Predestination and Free Will
- Thread starter Saint
- Start date
In other words, if God exists then one of the following must be true:
1) God doesn't know the future
2) We don't have free will
This has all been hashed out many times on these forums, and no-one has ever been able to refute the following logical consequence of God having knowledge of the future: if God knows that I will do X, then I can't possibly do Y, therefore my actions are predetermined.
1) God doesn't know the future
2) We don't have free will
This has all been hashed out many times on these forums, and no-one has ever been able to refute the following logical consequence of God having knowledge of the future: if God knows that I will do X, then I can't possibly do Y, therefore my actions are predetermined.
It is God who chose and predestined me to be saved or
I made the decision to be saved?
I always get confused!
Maybe this is the contradiction of Bible?
The Bible refs, are Romans 8:29,30 and Ephesians 1:5 & 11.
What is predestined, is God's will of a full adoption of all human beings. It applies to every human being.
But whether it takes place or not, on an individual basis, depends on other things that may received by choice, read carefully from a scholarly version like the King James, Romans 8:30,
Anybody may be called, justified etc. As following up on the predestined choice of God. "Many are called but few are chosen" because they don't accept the calling. All may be justified, but don't accept that free gift either.
For anyone to claim that they are destined to be saved apart from anyone else is not true,
and for someone to decline the offer for any reason, that person has declined the will of God.
No one has a choice over the will of God to have them fully adopted, but they can decline the offer of the calling, and full pardon, by rejecting that intitial will - to be destined for eternal life.
The follow up on the predestined will, is in harmony with freedom and keeping it a matter of choice.
The other question pops up, if it is my choice, why am I denied eternal life for not choosing the will of God.
Ask yourself what it is you want to do for eternity that is against the law of God?
Think about what would happen if certain kinds were granted eternal life.
Last edited:
In point one the subject is ''God''.
Why? If you're not prepared to accept that the ''God'' in question, is the Supreme Being, the Origin of everything?
That being the reason this so-called dilema can easily be refuted. Simply by attaching the nature that accompanies the capitalized
notion of God.
If you simply apply human limitation to ''God'', then it's little wonder think it hasn't been refuted.
jan.
It is God who chose and predestined me to be saved or
I made the decision to be saved?
I always get confused!
Maybe this is the contradiction of Bible?
God foreknew from the beginning that you would live.
God foreknew from the beginning what response you would chose upon hearing His will.
God foreknew from the beginning if you would accept or reject the salvation of the Messiah Jesus.
So from his foreknowledge God has predestined who He would conform to the image of Jesus.
Romans 8
21 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.
So there is no contradiction in the Bible on this issue. God knows the beginning and the End and everything in between in the History of mankind and in the History of every individual who will ever live.
God is AWESOME
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
God foreknew from the beginning that you would live.
God foreknew from the beginning what response you would chose upon hearing His will.
God foreknew from the beginning if you would accept or reject the salvation of the Messiah Jesus.
So from his foreknowledge God has predestined who He would conform to the image of Jesus.
Romans 8
21 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.
So there is no contradiction in the Bible on this issue. God knows the beginning and the End and everything in between in the History of mankind and in the History of every individual who will ever live.
God is AWESOME
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
So then there is a contradiction. If God foreknew, then there is no way I could have made the choice myself.
RoccoR
Registered Senior Member
Balerion, Rav, et al,
Well, actually, "God Paradoxes" have been discussed many time (YES!); but, they are not often absorbed.
I have not yet seen a "God Paradox" that cannot be explain. Does this mean that "God" is proven to exist? No. It just means that the human paradox is a paradox in itself, only because the "God Powers" are not fully explained. I'm not a true bliever in "God" as it is associated with all the major belief system, but I understand the limitations of human logic as it is applied to the infinity of a "God Power."
(REFERENCES)
For the sake of brevity, I will assume that the reader understands the dilemma presented by the traditional paradox, in all its various forms. But just in case some gray cells need refreshed, I offer just a couple of very cute references:
There are literally hundreds of references such as these. This is just a small - representative sample.
(DISCUSSION)
At the heart of each paradox on "Free Will" is the application and perception that:
The paradox implies that the DG/SB is bound to the same linear timeline perceived by humanity; finite increments and intervals that render the concepts of "past (historical events), present (the here and now), and future (the next forthcoming moments beyond the here and now)" to be understood and made relevant to man. The paradox does not fully apply the "God Powers" in the frame of the infinite.
