Free-will and ALL knowing's God can they coexist ?

[LordKiran]

You must always base your beliefs on evidence.
There are a lot of evidence for the multiverse and yet it is seen as a hypotesis, a possible solution, not as the only truth.

- - - Updated - - -

'' Free-will and ALL knowing's God can they coexist ? ''

No. The concept of free will is incoherent at the best of times, but applied to an Omniscient God in the form of alternative choice, there are no choices to be made, Omniscience means that the past, present and future (time being relative and Omniscience absolute) is perfectly known and what is perfectly/absolutely known cannot be altered.

Which concept of free will? There are plenty, wildly different.

Free will cannot exist as anything more than an idea if the future is set in stone, which it would have to be in order for someone to know it. The personal definition you choose to use for 'free will' does not matter in this context as they are all equally mutually exclusive with the future being set in stone.

If you were fated to do something, how can you ascribe that to free will in any reasonable way?

You should read up on the differents types of free will definitions.

"Free will" as in "decided by the person alone and not under pressure from other persons" fits even if the outcome is fixed by god.

Doesn't make it any less of an illusory concept though, which was sort of my point the whole time. If you're fated to do something, then it's out of your hands. Whether you embrace your fate or not is entirely irrelevant. The chance of the future occurring as fated is exactly the same if you made a conscious effort to subvert it as it would be if you did not. Your personal input has ZERO impact on the final outcome outside of you playing out your predetermined role. (Which you WILL play, no matter what.)

Just because the man doesn't realize he is little more than a cog in a greater mechanism does not make him 'free'.

That depends entirely on the perspective. When you look at a movie you can certainly have usage of the term free will to describe the characters actions, still we know that the movie is totally static seen as as a whole.

If you're going to argue that free will is a matter of perspective then that renders the whole idea pointless and meaningless.

Really? Why?

Because the whole point behind of free will is that you are in conscious control of your own actions and/or destiny/fate. If you're going to argue that this is a matter of perspective, then you're just confirming that it IS illusory, and nothing more than a trick of perception. You have effectively rendered the whole idea on the same level as god. An abstract delusion in the minds of those who believe in it.

This as a reminder, all presupposes that there is a set future that is known to a creator god, who presumably created you with the purpose of playing your role in mind. "It's all part of god's plan."

 

[blastula]

i will answers all your questions one by one

What time is it?

 

[DBT]

god did not say that he ALREADY knew who will go to heaven or hell

The bible says otherwise.

can god chose not to know?

No. That would contravene Omniscience.

 

[Lion IRC]

Omniscience is a subset of omnipotence - it's one of God's abilities.
God can do anything He wants and "to know" is a verb.

He can know anything He wants. And to assert that God must know everything would violate His absolute ability to do anything He wants.

God CAN choose not to know something. And if He can't, then He is not omnipotent.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Omniscience is a subset of omnipotence - it's one of God's abilities.
God can do anything He wants and "to know" is a verb.

He can know anything He wants. And to assert that God must know everything would violate His absolute ability to do anything He wants.

God CAN choose not to know something. And if He can't, then He is not omnipotent.

Ya, it's almost like the concept of God is illogical nonsense.

As has been said before, though, if he CAN know something, then that something is predetermined, whether or not he chooses to know it. If you flip to the last page of a book, you know how the book is going to end. If you stop halfway through and never reach the end, that ending still remains the same because the book is already written. Deciding not to look at the ending doesn't somehow make that ending variable instead of static.

 

[Juma]

You must always base your beliefs on evidence.
There are a lot of evidence for the multiverse and yet it is seen as a hypotesis, a possible solution, not as the only truth.

- - - Updated - - -

'' Free-will and ALL knowing's God can they coexist ? ''

No. The concept of free will is incoherent at the best of times, but applied to an Omniscient God in the form of alternative choice, there are no choices to be made, Omniscience means that the past, present and future (time being relative and Omniscience absolute) is perfectly known and what is perfectly/absolutely known cannot be altered.

