A conundrum of a question about free will
- Thread starter hobbes
- Start date
Hi Hobbes. I genuinely thought that I had replied to this topic, but it must have been another similar one...
The doctrine of Molinism uses the concept of 'middle knowledge' to try explain your question.
God knows all the variables beforehand, in fact He created a world where all those variable are possible at the same time (scientists are realising this only slowly - cf. Heisenberg et al.,uncertainty, multiplicity, super string theory, etc.). Yet only one set of variables can be true at a certain time ("reality"). God presides over this dimension as well as the others.
But in this one, we cannot see God (a little twist that we can't seem to get over of). We have to believe in something we cannot see. We know this is possible, because we believe in other immaterial things, like morals, human rights, freedom etc.
Your conundrum rests on the assumption that whatever people do subverts God's omni-everythingy. It doesn't - He omnipotency lies exactly therein: that He has foreseen all possibilities, and still created humanity, still presides over them, and still promises them eternal life along His side. You could argue that if He was so benevolent, He would simply have destroyed all bad people summarily so that only good people would survice and peace be possible.
The fact that evil people still exist is a sign of God's mercy. Don't worry about God's judgement of other people, because it doesn't matter if you don't believe in Him yourself.
1 Timothy 1
15Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners--of whom I am the worst. 16But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.
2 Peter 3
14So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 15Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
The doctrine of Molinism uses the concept of 'middle knowledge' to try explain your question.
God knows all the variables beforehand, in fact He created a world where all those variable are possible at the same time (scientists are realising this only slowly - cf. Heisenberg et al.,uncertainty, multiplicity, super string theory, etc.). Yet only one set of variables can be true at a certain time ("reality"). God presides over this dimension as well as the others.
But in this one, we cannot see God (a little twist that we can't seem to get over of). We have to believe in something we cannot see. We know this is possible, because we believe in other immaterial things, like morals, human rights, freedom etc.
Your conundrum rests on the assumption that whatever people do subverts God's omni-everythingy. It doesn't - He omnipotency lies exactly therein: that He has foreseen all possibilities, and still created humanity, still presides over them, and still promises them eternal life along His side. You could argue that if He was so benevolent, He would simply have destroyed all bad people summarily so that only good people would survice and peace be possible.
The fact that evil people still exist is a sign of God's mercy. Don't worry about God's judgement of other people, because it doesn't matter if you don't believe in Him yourself.
1 Timothy 1
15Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners--of whom I am the worst. 16But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.
2 Peter 3
14So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 15Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Not at all. Not at all. If you think I argued that god would would have destroyed evil persons if he was so benevolent it shows you didn't do much other then skim my post.
To sum up what I was saying in as few words so that people actually read it. A omnipotent omniscient god would be able to make it so all people turn out good with 100% free will. For a omnipotent omniscient god it is not impossible to make it so everyone has 100% free will and turn out good. The poof of this is in the first post i made. And if he was all loving he would do that.
So if god can do that then why wouldn't it? Only explanation left is that god isn't omnieverything. That or it doesn't exist.
CounslerCoffee
Registered Senior Member
Im not a lutherian. God alreadys knows which ones of us are going to hell and which ones to heaven... kinda takes the fun out of the game doesnt it?
You are underestimating the nature of evil. Since God is absolutely just, He is the only one who can objectively judge between good and evil.
If it were up to us, or to a law, even divine law, like the ten commandments, we would always fall short. But because of whose laws we know what is wrong, we can recognise evil. God does promise that everybody who believes in Jesus (i.e. that God is all-powerful because He has already freed us from evil by defeating death) will be 100% free from evil. A nice side-effect of this freedom is eternal life.
But since evil rules this world through our own doing (the free will part of it), we have to live our present lives in it believing, and be taken out of it in the end (the "eventual freedom" you speak of). The second part God will do, and indeed already has done. But if we persist not recognising Him in this life, we forfeit that freedom (again, because of our free will, driven along by our sinful nature).
