Predestination and Free Will

[Rav]

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).

OK. So we agree on that, then.

Originally Posted by Rav

but not that God could exist without the universe

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.

The statement "God can't exist without the universe" is true in a world (take "world" here to mean all things, physical or otherwise) where there is an actually existing universe that is contingent upon him. It simply follows from the previous conclusion that any notion of a creation event at some particular point in time is nonsensical within some more primary reality that transcends it. Nothing can happen, everything simply always is, eternally. Therefore, God can't exist without the universe also existing.

I can certainly imagine (or at least begin to imagine) a possible world in which there is God but no universe as we know it, but it's kinda pointless to do so if we're saying that God is ontologically primary, because that means that there are no possible worlds other than the one there is, nor were there ever.

Originally Posted by Rav

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.

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.

Forgive me, but I'm not entirely sure what your overarching point is here.

Tacking the following on from your subsequent post:

"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.

It's more what the possibility of actual foreknowledge of any event implies. It says something about the nature of reality. What it says is that past, present and future are all actualized as one predefined entity.

 

[Syne]

Foreknowledge and predetermination are two very different things. Foreknowledge can exist without predetermining. Or does the weather man, on the odd occasion he gets it right, cause the weather simply because he could predict the weather?

 

[Balerion]

Foreknowledge and predetermination are two very different things. Foreknowledge can exist without predetermining. Or does the weather man, on the odd occasion he gets it right, cause the weather simply because he could predict the weather?

That's different, and incorrect to boot. The weatherman can at best give percentages of probability. He doesn't "know" what the weather will be in that sense.

God, on the other hand, knows. Not because he has a Doppler radar, but because it is allegedly in his nature to know all that will happen. The problem with this is that if he knows prior to the event, then the choice is an illusion.

 

[Syne]

That's different, and incorrect to boot. The weatherman can at best give percentages of probability. He doesn't "know" what the weather will be in that sense.

God, on the other hand, knows. Not because he has a Doppler radar, but because it is allegedly in his nature to know all that will happen. The problem with this is that if he knows prior to the event, then the choice is an illusion.

A difference only of degree, and there is no disputing that foreknowledge does not necessarily constitute predetermination. A weather man has tools and capabilities at his disposal. An omniscient god simply has a much better "Doppler radar", so to speak. A better analogy might be the naked eye versus a telescope. The degree of ability to anticipate things is proportional to the ability to observe those things at a greater distance, whether in time or space.

I would also refer you to this great post by RPenner on indeterminism.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...tific-method&p=2967740&viewfull=1#post2967740

 

[RoccoR]

Rav, et al,

Yes!

Forgive me, but I'm not entirely sure what your overarching point is here.

(COMMENT)

While the universe evolves, it evolves through immutable rules. In the universe, it has been discovered that at the center of every galaxy, there is a Supermassive Black Hole. And that while the stars at the out edge of todays galaxy are unaffected by the gravity of the spinning supermassive black hole at the galaxy center, the movement of the stars at the edge were, at one time, linked to the influence of the black hole gravitation at the galactic center. The effect is immutable over time.

Also important was the quote I inserted.

It's more what the possibility of actual foreknowledge of any event implies.

(COMMENT)

Yes, if the GD/SB were subject to the same rules, and serially observed events over time in the same way, then the "foreknowledge of any event implies" there might be a cause and effect. (Agreed) But in the case where humanity can not yet travel to the future, but the GD/SB observes the entire timeline (seeing the past, present and future), then the "foreknowledge of any event implies" nothing other than the greater access to observable events.

It says something about the nature of reality. What it says is that past, present and future are all actualized as one predefined entity.

(COMMENT)

Well, only a slight disagreement here. The universe and its parts follow the laws of the universe, and not a predefined path. It is the laws of the universe that govern the motion of the constituent parts in the universe to interact in the predictable ways they do. The GD/SB did not (necessarily) intercede; with the possible exception of introducing the initial energy for first motion and the establishment of the basic physics.