Which concept of free will? There are plenty, wildly different.

Free will cannot exist as anything more than an idea if the future is set in stone, which it would have to be in order for someone to know it. The personal definition you choose to use for 'free will' does not matter in this context as they are all equally mutually exclusive with the future being set in stone.

If you were fated to do something, how can you ascribe that to free will in any reasonable way?

You should read up on the differents types of free will definitions.

"Free will" as in "decided by the person alone and not under pressure from other persons" fits even if the outcome is fixed by god.

Doesn't make it any less of an illusory concept though, which was sort of my point the whole time. If you're fated to do something, then it's out of your hands. Whether you embrace your fate or not is entirely irrelevant. The chance of the future occurring as fated is exactly the same if you made a conscious effort to subvert it as it would be if you did not. Your personal input has ZERO impact on the final outcome outside of you playing out your predetermined role. (Which you WILL play, no matter what.)

Just because the man doesn't realize he is little more than a cog in a greater mechanism does not make him 'free'.

That depends entirely on the perspective. When you look at a movie you can certainly have usage of the term free will to describe the characters actions, still we know that the movie is totally static seen as as a whole.

If you're going to argue that free will is a matter of perspective then that renders the whole idea pointless and meaningless.

Really? Why?

Because the whole point behind of free will is that you are in conscious control of your own actions and/or destiny/fate. If you're going to argue that this is a matter of perspective, then you're just confirming that it IS illusory, and nothing more than a trick of perception. You have effectively rendered the whole idea on the same level as god. An abstract delusion in the minds of those who believe in it.

This as a reminder, all presupposes that there is a set future that is known to a creator god, who presumably created you with the purpose of playing your role in mind. "It's all part of god's plan."

was your actions less free yesterday than now? And yet you know what happened yesterday. From this perspective the action are still free but cannot change. So from an point of view outside time (which resembles "after all time") all is fixed and free will still exist. (As: not being forced by other, abd also as in "feeling that my will is free")

Note that I do no argument for a religios free will as in "i could have done otherwise because my soul, which makes the decision is detached from matter"

 

[Juma]

Omniscience is a subset of omnipotence - it's one of God's abilities.
God can do anything He wants and "to know" is a verb.

He can know anything He wants. And to assert that God must know everything would violate His absolute ability to do anything He wants.

God CAN choose not to know something. And if He can't, then He is not omnipotent.

How do YOU know all this about god?

 

[LordKiran]

You must always base your beliefs on evidence.
There are a lot of evidence for the multiverse and yet it is seen as a hypotesis, a possible solution, not as the only truth.

- - - Updated - - -

'' Free-will and ALL knowing's God can they coexist ? ''

No. The concept of free will is incoherent at the best of times, but applied to an Omniscient God in the form of alternative choice, there are no choices to be made, Omniscience means that the past, present and future (time being relative and Omniscience absolute) is perfectly known and what is perfectly/absolutely known cannot be altered.

Which concept of free will? There are plenty, wildly different.

Free will cannot exist as anything more than an idea if the future is set in stone, which it would have to be in order for someone to know it. The personal definition you choose to use for 'free will' does not matter in this context as they are all equally mutually exclusive with the future being set in stone.

If you were fated to do something, how can you ascribe that to free will in any reasonable way?

You should read up on the differents types of free will definitions.

"Free will" as in "decided by the person alone and not under pressure from other persons" fits even if the outcome is fixed by god.

Doesn't make it any less of an illusory concept though, which was sort of my point the whole time. If you're fated to do something, then it's out of your hands. Whether you embrace your fate or not is entirely irrelevant. The chance of the future occurring as fated is exactly the same if you made a conscious effort to subvert it as it would be if you did not. Your personal input has ZERO impact on the final outcome outside of you playing out your predetermined role. (Which you WILL play, no matter what.)

Just because the man doesn't realize he is little more than a cog in a greater mechanism does not make him 'free'.