The "God Powers" concept implies that these attributes are infinite, beyond human understanding and comprehension.
Humanity experiences and awareness is limited (nor infinite) in four (4) dimensions or coordinates:
The "T" axis (time or frequency).
Humanity can not exist at every coordinate in space, simultaneously; nor can it experience every moment in time simultaneous. In fact time is a calculation made between events in the past; or a prediction (based on probability factors) of what will happen in the future (with some measure of uncertainty). However, the "God Powers" give the GD/SB exactly those abilities. The GD/SB can be everywhere in every time; with no uncertainty. It is not bounded to the finite.
(ANSWER)
The GD/SB knows all in every time at every location simply because it has already experienced the events. Not because it was preordained, but because in the infinite vision, experience, and awareness of the GD/SB, it has already happened. To the GD/SB, any human decision ever made - or will ever be made, is in the the "here and now" for the GD/SB, experienced all at once.
(EPILOG)
I don't necessarily subscribe to the theory of a GD/SB with infinite powers. But the application of the "God Powers" changes the definition of the soundness and validity of the paradox, making every paradox fragile and vulnerabile to the limitation of human thought and imagination.
Most Respectfully,
R
Well, actually, "God Paradoxes" have been discussed many time (YES!); but, they are not often absorbed.
I have not yet seen a "God Paradox" that cannot be explain. Does this mean that "God" is proven to exist? No. It just means that the human paradox is a paradox in itself, only because the "God Powers" are not fully explained. I'm not a true bliever in "God" as it is associated with all the major belief system, but I understand the limitations of human logic as it is applied to the infinity of a "God Power."
(REFERENCES)
For the sake of brevity, I will assume that the reader understands the dilemma presented by the traditional paradox, in all its various forms. But just in case some gray cells need refreshed, I offer just a couple of very cute references:
- 31 Free Will Arguments http://orion.it.luc.edu/~avande1/free-will-args.htm
- SOME ARGUMENTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF FREE WILL http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/philn/philn046.pdf
- An Argument from Consciousness and Free Will (2007) http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/stewart_goetz/dualism.html
There are literally hundreds of references such as these. This is just a small - representative sample.
(DISCUSSION)
At the heart of each paradox on "Free Will" is the application and perception that:
- The "God Deity" (GD) or "Supreme Being" (SB) knows the the outcome of a "Human Decision" before the choice is made. Then it follows that, since the GD/SB already knows the truth of what will happen in the future, that the future is already determined. This nullifies "free-will."
The paradox implies that the DG/SB is bound to the same linear timeline perceived by humanity; finite increments and intervals that render the concepts of "past (historical events), present (the here and now), and future (the next forthcoming moments beyond the here and now)" to be understood and made relevant to man. The paradox does not fully apply the "God Powers" in the frame of the infinite.
The Principle Powers: (Merely one example of God Power Atributes: http://hermeneutics.kulikovskyonline.net/hermeneutics/omni.pdf)
- Omnipotent (All Powerful)
- Omniscient (All Knowing)
- Omnipresence (Infinite Presents)
The "God Powers" concept implies that these attributes are infinite, beyond human understanding and comprehension.
Humanity experiences and awareness is limited (nor infinite) in four (4) dimensions or coordinates:
- The "X" axis.
- The "Y" axis.
- The "Z" axis.
The "T" axis (time or frequency).
Humanity can not exist at every coordinate in space, simultaneously; nor can it experience every moment in time simultaneous. In fact time is a calculation made between events in the past; or a prediction (based on probability factors) of what will happen in the future (with some measure of uncertainty). However, the "God Powers" give the GD/SB exactly those abilities. The GD/SB can be everywhere in every time; with no uncertainty. It is not bounded to the finite.
(ANSWER)
The GD/SB knows all in every time at every location simply because it has already experienced the events. Not because it was preordained, but because in the infinite vision, experience, and awareness of the GD/SB, it has already happened. To the GD/SB, any human decision ever made - or will ever be made, is in the the "here and now" for the GD/SB, experienced all at once.
(EPILOG)
I don't necessarily subscribe to the theory of a GD/SB with infinite powers. But the application of the "God Powers" changes the definition of the soundness and validity of the paradox, making every paradox fragile and vulnerabile to the limitation of human thought and imagination.
Most Respectfully,
R
Last edited:
If the basis for God having the ability to predestine our decisions without influencing them is that he's already seen us make them, then what he's doing isn't really predestination. As such, it falls into the same trap of infinite regression as the IDers' claim that everything requires a creator, and becomes an entirely different paradox.