The physical laws of the universe, may or may not be directly connected to bio-electrochemical synaptic activity that constitutes the mechanism for the human decision making process. But it is theoretically possible that from the moment of first motion, a cascade set of events was set in motion and the evolution of the universe and everything in it happens because it could not happen any other way (like the energy applied by the cue ball on racked set of balls on a pool table). It may look chaotic, but it is not.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Balerion]

A difference only of degree, and there is no disputing that foreknowledge does not necessarily constitute predetermination. A weather man has tools and capabilities at his disposal. An omniscient god simply has a much better "Doppler radar", so to speak. A better analogy might be the naked eye versus a telescope. The degree of ability to anticipate things is proportional to the ability to observe those things at a greater distance, whether in time or space.

But a weatherman can't know what the weather will be with absolute certainty without having the ability to control the weather, because there is an element of chance in play. Just as God couldn't possibly know what path we will choose without actually making the choice for us.

I would also refer you to this great post by RPenner on indeterminism.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...tific-method&p=2967740&viewfull=1#post2967740

It's an interesting post, but his assertion that randomness does not exist is debunked by Prometheus in his following post.

 

[Rav]

Well, only a slight disagreement here. The universe and its parts follow the laws of the universe, and not a predefined path. It is the laws of the universe that govern the motion of the constituent parts in the universe to interact in the predictable ways they do. The GD/SB did not (necessarily) intercede; with the possible exception of introducing the initial energy for first motion and the establishment of the basic physics.

The physical laws of the universe, may or may not be directly connected to bio-electrochemical synaptic activity that constitutes the mechanism for the human decision making process. But it is theoretically possible that from the moment of first motion, a cascade set of events was set in motion and the evolution of the universe and everything in it happens because it could not happen any other way (like the energy applied by the cue ball on racked set of balls on a pool table). It may look chaotic, but it is not.

Sounds like determinism to me. Is that really what you're saying? That the universe is deterministic?

Anyway, it doesn't matter whether you are or not because my argument doesn't hinge on something like that.

To reiterate, if what we call the future already exists (which is one of the possibilities that you're positing), then it always has. Every "slice" of time, so to speak, exists eternally. If we can say that there was a creation event (as much of a difficulty as it may be to talk in those terms given a transcendent creator) then such an event was not merely the creation of a first moment destined to dynamically unfold into subsequent moments, but the creation of the fullness of all things present and future simultaneously. In other words, you, me, everyone else, and indeed every single thing that any of us will ever do, was predefined in that creation event.

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

That's what I tell my cat, but he keeps jumping on the car.

It's against my will, and I know that after I polish the bonnet, he will try again and go for a mighty slide!

 

[kx000]

With great logic I can tell the future. With great will, my great destiny will be achieved. This one is old.

 

[Saint]

I am able to digest what you guys talked about here.
I just want to know, am I free to choose?

 

[Rav]

I just want to know, am I free to choose?

Nobody knows for sure, whether God enters the discussion or not. But there are benefits to believing that you are, so you might as well just go ahead and do that

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

Nobody knows for sure, whether God enters the discussion or not. But there are benefits to believing that you are, so you might as well just go ahead and do that

Wisdom here.

 

[wynn]

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.

So? Is that automatically bad somehow?

As soon as we work out of the definition that God is the most powerful being in existence, this already means that God's will cannot be overrun; from the perspective that God is the most powerful being, humans don't have (any libertarian) free will (worth mentioning) to begin with.



Bottomline, the only way to be concerned about these issues (of free will and determinism) is if one already takes for granted the possibilities such as those suggested by mainstream Christianity - notably, eternal damnation, only one lifetime for action, salvation exclusively by one religious figure.

Without such taking for granted, the issue of free will vs. determinism falls away.

 

[Balerion]

So? Is that automatically bad somehow?

That's not the matter at hand. What is being discussed is whether or not predestination and free will are compatible, not whether or not their compatibility to good or bad.