If it were up to us, or to a law, even divine law, like the ten commandments, we would always fall short. But because of whose laws we know what is wrong, we can recognise evil. God does promise that everybody who believes in Jesus (i.e. that God is all-powerful because He has already freed us from evil by defeating death) will be 100% free from evil. A nice side-effect of this freedom is eternal life.
But since evil rules this world through our own doing (the free will part of it), we have to live our present lives in it believing, and be taken out of it in the end (the "eventual freedom" you speak of). The second part God will do, and indeed already has done. But if we persist not recognising Him in this life, we forfeit that freedom (again, because of our free will, driven along by our sinful nature).
CounslerCoffee, you are confusing prescience with predetermination. It looks like the same thing, but what God knows is that some people will continue to reject Him, and what He has determined is that all who accept Him will be saved. You still have a chance to believe. But that's only the first step.
Don't be fooled by people who say it doens't matter whether you believe:
Jeremiah 23:17
They keep saying to those who despise me, 'The LORD says: You will have peace.' And to all who follow the stubbornness of their hearts they say, 'No harm will come to you.'
Your present choice does make a difference. Why would anybody expect otherwise?
Don't be fooled by people who say it doens't matter whether you believe:
Jeremiah 23:17
They keep saying to those who despise me, 'The LORD says: You will have peace.' And to all who follow the stubbornness of their hearts they say, 'No harm will come to you.'
Your present choice does make a difference. Why would anybody expect otherwise?
Jenyar. You totally side stepped my questions and as of yet undisputed theorem. I never mentioned a word about what makes something good and what makes something evil. thats for a whole nother topic. Nor all that other stuff you went on about. I'm looking for a reply/explanation to my theorem not a sermon.
To sum up what I was saying in as few words. A omnipotent omniscient god would be able to make it so all people turn out good with 100% free will. For a omnipotent omniscient god it is not impossible to make it so everyone has 100% free will and turn out good. The proof of this is in the first post i made. And if he was all loving he would do that.
So if god can do that then why wouldn't it? Only explanation left is that god isn't omnieverything. That or it doesn't exist.
________________
Do you dispute this statement?
For a omnipotent omniscient god it is not impossible to make it so everyone has 100% free will and turn out good.
Do you believe its impossible for god to manipulate a persons environment so that everyone chooses to walk the path of goodness on there own with complete free choose and will?
If you believe its impossible for god to do that what is the basis for this belief?
Last edited:
Originally posted by hobbes
If he did then we wouldn't do so.
He has and we do.
You contradicted yourself due to your lack of understanding of what i was saying.(that or not thinking it through)
I don’t think so, you asked, “….so that we can choose on our own the good path? Most of us choose not, the good path.
Then he would provide the environment that we need to choice said path our self.
What sort of environment would that be, in your opinion?
It would still be our choice but because of the needed hardships and lessons god would provide us because of him being those three things each of us would choose a path of goodness of our own free will.
What is confusing you, is your choice of the word “choose.” It is obvious that we can choose one way or another, so what is your point?
He would manipulate our environment
What is wrong with the environment, why He should manipulate it?
…in order that well all learn the hard lessons we need to (the hard way of course else it isn't a hard lesson) In order for each of us of our own free will and violation choice that path of goodness.
Okay, I’ll go with you here, again you use the word “choice,” maybe you should use the word “force” then what you are asking would make more sense. But let me ask you a question. Supposing He has manipulated the environment in order that we choose the path of goodness, but because we have a choice, we still decide to go against it.
Teaching them the love of learning and making sure they come to class each day. Not like giving the answers.
God does that in so many ways, maybe you are not paying attention.
except unlike a human teacher a omniscient,omnipotent and all loving would not fail because he could see all possible outcomes before even starting.
Do you know (hypothetically for sake of argument), the relationship between God and man?
I ask this because you are asking questions about aspects of Gods nature which is predominantly documented in scipture, but you are not using the scripture to find out the answers.
Why is this?
A omnipotent omniscient god would be able to make it so all people turn out good with 100% free will.