Predestination and free will are incompatible concepts. The best you can do is what you've done in the following quote:
...and imply that there is some mysterious and magical power beyond our kenning at work. But this doesn't solve the paradox, as it isn't any sort of explanation.
Predestination and free will are incompatible concepts. The best you can do is what you've done in the following quote:
...and imply that there is some mysterious and magical power beyond our kenning at work. But this doesn't solve the paradox, as it isn't any sort of explanation.
It's not an argument against the existence of God. It's essentially an argument against the simultaneous existence of libertarian free will and a God who already knows precisely how the universe, and every single thing in it, will unfold.
Actually it appears to be you who is placing limitations upon the idea of omnipotence. You're essentially saying that there are some things that God can't do. You probably don't realize this, but it follows from your rejection of the notion that God doesn't know the future, and your subsequent embrace of a cheap fideistic notion in it's place. But why is it impossible for God to create a universe within which he doesn't know precisely how events will unfold? Is it because any sort of limitation violates the integrity of the idea of omnipotence? If it does, you're in serious trouble, because the existence of human free will itself would be such a violation. I mean, free will can't really be free if God is in complete control of our thoughts, can it? No. In order to hold that free will is truly free, you need to accept that it's something that operates independently of God's own will, something that he has relinquished control of. It's not incompatible with omnipotence so long as you don't require omnipotence to be defined as the perpetual exercising of every divine ability. With respect to God, it's a self-imposed limitation, not an absolute one. Similarly, the creation of a universe within which the future is not known would be, in part, the implementation of another self-imposed limitation, in order to achieve a certain outcome.
There's quite a few theists out there who believe something similar to this. You still have your all powerful God, without some of the glaring logical contradictions, which is important to some people since they feel that the ability to reason logically is ultimately part and parcel of being created in God's image, and therefore shouldn't be so quickly abandoned in favour of nonsensical appeals to incomprehensibility.
This just doesn't get around the core issue at all. The core issue is that if God knows how events will unfold (it doesn't matter how he knows), then it is impossible for them to unfold in any other way.
RoccoR
Registered Senior Member
Rav, et al,
Well, actually it does.
You are still stuck thinking along a linear timeline.
The GD/SB doesn't know until your choice is made. The GD/SB sees it as you make it. But since the GD/SB is also occupying the timeline in the past, before you made the decision, from your perspective, the DG/SB knows the future.
The GD/SB occupies the entire timeline all at once, forward and backwards in time. Your future decisions have already been freely made by you; you are just not there yet because you can only perceive one point at a time on the timeline consisting of an infinite number of points.
Linear thinkers, are like graphic calculators, presenting a succession of approximations one term at a time. Yet, there is an answer that already exists, it just takes the calculator/computer a while to get there. The DG/SB is like an instantaneous value engine (Calculus without paradox), and has already seen the answer.
In mathematics there is a shape called a Torricelli Horn (quite famous among a certain kind of nerd). Mathematically, it is described as having an "infinite external surface area" and a "finite internal volume." This is a paradox. Because we know that we can entirely paint the external surface and it doesn't require an infinite amount of paint (taking less paint to coat the outside then it does to fill the inside). But in our limited understanding, and the fact that our mathematics, created by man, cannot calculate an infinite sum, we logically conclude - through our finite calculations - that the external surface is infinite. The paradox is created because humanity doesn't have a handle on the "infinite."
You see a paradox in the timeline because you cannot comprehend how - you have already made a decision, of your own free will, in the future (already observed by the GD/SB) - because you see the dimension of time as a linear progression of events and points that move in one direction. You believe the future hasn't been created yet. That is the hidden assumption upon which the "Free Will" arguments all make. The all rest on the assumption that time move in one direction (forward), one event at a time.
You may not like the answer, but in terms of the infinite "God Powers," supra, it is a solution.
Having said that, not everyone believes that such a set of "God Powers" exist (you are in good company). Some people believe that "man" may (one day) have the ability to see the future,
AND --- if YOU can travel into the future, then it follows that the future holds the consequences of decisions that have not yet been made. Would this mean that YOU are the true limit to "free will?"
(STATED DIFFERENTLY)
Anything that a DG/SB knows about the future, from the perspective of the DG/SB, it happened in the past.
Most Respectfully,
R
Well, actually it does.
(COMMENT)
You are still stuck thinking along a linear timeline.
