we have got free will but god knows what we will do. thats all. nothing hard to understand.
They were called libertines.
Anyway, as for free will, according to St. John of Damascus, God “knows all things beforehand, but He does not predetermine them. Although He knows what is in our power, He does not predetermine it”. Man is free because he was created in “the image of God”.
Just because you know something in the future is going to happen that does not mean you caused it to happen. Granted, we, in our limited capacity, cannot know the future, but if you did reason your way to a prediction about what will happen, if you’re right, you aren’t the reason it happened. God’s omniscience and human free-will are not contradictory. Knowledge does not necessarily employ force, nor come from force. It’s simply knowledge. Just because it’s hard/confusing to see the consistency does not mean it isn’t there, especially when you’re theory relies on it being inconsistent/contradictory. So God knew you were going to be a fuck-up when he decided to create you, that doesn’t mean he made you to be a fuck-up, merely that he knew the circumstances of your life and the choices you would make. The question that you’re really trying to ask is not “then, how am I free?”, but rather “then, why did He make me?”. That’s a really dumb question to ask, to yourself or another human, at least.
That leads me to my next point, all this debate is centering on something that IS contradictory. According to the scriptures and Christians, God is perfect, infinite and a bunch of other really fun words, yet we are imperfect beings and seemingly finite in this life. This means that we can’t possibly understand anything God does as His perfection is beyond our imperfect capacities. This is a double-edged sword, though, because now we can’t accurately reason about God. We can try, but we can’t really hold anything true in light of our reasoning. This is the distinction between reason and faith. God is illogical, I’ll give you guys that, but just because something is illogical does not mean that it is wrong. It just means that it is not bound by the rules of logic. It’s important to note here that according to logic, logic itself can logically be false. It is rooted in postulations. Philosopher/logicians have been trying to prove logic for the past 200 years, so far to no avail. All we can think to know is that logic looks like it’s right (I’m not saying it’s wrong either. In fact, I think it’s the best tool that will probably ever be available to us, given our capacities).
What’s the case for this perfect/imperfect finite/infinite distinction? It’s simple, can we know everything? Can we even know anything for certain? How is it that we can even understand a concept like ‘certain’ when we seem to be incapable of it? The same goes for perfection and infinity. Infinity is a great example actually. We can kind of realize that there is an infinite, yet given its definition, there is no way that we could probably prove it exist. In order to prove it, you must show everything that makes up infinity, which is impossible. We use ∞ as a cop-out because we really have no idea.
Everything that we hold a belief about is going to be rooted in some degree of faith somewhere along the line. That degree of faith is logically unprovable, yet we still hold beliefs. I believe I’m typing on a laptop right now because I’m using my senses to figure that out, however, how do I know my senses are right? They fuck up quite a bit. I believe, hypothetically, in evolution/big bang theory, but how the shit did the big bang happen? Fuck if I know, we haven’t figured it out yet, BUT WE WILL. ORLY, how do you know that you will one day without employing faith? As it stands, big bang theory basically says that everything today came out of the “explosion” of something. Well, where the fuck did that something come from and why did it explode? WHERE DID YOUR GOD COME FROM. :fffuuu: Right, the distinction here is that those who have faith realize that we have a limited capacity for knowledge and that get the feeling that there are some things that we’ll never know for certain using reason. For those things, some, including myself, think it’s appropriate to employ faith. Atheists say faith is stupid, but I counter by saying that so is the big bang theory until it makes some fucking sense. Furthermore, faith does not require anything additional, you can’t disprove a matter of faith because of something else, because faith is a belief of something without regard to any proof/evidence, so no evidence should technically affect it.
tl;dr: Christians/scripture say God is perfect and humans are imperfect. Imperfection cannot understand something more perfect than it–namely perfection. So, you’re all cocks arguing about something that will never get anywhere due directly to the definition of those two terms. :jizz:
On that note, I’m going to start rambling and write this ridiculously overdue paper. :retard:
You don’t see that there is no point in placing a god there at the big bang, answering a question with another even more nonsensical question.
Even if, for sake of argument, a god did cause the big bang, what gives you any idea that it was the god of christianity?
The bible itself has been refuted quite a few times in this very thread.