What would be the point of having 100% free will?
And if he was all loving he would do that.
So what does “all loving” actually mean?
Only explanation left is that god isn't omnieverything.
No, your enquiry is non-sensical and designed to come to that conclusion.
Simply wishful thinking.
Love
Jan Ardena.
You're right, hobbes (Is that a pun on Calvyn?
) - I do get carried away with an idea sometimes.
Yes I believe that God can (and has) made it possible - an given us the prophecy of a new heaven and a new earth. I guess I should have said it in that many words in the first place...
What I have been going on about is that our free will is a variable that God is taking into account when making it possible - not forcing it upon us. The other variable is time - when will that prophecy become true? The sad fact is, not everyone wants to be saved, despite God's plan. He warns, He preaches, He send angels, messengers, other people, 66 books, He punishes, He forgives. As far as I can see God has been doing His best to get us to listen on our own accord over the past two thousand years. But I'm ranting again
Since you do have 100% free will to believe in God or not, and knowing that the only way to a life that would "turn out good" is by following Jesus (since God has presented Jesus as the only way to that outcome), the merit of the choice is more important than the possibility of it.
Because that would mean that doing God's will is the only option that makes sense, once you know what the alternative (less than 100% freedom/being a lost soul) is.
) - I do get carried away with an idea sometimes. Yes I believe that God can (and has) made it possible - an given us the prophecy of a new heaven and a new earth. I guess I should have said it in that many words in the first place...
What I have been going on about is that our free will is a variable that God is taking into account when making it possible - not forcing it upon us. The other variable is time - when will that prophecy become true? The sad fact is, not everyone wants to be saved, despite God's plan. He warns, He preaches, He send angels, messengers, other people, 66 books, He punishes, He forgives. As far as I can see God has been doing His best to get us to listen on our own accord over the past two thousand years. But I'm ranting again
Since you do have 100% free will to believe in God or not, and knowing that the only way to a life that would "turn out good" is by following Jesus (since God has presented Jesus as the only way to that outcome), the merit of the choice is more important than the possibility of it.
Because that would mean that doing God's will is the only option that makes sense, once you know what the alternative (less than 100% freedom/being a lost soul) is.
Last edited:
Sheesh Jan Ardena. you sliced up my post into ribbons. Your quoting such small sections I can't figure out which part your quoting being so out of context. Like you quoted me as saying "if he did then we wouldn't do so." like I even know what thats in reference to. sheesh.
Nothing is confusing me here except you. I "choose" the right word.
My point was that god could give use freedom of choice and manipulate our environment so that all of us use that free choice to follow the path of good.
So that all people choice to be good. What discussion are you in that you don't know that this is what I'm talking about?
Basically your asking "what if god failed to create the custom environment we each need that would lead us all to a path of goodness?"
To that I'd answer a omnipotent omniscient god couldn't fail i'd think.
Cause I got a brain and like to use it perhaps? Also the bibles open for interpretation. Proof of this is how everyone has there own interpretation. Not to mention theres nothing in the bible that handles the questions im asking or the theorems im postulating. (I know because ive read it through)
You don't see a point to having free will?
What do you think it means?
Its more theorem then inquiry. A challenge to persons to find a single hole in my logic. A challenge noone has gotten close to stepping up to. Most just like to repeat the same platitudes and think that counts as rebuking the whole thing.
My theory makes plenty of sense and the theorem came long before the conclusion so your statement of it being designed that way is simply false.
Wishful thinking? Id love to believe your pie in the sky head in the clouds christian platitudes. I'm simply too smart for it. Why would I want to believe there would be anything less then a omnipotent omniscient god? I wouldn't. But this train of reasoning proves almost beyond a doubt that its not that way so I can't.
One set up by god in all his wisdom and power. You would know more of what im saying here if you were to put this into context.
Nothing is confusing me here except you. I "choose" the right word.
My point was that god could give use freedom of choice and manipulate our environment so that all of us use that free choice to follow the path of good.