As soon as we work out of the definition that God is the most powerful being in existence, this already means that God's will cannot be overrun; from the perspective that God is the most powerful being, humans don't have (any libertarian) free will (worth mentioning) to begin with.

How does that follow? An all-powerful god could still grant its people free will. There's nothing inherently paradoxical about God and free will, only predestination and free will.

Bottomline, the only way to be concerned about these issues (of free will and determinism) is if one already takes for granted the possibilities such as those suggested by mainstream Christianity - notably, eternal damnation, only one lifetime for action, salvation exclusively by one religious figure.

Without such taking for granted, the issue of free will vs. determinism falls away.

Absolute garbage. These issues have been discussed since long before Christianity began, and have implications entirely unrelated to Yahweh.

 

[Sarkus]

Yes, if the GD/SB were subject to the same rules, and serially observed events over time in the same way, then the "foreknowledge of any event implies" there might be a cause and effect. (Agreed) But in the case where humanity can not yet travel to the future, but the GD/SB observes the entire timeline (seeing the past, present and future), then the "foreknowledge of any event implies" nothing other than the greater access to observable events.

This is the key point in the disagreement... whether one can observe/know events (whether as part of an "all at once" or a "timeline") without there being some cause/effect from the event to the observation.

If one considers there to be a need for such linkage then knowledge of events implies an existing and unbreakable chain of events from event to observation/knowledge, even if that chain, and all chains, occur simultaneously - in zero time. And both foreknowledge and omniscience would imply predestination.

If one considers there to be no such requirement for linkage between knowledge and the event - then foreknowledge and omniscience, in the absence of such linkage, would not have that implication - and free-will might still exist within this context.


But in both cases I would say that the experience of free-will is merely an illusion compared to what I would call genuine free-will.
Genuine free-will, as I see it, requires manipulation of the fundamental building blocks of our universe that breaks the laws of physics... a non-random/guided event without a cause... like a cueball that moves or changes direction of its own volition.

Anyhoo - that is probably for another thread - or many threads - or existing threads.

 

[Gerhard Kemmerer]

...Genuine free-will, as I see it, requires manipulation of the fundamental building blocks of our universe that breaks the laws of physics... a non-random/guided event without a cause... like a cueball that moves or changes direction of its own volition.

Anyhoo - that is probably for another thread - or many threads - or existing threads.

That's interesting because it took the death of the Son of God to buy back genuine freedom. Such an expense was not necessary for a fake freedom.
Manipulation is much easier, yet never indulged in by God. Genuine love can only be based on genuine freedom.

How I relate this to what you said about physical laws, since the Son is responsible for maintaining all matter, our physical world may be displaying a loss of freedom as the result of sin.

 

[wynn]

Absolute garbage. These issues have been discussed since long before Christianity began, and have implications entirely unrelated to Yahweh.

Excellent reading skills you have there.

 

[Adstar]

Most pastors teach that God saves you instead of you are able to have faith in Jesus by yourself,
it is God who touches your heart in the first place, and then you use your free-will to respond to him.

Is this right?

Many are call few are chosen. If those pastors where right all that where called would be chosen because no one could resist the call of God.

Matthew 22
14 “For many are called, but few are chosen.”

So yes God does call upon many with His message, with dreams and visions but each person has to respond with acceptance to His calling. Those that reject his calling will not be chosen to be conformed to the image of Jesus.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Adstar]

If God predetermined your response earlier,
then we are just like an object in a computer's program,
we're just pitiful puppets.

No God does not predetermine your response God foreknows your response. We are not pitiful puppets.

God predetermined your eternal destiny from His foreknowledge of your response. Once again God knows the Begging and the End.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Adstar]

So then there is a contradiction. If God foreknew, then there is no way I could have made the choice myself.

Your mind cannot see how it can be that God foreknows what a persons free willed response will be. God the Creator created the universe and this universe has time as a integral part of it. Therefore God not being part of His creation is separate from His creation and that means he is separate from our Universe time. Therefore He can see all our times from His perspective outside our universe dimensions.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days