You are essentially using Pascal’s wager argument which is also invalid, because there are so many different versions of christianity, not to mention that it doesn’t disprove any other god from other religions.
I didn’t say that a God is needed for the big bang, just that it contradicts current accepted laws of physics: the Law of Conservation of Mass. Quantum physics/mechanics is trying to get around that, but it hasn’t–yet, at least. Until it does, it just doesn’t make sense. Even then, who knows if it will. I’d really like to see how they’ll explain that something came from nothing. From my perspective, that centers on something which is beyond human cognition.
Secondly, you cannot refute a matter of faith by its very definition. Faith can only be accepted or abandoned by the individual holder of said faith. You can, however, argue when faith is and isn’t appropriate, and if it is or isn’t, but that–theoretically–would have no effect on anyone’s faith, as arguing uses reason.
Thirdly, similarities don’t mean they came from the same a different source. Much like in science, correlation does not mean causation. Also, just because there is a purported lack of monotheistic beliefs in that area during that time does not mean there weren’t any. It only means that we haven’t found any. Is it an alternate, reasoned theory? Sure it is. Does that mean it’s correct? No. Providing an alternate theory is not refutation. There are even plenty of counter-theories to that alternate theory.
haven’t read zen’s post or anything on this page, but again:
god knows the choice you’re going to make, which doesn’t mean the choice is defined by his knowledge of it
knowledge does the define the subject of that knowledge, the subject of the knowledge defines the knowledge
haven’t read zen’s post or anything on this page, but again:
god knows the choice you’re going to make, which doesn’t mean the choice is defined by his knowledge of it
knowledge does not define the subject of that knowledge, the subject of the knowledge defines the knowledge
edit: okay I’ve read most of it now, and let me just say, I’m not a theologian or anything, I don’t know any scripture, I’m simply arguing daniel’s simple point that knowledge of the future predetermines the future.
I think the counter to that is supposed to be that if everything you ever will do, or decide is predetermined ( knowing all past and future simultaneously means that the linear nature of time as we know it doesn’t apply ). If everything that you will ever do is determined BEFORE you were even born, then what will of yours was there? Unless you argue for infinite possibilities that you COULD have accomplished but because of the choices you make, you are who you ended up being, there never was choice. You simply played your part while only perceiving your timeline in a linear way. Unless you argue for a branching reality, there never was free will. Just the illusion of it.
Again, this is ALL academic because there is no evidence either way.
All of this ( and I mean EVERY WORD ) is meaningless drivel. It simply has no place in a debate for the existence of a god. Saying that our logic may fail is one thing, but to argue that because a god might exist with an entirely different nature, and any influence such a being has on us or our universe imperceptible, than the existence of the being to us is meaningless. What is the point of discussing a being totally separate from us and any perceptible interaction? Your argument that reason fails is also ridiculous because it is based on the premise that it doesn’t change.
This whole thing throws all useful information out the window. There is a MAJOR distinction between saying one doesn’t know and work towards understanding more, and simply saying something that could very well just be a made up concept is the answer and stop. You say our perceptions are flawed and our tools imperfect. But that doesn’t mean you throw the tools out and hope that the work does itself. You improve the tools to as much as possible to do the best you can. the very nature of our universe suggest that perfection doesn’t exist within it. So we may never reach perfection. Assuming that it does exist is flawed though. The proper approach would be to say we don’t know, but there is no suggestion that it does yet.
You seem to be approaching the whole concept cart before horse here.
Actually, daniel’s point is that knowledge of the future is only possible when it is predetermined, not that knowledge predetermines future.
If God knows what path things will take, then, in particular, there is a path which things will take (otherwise God wouldn’t know it). That means things are predetermined.
OTOH, if there is free will, things are not predetermined.
Assuming both, we have a contradiction.
guga: Thank you. It is why I keep asking the question: Can I make a decision where the outcome is something God doesn’t know?
no, you can’t, but that doesnt mean his knowledge has any effect on the outcome, he just knows it
anyway, i’m going to stop here, it’s a pretty lame discussion
I never suggested that his knowledge has any effect on the outcome…but that he already knows the outcome before it happens…therefore, you can’t do something that God doesn’t know about…therefore, no free will; you’re already running a predetermined program. Either God is omniscient and we don’t have free will or God is not omniscient and we do.