The GD/SB doesn't know until your choice is made. The GD/SB sees it as you make it. But since the GD/SB is also occupying the timeline in the past, before you made the decision, from your perspective, the DG/SB knows the future.
The GD/SB occupies the entire timeline all at once, forward and backwards in time. Your future decisions have already been freely made by you; you are just not there yet because you can only perceive one point at a time on the timeline consisting of an infinite number of points.
Linear thinkers, are like graphic calculators, presenting a succession of approximations one term at a time. Yet, there is an answer that already exists, it just takes the calculator/computer a while to get there. The DG/SB is like an instantaneous value engine (Calculus without paradox), and has already seen the answer.
In mathematics there is a shape called a Torricelli Horn (quite famous among a certain kind of nerd). Mathematically, it is described as having an "infinite external surface area" and a "finite internal volume." This is a paradox. Because we know that we can entirely paint the external surface and it doesn't require an infinite amount of paint (taking less paint to coat the outside then it does to fill the inside). But in our limited understanding, and the fact that our mathematics, created by man, cannot calculate an infinite sum, we logically conclude - through our finite calculations - that the external surface is infinite. The paradox is created because humanity doesn't have a handle on the "infinite."
You see a paradox in the timeline because you cannot comprehend how - you have already made a decision, of your own free will, in the future (already observed by the GD/SB) - because you see the dimension of time as a linear progression of events and points that move in one direction. You believe the future hasn't been created yet. That is the hidden assumption upon which the "Free Will" arguments all make. The all rest on the assumption that time move in one direction (forward), one event at a time.
You may not like the answer, but in terms of the infinite "God Powers," supra, it is a solution.
Having said that, not everyone believes that such a set of "God Powers" exist (you are in good company). Some people believe that "man" may (one day) have the ability to see the future,
AND --- if YOU can travel into the future, then it follows that the future holds the consequences of decisions that have not yet been made. Would this mean that YOU are the true limit to "free will?"
(STATED DIFFERENTLY)
Anything that a DG/SB knows about the future, from the perspective of the DG/SB, it happened in the past.
Most Respectfully,
R
Last edited:
Before Christ healed someone, He would often ask if they wanted it first. Choice is vital.
A need to be healed or a need to be loved, you could call that force if you want, and think of yourself as a helpless puppet, or you could think of it as a conducive condition to life, as a necessary part of living.
God made man with those needs and conditions, and that is the basis by which He will relate to you.
Yes, you are made with certain functions, and you have a choice to go with it or against it.
The conditions for existence are predetermined but choice is not. If choice is set, then there is no choice and no freedom, and love cannot exist without freedom.
Last edited:
Knowing something before it happens, does not remove the choice of the creature.
That's an incorrect assumption. The idea that God is outside of, or transcends, or is omnipresent throughout the fullness of time is something I'm quite familiar with. I used to make exactly the same sort of arguments myself once upon a time. But in my opinion they're the sort of arguments that seem sound when you first arrive at them, but ultimately collapse once you've spent enough time exploring them.
In a nutshell, it's all about immutability. It's widely agreed that at some point God actualized the universe. But if we posit that he transcends time rather than being subject to it, there really couldn't have been a moment before the universe was created. Or to put it another way, a time line such as:
God > some sort of delay > the universe
doesn't really make any sense. There really can't be a delay. The moment there is God, there is the universe, and since there has always been God, there has always been the universe. It's basically as if God and the universe are different aspects of the same eternally existent entity. One could still say that the universe is contingent upon God, but not that God could exist without the universe (remembering, of course, that this isn't to say that contingency necessarily runs in the other direction as well). The critical thing to understand is that the actualization of the universe, if past present and future are all essentially actualized together, results in immutability. Every single one of the universe's features across the fullness of time, has already been defined. That obviously includes every feature of each individual person across the fullness of time. It's means that we're static rather than dynamic, and eternally so.
Perhaps you can still find room for free will in there somewhere, but I don't see how.
RoccoR
Registered Senior Member
Rav, et al,
First, let me say, I'm not trying to argue for the existence of a Supreme Being (SB); of any particular variety.
The human concepts of "time" and "delay" are finite incements between events (the duration between between events). Thus, there is no delay between the SB and the associated creation of the universe (if you believe in a universe created by the SB). Under the standard concept of the SB, it is infinite (always was and always will be). It is not an event; thus there is no increment between the SB and the universe (if you are a believer that there is one universe - competing theories).
Certainly, you must admit that this is an "assumption in contention."
It does raise the question on the Theory of First Motion.