So that all people choice to be good. What discussion are you in that you don't know that this is what I'm talking about?
The word force doesn't make sense at all. Who said anything about forcing anyone to do anything? Not me.
Basically your asking "what if god failed to create the custom environment we each need that would lead us all to a path of goodness?"
To that I'd answer a omnipotent omniscient god couldn't fail i'd think.
Cause I got a brain and like to use it perhaps? Also the bibles open for interpretation. Proof of this is how everyone has there own interpretation. Not to mention theres nothing in the bible that handles the questions im asking or the theorems im postulating. (I know because ive read it through)
You don't see a point to having free will?
What do you think it means?
Only explanation left is that god isn't omnieverything.
No, your enquiry is non-sensical and designed to come to that conclusion.
Simply wishful thinking.
Its more theorem then inquiry. A challenge to persons to find a single hole in my logic. A challenge noone has gotten close to stepping up to. Most just like to repeat the same platitudes and think that counts as rebuking the whole thing.
My theory makes plenty of sense and the theorem came long before the conclusion so your statement of it being designed that way is simply false.
Wishful thinking? Id love to believe your pie in the sky head in the clouds christian platitudes. I'm simply too smart for it. Why would I want to believe there would be anything less then a omnipotent omniscient god? I wouldn't. But this train of reasoning proves almost beyond a doubt that its not that way so I can't.
Lets say you put out some cookies. You tell your kid not to take any.
Now if you leave out the cookies just by themself you know your kids going to take some.
You also know(without a doubt because your god) if you put a note by those cookies reminding him/her that you will count the cookies and if he/she takes some you will punish em. The he/she wouldn't take any cookies.
To put the note on the cookie or not is your choice. Note being there or not, taking a cookie is your kids choice. But you control your kids choice by choosing whether or not to leave the note. But its still your kids choice.
Does anyone yet get my point that the whole thing revolves around that free choice and control of environment are not mutually exclusive? If they were then priests totally waste there time. Why preach to people if there going to end up the same no matter what you say?
Now if you leave out the cookies just by themself you know your kids going to take some.
You also know(without a doubt because your god) if you put a note by those cookies reminding him/her that you will count the cookies and if he/she takes some you will punish em. The he/she wouldn't take any cookies.
To put the note on the cookie or not is your choice. Note being there or not, taking a cookie is your kids choice. But you control your kids choice by choosing whether or not to leave the note. But its still your kids choice.
Does anyone yet get my point that the whole thing revolves around that free choice and control of environment are not mutually exclusive? If they were then priests totally waste there time. Why preach to people if there going to end up the same no matter what you say?
Last edited:
The fact is - people can and will choose. They were tempted to "take the cookie", and would otherwise have had no inclination to. But the grass is always greener on the other side to us, and that's not God's fault. Our free will made us vulnerable, and Satan exploited it.
The crux of the matter is that it's easier to just do everything you want and then look for justification later, than to take responsibility. Adam and Eve were not children any more than we are. There are always excuses. Always.
God created a complete world, not an inclomplete one. A complete world will have everything that choice allows, otherwise free will won't be free anymore.
Where do you get the notion that everyone is going to end up the same no matter what? Please back it up with something.
The crux of the matter is that it's easier to just do everything you want and then look for justification later, than to take responsibility. Adam and Eve were not children any more than we are. There are always excuses. Always.
God created a complete world, not an inclomplete one. A complete world will have everything that choice allows, otherwise free will won't be free anymore.
Where do you get the notion that everyone is going to end up the same no matter what? Please back it up with something.
All immaterial. That people have choice I already said is so. And why they might sin has no bearing on this topic.
That does not rule out control of a persons environment causing someone to use there free choice to choice the path of goodness.
I never got this notion.
If our environment has no affect on the choices we make then the work of priests is a waste of time. No matter what they say its not going to have any affect on anyone anyways.
Those chick pamphlets are also a waste. Since were going to end up the same no matter what is said to us or what we see or hear then those pamphlets are just a waste of paper.