That depends entirely on the perspective. When you look at a movie you can certainly have usage of the term free will to describe the characters actions, still we know that the movie is totally static seen as as a whole.

If you're going to argue that free will is a matter of perspective then that renders the whole idea pointless and meaningless.

Really? Why?

Because the whole point behind of free will is that you are in conscious control of your own actions and/or destiny/fate. If you're going to argue that this is a matter of perspective, then you're just confirming that it IS illusory, and nothing more than a trick of perception. You have effectively rendered the whole idea on the same level as god. An abstract delusion in the minds of those who believe in it.

This as a reminder, all presupposes that there is a set future that is known to a creator god, who presumably created you with the purpose of playing your role in mind. "It's all part of god's plan."

was your actions less free yesterday than now? And yet you know what happened yesterday. From this perspective the action are still free but cannot change. So from an point of view outside time (which resembles "after all time") all is fixed and free will still exist. (As: not being forced by other, abd also as in "feeling that my will is free")

Note that I do no argument for a religios free will as in "i could have done otherwise because my soul, which makes the decision is detached from matter"

The past actually happened. The future is entirely conceptual but doesn't actually exist. This is a fundamental part of free will; that the future is not fixed and subject to change based on the input of actors.

The concept of an all-knowing creator god who knows the outcome of your entire lifespan before he even creates you throws that idea out the window.

This is not, I repeat, NOT the same thing as arguing "Well how would you ever know if you did what you did was of your own free will or if you were fated to do it, I guess it all depends on your outlook." Since we (As religious Christians) are presupposing that you are in fact fated to do what you do as part of an elaborate celestial plan. There is no room for personal interpretation here. There is a god. He knows your future. He made you with your future in mind. You are a part of his divine plan. In this way, you are comparable to a tool or machine. Just another gear in the greater mechanism, bound to your god to serve your purpose before you expire. Tools and machines by their very function, do not have any free will of their own. They were created at the whim of their creator with a specific purpose in mind.

Free will by contrast, relies on the assumption that you were an accidental result of the chaotic chemistry of life with no rhyme or reason or purpose of any kind.

 

[Juma]

The past actually happened. The future is entirely conceptual but doesn't actually exist. This is a fundamental part of free will; that the future is not fixed and subject to change based on the input of actors.

How can something that doesnt exist change? Future and the past is fixed in the meaning that what have happened has happened and what will happen will happen. There cannot be change if not within time and talking about history and future is talking from s perspective outside time.

The concept of an all-knowing creator god who knows the outcome of your entire lifespan before he even creates you throws that idea out the window.

Nope. It just makes it clear that the god has a very different perspective than we do.

This is not, I repeat, NOT the same thing as arguing "Well how would you ever know if you did what you did was of your own free will or if you were fated to do it, I guess it all depends on your outlook." Since we (As religious Christians) are presupposing that you are in fact fated to do what you do as part of an elaborate celestial plan. There is no room for personal interpretation here. There is a god. He knows your future. He made you with your future in mind. You are a part of his divine plan. In this way, you are comparable to a tool or machine. Just another gear in the greater mechanism, bound to your god to serve your purpose before you expire. Tools and machines by their very function, do not have any free will of their own. They were created at the whim of their creator with a specific purpose in mind.

But you do not view the machine from the perspective of the cog. The cog does what it wants. It does this of its own free will. It has an, extremely, simple decision process but still. It does what it has decided to do.

Free will by contrast, relies on the assumption that you were an accidental result of the chaotic chemistry of life with no rhyme or reason or purpose of any kind.

That will depened on what definition of free will you are using. The christian free will (god gave us free will, we have a soul detached from matter) definitely does not.

 

[LordKiran]

How can something that doesnt exist change? Future and the past is fixed in the meaning that what have happened has happened and what will happen will happen. There cannot be change if not within time and talking about history and future is talking from s perspective outside time.

