any form, then the proposition's truth value is speculation - which would not compromise free will IMO.

If the actual future can be known with certainty, it means that the future exists in some form, and actors are incapable of doing anything except what is foreknown. I see this as incompatible with free will.

Not that it matters, but I don't really have a solid opinion about whether we have free will. I just believe that it would be impossible under the conditions that allow certainty of foreknowledge.

 

[Thief]

*sigh* but I'll go along with you here.

No one else's.

By my brain and mind? Yes.

Not sure what you mean by "posses his own mind."

Because one cannot do otherwise. I can only do what all the causative factors have lead me to do. Same as with yourself.

Your past is set in stone.
Your future is flexed by what you decide to do now.

 

[Skwim]

Your past is set in stone.
Your future is flexed by what you decide to do now.

Where I come from mere assertion is not an argument, but if that's all you've got then that's all you've got.

Take care.

 

[Daniel09]

No, this is exactly the problem of logical determinism. You're saying that there's a truth of the matter about what we will do. Therefore, we will do that stuff "no matter what". "No matter what" is determinism. Therefore my argument is directly on point.

What I mean is that if God knows what a person will choose to do, then he has the power to do something about it, no? Since he doesn't with so many people, doesn't this seem to clue you in a bit?

Also, why assume God has done nothing? On the Christian tradition he has gone so far as to incarnate himself, die on a cross, and bestow his holy spirit on the world in order to draw humanity back to himself and thus avoid that fate. Apart from spiritually raping everyone, I can't see what else God could be expected to do. And even if you think he could have done more, the point is that it's simply not true that he has done nothing. All we can say is that people are capable of resisting God's overtures of warning and friendship. That is, they're free!

They're free until they die, you mean. They have forgiveness as long as they follow something that God knew many wouldn't be able to believe.

WHAT? Influence does not amount to coercion or subversion of free will. I have influence with my colleagues at work. They take me seriously because of the relationship I have with them. That does not undermine their freedom or make me somehow their puppetmaster. If that's true of me at work, why isn't it true of God? God can influence us in a number of ways without subverting our freedom. He might present a choice to us in a particularly appealing light so that, all things being equal, I'd be attracted to that choice. But things are rarely equal. I often have competing agendas and priorities and so I resist God's overtures at times, however prettily presented. Free will is not subverted simply as a result of someone exercising influence.

I don't think it's this clear cut.

I've addressed the issue of "doing nothing" already. But here you move the goalposts. Now the complaint isn't that God did nothing but that he didn't do enough. I'd simply point out that everyone knows that there is a creator to whom they will one day have to give an account. I realize atheists will howl their disagreement, to which I merely shrug my shoulders. Further, on a Christian view, for those who are interested in friendship with God, the door is wide open, the invitation is sent. Even those without access to the bible and the church know these things and are able to respond if they want to. The fact that there is a truth about who will and won't respond and that God happens to know, doesn't change the fact that our choice is available and free.

It's that he knows what will happen and doesn't seem to care. Sure, the choice is there, but he knows which one a person will make. Is this making sense yet?

I hope you can see why this doesn't follow. The fact is that God is forgiving. He could have simply let us all go to hell (which is where we are all bound, anyway). Instead, he made a way for us to be restored to health and friendship with God such that our freedom remains intact. Perhaps you would have preferred spiritual rape?

Oh sure, he could simply send us all to hell, but instead he makes guidelines so that only the ones he fancies get to go to "paradise". Honestly, I would rather go to hell than enter heaven knowing that so many are in hell.

 

[justbehappy]

Ok, so Christians state that God gives humans Free Will. Also, God is Omnipotent. Omnipotent means God knows "everything;" the past, the present, and the future. So, God knows exactly what choices a person will make, knows what sins they will partake in, and in a sense, the person's judgment is already decided before they are even born. A person's fate is sealed, because no matter how you argue it, God knows in his Omnipotence what will happen. People are created to be sent to hell and/or heaven, free will or not.

If this made sense to you, then how do you explain things? God cannot be Omnipotent and we still have Free Will. It is a contradiction. Either God is not all-knowing, or people really don't have a choice in what happens after they die. It is known before they even exist.