As were all the prophets that ever were. Each one of them wasting there time in the name of god because no matter what they say or what miracles they show it will have no affect on the choices made by the people who see and here such things.
Do note I do note believe any of that. That is how it would be if free will worked like say, how Jan Ardena says it works.
Those chick pamphlets are also a waste. Since were going to end up the same no matter what is said to us or what we see or hear then those pamphlets are just a waste of paper.
As were all the prophets that ever were. Each one of them wasting there time in the name of god because no matter what they say or what miracles they show it will have no affect on the choices made by the people who see and here such things.
Do note I do note believe any of that. That is how it would be if free will worked like say, how Jan Ardena says it works.
Fogive me if this has already been said, I'm short on time and didn't read the whole thread yet.
The short answer is, there can be no light without darkness, and no good without evil. One cannot exist without the other, so in order for there to be good, there must be evil as well.
The short answer is, there can be no light without darkness, and no good without evil. One cannot exist without the other, so in order for there to be good, there must be evil as well.
Originally posted by hobbes
One set up by god in all his wisdom and power. You would know more of what im saying here if you were to put this into context.
Your context is all over the place.
My point was that god could give use freedom of choice and manipulate our environment so that all of us use that free choice to follow the path of good.
Then that wouldn’t be freedom of choice, can’t you see that?
So that all people choice to be good.
Well if they are able to “choose” then they could “choose” to be bad as well. Which is the point of having choice.
What discussion are you in that you don't know that this is what I'm talking about?
Why don’t you talk straight?
The word force doesn't make sense at all. Who said anything about forcing anyone to do anything? Not me.
Well, if God manipulated the environment so that we all chose “good” even if we wanted to be bad, then as far as I can see, that is “forcing.”
Also the bibles open for interpretation. Proof of this is how everyone has there own interpretation.
Everything is open for interpretation, but you say you have a brain, so I suggest you use it and find out the relationship between God and man, it is in there and needs no scholarly interpretation.
Not to mention theres nothing in the bible that handles the questions im asking or the theorems im postulating. (I know because ive read it through)
Well you obviously haven’t understood it.
A omnipotent omniscient god would be able to make it so all people turn out good with 100% free will.
What would be the point of having 100% free will?
You don't see a point to having free will?
Could you answer my question first?
So what does “all loving” actually mean?
What do you think it means?
Please answer my question first, then I will answer yours.
A challenge to persons to find a single hole in my logic.
What logic, you don’t even understand the relationship between God and man.
My theory makes plenty of sense
Only to you it would seem.
Id love to believe your pie in the sky head in the clouds christian platitudes.
You don’t even know what I’m about.
I'm simply too smart for it.
Puh-lease!!!!!!
Love
Jan Ardena.
Yin-Yang crap? Hardly. The definition of good and evil depend on each other, same as you can't have light without darkness.
Can you explain how you can have light without darkness? No, you can't, because then there'd be no darkness to compare the light to. I'd say "Light compared to what?"
Same with good and evil. You can't have everyone be completely evil with no good. There is good and bad in every action. Same for good. You can't have everyone benefitting in every way. Someone has to suffer for others to get their way in many instances.
They must co-exist.
Can you explain how you can have light without darkness? No, you can't, because then there'd be no darkness to compare the light to. I'd say "Light compared to what?"
Same with good and evil. You can't have everyone be completely evil with no good. There is good and bad in every action. Same for good. You can't have everyone benefitting in every way. Someone has to suffer for others to get their way in many instances.
They must co-exist.
The fault in your argument is your definition of good and evil
Raithere has some interesting ideas of what is good and what is evil
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10661&pagenumber=3
Also you have yet to prove that good is litteral light and evil is litteral darkness.
Raithere has some interesting ideas of what is good and what is evil
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10661&pagenumber=3
(too tired and busy to put my own thoughts on what i think is good and evil, in but this post is good. )
Also you have yet to prove that good is litteral light and evil is litteral darkness.