It's an intellectual construct. When I say the future is subject to change, that means what the present becomes is dependent upon the input of actors.

Nope. It just makes it clear that the god has a very different perspective than we do.

Beside the point.

But you do not view the machine from the perspective of the cog. The cog does what it wants. It does this of its own free will. It has an, extremely, simple decision process but still. It does what it has decided to do.

It's a fair assumption to say that god would not create someone who's actions go against his master plan. Willing or not, you are his tool and only exist because you advance his agenda.

Wether the cog does what it wants does not preclude it having any real choices in the grand scheme of things. This goes back to the illusory nature of 'free will' It doesn't actually exist, because what you do is already set in stone. If it isn't set in stone then it's not really the future, and god cant be all knowing. By arguing that we have free will you are actively arguing against god being omniscient.

That will depened on what definition of free will you are using. The christian free will (god gave us free will, we have a soul detached from matter) definitely does not.

What's a soul?

 

[Juma]

It's an intellectual construct. When I say the future is subject to change, that means what the present becomes is dependent upon the input of actors.

Nope. It just makes it clear that the god has a very different perspective than we do.

Beside the point.

But you do not view the machine from the perspective of the cog. The cog does what it wants. It does this of its own free will. It has an, extremely, simple decision process but still. It does what it has decided to do.

It's a fair assumption to say that god would not create someone who's actions go against his master plan. Willing or not, you are his tool and only exist because you advance his agenda.

Wether the cog does what it wants does not preclude it having any real choices in the grand scheme of things. This goes back to the illusory nature of 'free will' It doesn't actually exist, because what you do is already set in stone. If it isn't set in stone then it's not really the future, and god cant be all knowing. By arguing that we have free will you are actively arguing against god being omniscient.

That will depened on what definition of free will you are using. The christian free will (god gave us free will, we have a soul detached from matter) definitely does not.

What's a soul?

Theory of relativity shows that what is history for one observer can be the future of another. Thus future and history is real.

I have no clue what a soul is (ask the christians, its their definition)

I definitely think there is a difference between wether I give my mony to a stranger by free will or if i do it under gunpoint.
I definitely do not believe that our choicemaking is non-material. Wehave as much free will as computers can have: we can make choices, but under the same premises we will alleaus make the same choice.

 

[LordKiran]

It's an intellectual construct. When I say the future is subject to change, that means what the present becomes is dependent upon the input of actors.

Beside the point.

But you do not view the machine from the perspective of the cog. The cog does what it wants. It does this of its own free will. It has an, extremely, simple decision process but still. It does what it has decided to do.

It's a fair assumption to say that god would not create someone who's actions go against his master plan. Willing or not, you are his tool and only exist because you advance his agenda.

Wether the cog does what it wants does not preclude it having any real choices in the grand scheme of things. This goes back to the illusory nature of 'free will' It doesn't actually exist, because what you do is already set in stone. If it isn't set in stone then it's not really the future, and god cant be all knowing. By arguing that we have free will you are actively arguing against god being omniscient.

That will depened on what definition of free will you are using. The christian free will (god gave us free will, we have a soul detached from matter) definitely does not.

What's a soul?

Theory of relativity shows that what is history for one observer can be the future of another. Thus future and history is real.[1]

I have no clue what a soul is (ask the christians, its their definition)

I definitely think there is a difference between wether I give my mony to a stranger by free will or if i do it under gunpoint.[2]
I definitely do not believe that our choicemaking is non-material. Wehave as much free will as computers can have: we can make choices, but under the same premises we will alleaus make the same choice.[3]

1. If you hovered around a black hole for a bit and then came back to earth, we would have experienced the exact same passage of time, just differently. It isn't as if you would become desync'd from the normal timeflow.

2. So are you arguing for the christian concept of free will or a more materialist definition? Pick one, define it clearly, and stick with it.