I'm sure Christians will say to this - "Our minds are not capable to understand all of God's wonderful miracles"

 

[idea]

Originally Posted by idea
Knowing something is different than causing it. Free will has to do with who causes what, not who knows what. We cause it, so it is our will.

Ex: I can look at the TV guide and "know" what will be on TV, but I did not cause it. I did not take away the will of any of the programmers merely by knowing what will be on TV.

The future is set in stone, yes, but we are the ones who set it in stone, so it is our will, our agency.

I like the first two lines.
Allow me to rebuttal the last one.

The past is set in stone. The future is flexed by our immediate willfulness.

If the future was not set in stone, then no one - not even God - could know it. If there was something that God did not know? imagine the horror - perhaps there was a better way to save us than killing Jesus, only He didn't know it... It seems like God needs to know everything, or the whole thing is a wash...

(Old Testament | Psalms147:5)
5 Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.


How could you prophecy about the future if you don't know it?

The Nature of Prophets and Prophecy



it is obvious that the free-will actions of men play a role in the fulfillment of prophecy. Here are other examples from the Bible:

• The Lord told David that the men of Keilah "will deliver thee up [to Saul]" (1 Samuel 23:12). This did not happen, however, because David fled from the city (verses 13-14).
• Isaiah told king Hezekiah, "Thus saith the Lord, Set thine house in order; for thou shalt die, and not live." (2 Kings 20:1) But after the king pleaded with the Lord, the prophet delivered a new message, saying that fifteen years would be added to his life (verses 2-6).
• The Lord told Moses that he would destroy the Israelites and make of Moses a greater nation than they. When Moses protested that this would be wrong, the Lord changed his mind (Numbers 14:11-20).
• The Lord said through Elisha that the combined armies of Israel, Judah and Edom would "smite every fenced city" of Moab and that he would "deliver the Moabites also into your hand." But one city, Kir-hareseth, was not taken. When Mesha, the Moabite king, sacrificed his son on the city wall, the Israelites left and went home. The prophecy was not fulfilled because the Israelites would not cooperate with the Lord's wishes.
• Through Ezekiel, the Lord declared that the Lebanese city of Tyre would be destroyed by the Babylonian king Nebuchadrezzar, never to be rebuilt (Ezekiel 26, especially verses 4, 7, 12, 14). Though Nebuchadrezzar laid siege against Tyre from 598 to 586 B.C., he was never able to take the city. The Lord then told Ezekiel that, in compensation for his not taking Tyre, Nebuchadrezzar would be given the land of Egypt, (Ezekiel 29:17-10). Its people would be slain and its rivers dry up (Ezekiel 30:10-12; 32:11-15) and the land of Egypt would remain uninhabited for forty years (Ezekiel 29:11-13). But though Nebuchadrezzar defeated an Egyptian army in battle, he never conquered Egypt either.
• Isaiah, in his prophesy against Babylon (Isaiah 13:1), declared that the Medes would slay men, women and children and that Babylon would "be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation" (Isaiah 13:17-20). In 539 B.C., Cyrus, king of the Medes and Persians, took Babylon without bloodshed, and made it one of the principal cities of his empire. Babylon remained inhabited for centuries afterward.

so, was the future changed in the above instances? or did they need the unfulfilled prophecy in order to change their actions? if you don't do xyz then abc sort of thing - and they had to be told xyz? hmmm we'll see

 

[idea]

I'm sure Christians will say to this - "Our minds are not capable to understand all of God's wonderful miracles"

hoepfully not -

(New Testament | John 17:3)
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God

The whole point is to know God...

 

[Thief]

Knowing with certainty some aspect of the future, does not take away your free will...or the consequence of how you used it.

You could change your mind.

I suppose some participates are going to boo-hoo....in the face of God...
'You made me what I am...It's all Your fault!'

If this is what you are looking forward to....fine.
You are what you are....off to hell you go.

Or maybe...you could change your mind.

 

[Peacewise]

[youtube]teMlv3ripSM[/youtube]
YouTube - Monty Python - Argument Clinic

hilarious.

 

[Wandered Off]

Knowing with certainty some aspect of the future, does not take away your free will...

It renders you incapable of acting otherwise. Is this free will?

You could change your mind.

If so, then you did not previously know with certainty. Maybe you had intent, but not actual knowledge with certainty.