Yes, this is the argument on the theme of a predetermined destiny. And it suggests that it is unreasonable to assume the laws governing the universe are unchanging and will not unfold in a way consistent with the universal forces in play.
First, no one knows. Humanity's knowledge and conception of how the universe unfolded is incomplete. But, under our current understanding - down to [10^(-43)] seconds prior to the creation of the universe (AKA: Big Bang) the Relativistic and Quantum activity seems to be understandable and advancing in a predictable way; set in a motion that is not chaotic, given the energy and forces in play. The speed of light is constant, gravitational forces seem to be set to fixed ratios, the electromagnetic forces have fixed relationships and effects, and the creation of elements seems to be very cosmic manner. The expansion and inflation of the universe is happening in a way, just as the initial forces caused and directed, and cannot be unfolding any other way. Yes, in terms understanding, humanity still has a lot to learn, but there doesn't yet apear to be an invisible hand that is changing things (excluding the question of Dark Energy and Dark Matter). Immutability is NOT a factor in play.
Again, none of this either imposes the requirement for a SB, nor discounts the possibility of a SB as the source. It simply doesn't apply. The concept of a GD/SB is a faith based concept in the supernatural, not a facet that can be studied in science and the rigors of testing. But then, neither is String Theory, and it sounds very scientific. They are both theoretical discussions.
Most Respectfully,
R
First, let me say, I'm not trying to argue for the existence of a Supreme Being (SB); of any particular variety.
(COMMENT)
The human concepts of "time" and "delay" are finite incements between events (the duration between between events). Thus, there is no delay between the SB and the associated creation of the universe (if you believe in a universe created by the SB). Under the standard concept of the SB, it is infinite (always was and always will be). It is not an event; thus there is no increment between the SB and the universe (if you are a believer that there is one universe - competing theories).
(COMMENT)
Certainly, you must admit that this is an "assumption in contention."
- So, there is an implication that the SB exists if and only if there is a universe.
- One could conclude that the universe is a manifestation of the SB, since a universe must exist if there is a SB.
It does raise the question on the Theory of First Motion.
(COMMENT)
Yes, this is the argument on the theme of a predetermined destiny. And it suggests that it is unreasonable to assume the laws governing the universe are unchanging and will not unfold in a way consistent with the universal forces in play.
First, no one knows. Humanity's knowledge and conception of how the universe unfolded is incomplete. But, under our current understanding - down to [10^(-43)] seconds prior to the creation of the universe (AKA: Big Bang) the Relativistic and Quantum activity seems to be understandable and advancing in a predictable way; set in a motion that is not chaotic, given the energy and forces in play. The speed of light is constant, gravitational forces seem to be set to fixed ratios, the electromagnetic forces have fixed relationships and effects, and the creation of elements seems to be very cosmic manner. The expansion and inflation of the universe is happening in a way, just as the initial forces caused and directed, and cannot be unfolding any other way. Yes, in terms understanding, humanity still has a lot to learn, but there doesn't yet apear to be an invisible hand that is changing things (excluding the question of Dark Energy and Dark Matter). Immutability is NOT a factor in play.
Physicist Paul C. Davies comments said:
Again, none of this either imposes the requirement for a SB, nor discounts the possibility of a SB as the source. It simply doesn't apply. The concept of a GD/SB is a faith based concept in the supernatural, not a facet that can be studied in science and the rigors of testing. But then, neither is String Theory, and it sounds very scientific. They are both theoretical discussions.
Most Respectfully,
R
RoccoR
Registered Senior Member
Balerion, Gerhard Kemmerer, et al,
This is absolutely true.
"Gerhard Kemmerer" has it correct. Advanced knowledge of an event is not the cause of the event. There is an illogical tie between knowledge and predetermination. But there is also a misunderstanding in the argument.
The SB doesn't actually know the future decision until the "Free Will" Subject makes the decision. Again, the "Free Will" Subject just doesn't know they have made the decision yet; but in they futre it is already made and observable by the SB. The SB did not ordain it.
Most Respectfully,
R
This is absolutely true.
(COMMENT)
"Gerhard Kemmerer" has it correct. Advanced knowledge of an event is not the cause of the event. There is an illogical tie between knowledge and predetermination. But there is also a misunderstanding in the argument.
The SB doesn't actually know the future decision until the "Free Will" Subject makes the decision. Again, the "Free Will" Subject just doesn't know they have made the decision yet; but in they futre it is already made and observable by the SB. The SB did not ordain it.
Most Respectfully,
R