3. This viewpoint ignores the fact that a creator god made you with your future in mind.

 

[sdelsolray]

Omniscience is a subset of omnipotence - it's one of God's abilities.
God can do anything He wants and "to know" is a verb.

He can know anything He wants. And to assert that God must know everything would violate His absolute ability to do anything He wants.

God CAN choose not to know something. And if He can't, then He is not omnipotent.

How do YOU know all this about god?

Simple. Lion IRC's God is an imaginary construct in his brain upon whom he projects chosen attributes, properties and character. He learned how to do it by observing others who did the same thing and by being encouraged to do so himself.

 

[Syed]

The bible says otherwise.

can god chose not to know?

No. That would contravene Omniscience.

yes he can he makes the rules

 

[Lion IRC]

I just don't see how my totally spontaneous free will choice to have vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate is rendered null and void by the fact that someone else happens to be able to correctly prophesy my choice.

The two events - my action and the other persons act of prediction - aren't connected by logical necessity. I might be totally unaware that somewhere there exists someone who can say what free choice I will make. Its not like my decisions might be affected by the knowledge that I'm being observed.

 

[bilby]

I just don't see how my totally spontaneous free will choice to have vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate is rendered null and void by the fact that someone else happens to be able to correctly prophesy my choice.

Your inability to understand something is no reflection on its reality

The two events - my action and the other persons act of prediction - aren't connected by logical necessity. I might be totally unaware that somewhere there exists someone who can say what free choice I will make. Its not like my decisions might be affected by the knowledge that I'm being observed.

Do you have a free choice, right now, as to what you will have for breakfast yesterday?

If anyone or anything has certain knowledge of the future, then it is no more subject to freedom of choice than the past.

It's not a difficult concept to grasp. But a desire for it to be false might hinder your doing so.

 

[OLDMAN]

I just don't see how my totally spontaneous free will choice to have vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate is rendered null and void by the fact that someone else happens to be able to correctly prophesy my choice.

The two events - my action and the other persons act of prediction - aren't connected by logical necessity. I might be totally unaware that somewhere there exists someone who can say what free choice I will make. Its not like my decisions might be affected by the knowledge that I'm being observed.

Your choice on which ice cream to have is totally dependent on past experiences, your understanding of the choice, the mood you are in, which one might seem more appealing and a dozen other things you simply don't consciously think about...when you make what you think is a simple free choice.

If I ask you to picture an apple in your head......(go ahead and do it) Now ask yourself, what picture did I see? Was it a red apple, or green, was it 3d or flat, was it a drawing or a picture, was it a granny smith or a macintosh....and on we could go. The picture your mind served up is probably a memory complied from many life experiences. A month from now you may be served up a different version of the apple. But you do not consciously pick the picture...nor do you chose the ice cream freely. Your brain is in charge and has its own methods.

 

[Juma]

It's an intellectual construct. When I say the future is subject to change, that means what the present becomes is dependent upon the input of actors.

Beside the point.

But you do not view the machine from the perspective of the cog. The cog does what it wants. It does this of its own free will. It has an, extremely, simple decision process but still. It does what it has decided to do.

It's a fair assumption to say that god would not create someone who's actions go against his master plan. Willing or not, you are his tool and only exist because you advance his agenda.

Wether the cog does what it wants does not preclude it having any real choices in the grand scheme of things. This goes back to the illusory nature of 'free will' It doesn't actually exist, because what you do is already set in stone. If it isn't set in stone then it's not really the future, and god cant be all knowing. By arguing that we have free will you are actively arguing against god being omniscient.

That will depened on what definition of free will you are using. The christian free will (god gave us free will, we have a soul detached from matter) definitely does not.

What's a soul?

Theory of relativity shows that what is history for one observer can be the future of another. Thus future and history is real.[1]

I have no clue what a soul is (ask the christians, its their definition)

I definitely think there is a difference between wether I give my mony to a stranger by free will or if i do it under gunpoint.[2]
I definitely do not believe that our choicemaking is non-material. Wehave as much free will as computers can have: we can make choices, but under the same premises we will alleaus make the same choice.[3]

1. If you hovered around a black hole for a bit and then came back to earth, we would have experienced the exact same passage of time, just differently. It isn't as if you would become desync'd from the normal timeflow.