I don’t see what the problem is.
Some proponents of m-theory have some ideas on how it worked. At one point, our ancestors thought that knowing exactly why the sun moved around the earth was beyond our abilities.
In the equation of the big bang, you’re making the x variable into a god variable instead, which answers nothing.
As far as saying that god is outside the universe and outside logic, there is no point in making any conclusions about it.
this is not a logical conclusion at all
what you are saying here is that his knowledge predetermines the subject of said knowledge
Let me just note that my and daniel’s concerns regarding the relationship between God’s omniscience and free will are actually very known in philosophy and theology:
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omniscience
Take a look at theological fatalism as well.
So, guys, stop saying “free will and omniscience are not contradictory, it is obvious”. It seems obvious for people that are not familiar with logic. The problem is that we did not give a specific logical definitions of free will nor omniscience. I have thought of a few possibilities, the only possible answer seems to be limiting God’s knowledge.
The only thing I was arguing was daniel’s argument that knowledge of our choices defines our choices. Whether or not there are more arguments to be made or whatever is of no consequence to that one argument.
But the point daniel is making is the same that I quoted from Wikipedia. Take a look:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theological_fatalism
That quote looks exactly like daniel’s.
indeed it does, which doesn’t make it any more logical
Within the confines of ourselves, it appears that we have free will; that we use our knowledge to make what we perceive to be completely voluntary choices…whether to buy a game, whether to wear that shirt, whether to eat at 6:30PM instead of 7:00PM, what movie to watch in the theater, or whatever.
But, if God knows exactly what we’re going to do, we logically cannot make any other choice. I could choose between seeing “Paul” or “Rango” in the theater, but if God knows that I’m going to see “Paul”, then it is IMPOSSIBLE for me to choose “Rango”. It is an illusion of free choice.
I could not see “Rango” no matter what I do. I may believe I can, but I can’t. I may believe that I can buy the movie theater nachos, but if God knows I’m going to buy the large popcorn, then nachos was never an option, even though I believe it would be.
Understand?
[color=red]Daniel. Thank you for so many good questions. Guess what. Youre right. You are so right. I think everything you ahve said here is completely and totally right. I wish more Christians understood this. Let me explain.
Yes. It is a bit hard to understand how this works at first, almost seems like an illusion, thats not a bad way of describing this.
Good point bur. It was completely in the will of Adam and Eve to eat the fruit. They wanted to. Good distinction, this will come in handy.
Great question here. Do we have free will? Can we do something God does not already know we intend to do? No. Can we do anything that God has not already predetermined? … NO. (yes i admit it) so then is there free will? In a very important sense yes. I right now am choosing to type what Im typing. Of course im choosing to do this. Of course I am freely choosing to do this. Free will. I am responsible for this action of typing. So yes I have Free Will, and Im responsible for what I do. But did I just contradict myself? Lets keep going here.
Actually I think its great that he is demanding a reasonable answer here. And he hasnt gotten one yet.
working on it! Thanks daniel.
[color=red]I think you pretty much got it here. Congrats. This is like a pretty tough concept and you reasoned through it remarkably well.
[color=black]Lets do a little recap here.
Does God know everything that will happen? Even more so, is God in complete control over all actions.
IF GOD WAS NOT IN CONTROL OF ALL THINGS, WE COULD HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN THE FACT THAT ALL THINGS WORK FOR GOOD FOR THOSE WHO LOVE HIM.
How could he possibly say this if we had complete free will to do whatever we want.
God has all authority on heaven and on earth. all of it. everything.
Ill let you read this and take the multitude of questions that will follow.
I have read your post with great interest and I thank you for your answers.
The problem I see here is that God knew you were going to type what you typed even before you were born. I do see that you contradicted yourself and I don’t see where you had any choice in the matter. Every letter that you typed or backspaced or deleted or anything else for that matter was predetermined, assuming God’s omniscience.
You say that we can’t do anything that God doesn’t already know about? Then we don’t have free will. If we turn away from God, such as Adam and Eve did when they ate from the tree, God knew that would happen before we were even born.
Basically, we were created to be punished. That doesn’t, to me, sound like the workings of an “all-good” deity. Does it to you?