2. So are you arguing for the christian concept of free will or a more materialist definition? Pick one, define it clearly, and stick with it.

3. This viewpoint ignores the fact that a creator god made you with your future in mind.

1. That is not whatI refer to. Read up on relativity of simultanety. (The order of events depend on the relative speed of the observer)
2. Here i use the definition "by my own decision, not forced by anyone else". Thought that was obvious by the example...
3. Since that section obviously stares what I personally believe I have no clue why you bring up a creatir god. You could as. Well bring up santa....

 

[LordKiran]

It's an intellectual construct. When I say the future is subject to change, that means what the present becomes is dependent upon the input of actors.

Beside the point.

But you do not view the machine from the perspective of the cog. The cog does what it wants. It does this of its own free will. It has an, extremely, simple decision process but still. It does what it has decided to do.

It's a fair assumption to say that god would not create someone who's actions go against his master plan. Willing or not, you are his tool and only exist because you advance his agenda.

Wether the cog does what it wants does not preclude it having any real choices in the grand scheme of things. This goes back to the illusory nature of 'free will' It doesn't actually exist, because what you do is already set in stone. If it isn't set in stone then it's not really the future, and god cant be all knowing. By arguing that we have free will you are actively arguing against god being omniscient.

That will depened on what definition of free will you are using. The christian free will (god gave us free will, we have a soul detached from matter) definitely does not.

What's a soul?

Theory of relativity shows that what is history for one observer can be the future of another. Thus future and history is real.[1]

I have no clue what a soul is (ask the christians, its their definition)

I definitely think there is a difference between wether I give my mony to a stranger by free will or if i do it under gunpoint.[2]
I definitely do not believe that our choicemaking is non-material. Wehave as much free will as computers can have: we can make choices, but under the same premises we will alleaus make the same choice.[3]

1. If you hovered around a black hole for a bit and then came back to earth, we would have experienced the exact same passage of time, just differently. It isn't as if you would become desync'd from the normal timeflow.

2. So are you arguing for the christian concept of free will or a more materialist definition? Pick one, define it clearly, and stick with it.

3. This viewpoint ignores the fact that a creator god made you with your future in mind.

1. That is not what I refer to. Read up on relativity of simultanety. (The order of events depend on the relative speed of the observer)
2. Here i use the definition "by my own decision, not forced by anyone else". Thought that was obvious by the example...
3. Since that section obviously stares what I personally believe I have no clue why you bring up a creatir god. You could as. Well bring up santa....

1. Sounds like an argument you'd be better off bringing to Bilby then.
2. You've jumped around on this a few times though.
3. The topic is whether or not free will and an all-knowing god are mutually exclusive. Not my fault you can't stay on topic.

 

[DBT]

I just don't see how my totally spontaneous free will choice to have vanilla ice cream instead of chocolate is rendered null and void by the fact that someone else happens to be able to correctly prophesy my choice.

Deterministic processes. What you feel is 'spontaneous' has antecedent causal events. Events and processes that you are nor aware of but an Omniscient Entity, by definition, should be.

Plus consider the relativity of time in relation to the absolute of Omniscience.

The two events - my action and the other persons act of prediction - aren't connected by logical necessity. I might be totally unaware that somewhere there exists someone who can say what free choice I will make. Its not like my decisions might be affected by the knowledge that I'm being observed.

All the events of your life, your experiences, genetic makeup, likes, dislikes, aversions, preferences, etc, bring you to the point where you choose chocolate rather than vanilla. You are a process in time that is understood by an Omniscient Entity, should such a thing exist. And if block time or eternalism is a reality, the future is as real as the present and the past and time is nothing more than an illusion of consciousness.