Does God Have Free Will?

[Moral Orel]

There have been a lot of ideas about this sort of concept thrown about, so I wanted to get some more information and answers about it that I maybe haven't seen. I'm learning a lot about my own assumptions in another thread about time, so I want to find out what assumptions I am making about "free will" too, since it is kind of a mysterious subject.

First I'll define terms.
God is omnipotent, omniscient, omni-benevolent, and immortal.
Free will is hard to define because it can be so relative, so I won't. We can just discuss the varying levels of free will and determine how much free will God has or does not have.

Second, I'll point out some of the arguments that some people have posited to show that God does not have free will. Some seem strong, and others seem weak. But either way, something can be learned from them.

1. God knows what his actions are going to be before he does them.
2. God's actions are predestined.
3. God cannot have freewill and be subject to fate.

I think that is pretty weak since there isn't necessarily a direct connection between fate and free will, but I may just be missing information.

1. God cannot do evil.
2. God cannot make mistakes.
3. God cannot choose to do evil nor can he make a choice that accidentally results in evil.

I put the "accidentally" part in there because someone could accidentally cause harm to someone and it wouldn't be considered wrong-doing. God doesn't make mistakes, so there is more to it than to just say that he has no evil intentions in what he does, we have to say that he doesn't do anything that ever results in evil.

That seems a little more convincing. I mean, I think that we are supposed to have free will because we are capable of making the choice to do evil, but God isn't capable of that choice, so does that mean he doesn't have free will? That assumption about our own free will may be wrong. Would we still have free will if we could only do good?

1. God can only do the absolute best action for a situation.
2. There is one and only one absolute best action for every situation.
3. God must do the absolute best action without choosing between options.

That one may be a bit tricky. It could be argued that there might be more than one option, but it would seem as though having knowledge of every single thing in existence down to the last particle would make it highly unlikely that with everything being weighed, that there are two identically good decisions.

So let's get talking! I hope no one is getting offended at the mere asking of the question, I just want to learn about other people's viewpoints and what may be the most logical answer to be derived from all this. It is in no way intended to be derogatory or a disproof or anything negative of the sort.

Since this got moved to the "Exploring Christianity" section I am editing the OP. I had previously asked people to not quote the Bible since I didn't want this to be a general apologetics thread. Somehow it was deemed one anyways, so I'm taking that part out to make the post more in tune with the section it now finds itself.

I haven't had a lot of luck with politeness in this section, that's why I avoided it in the first place, so if you get angry at me for asking a question like this don't reply. If you really feel the need to tell me how terrible I am, go ahead, I won't report anyone for flaming. I also won't respond either.

 

[dgiharris]

When I think of these sorts of philosophical discussions, I think of dimensions, 1-d, 2-d, 3-d

We like to think about good and evil and right and wrong...

I submit that this sort of thinking is very 1-dimensional and 2-dimensional. It is very "What" focused. What did you do? Was that action good or bad, right or wrong...

If we think a little deeper and think in terms of why, then we start to get into 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional thinking. You killed that person? Why? The why then determines whether the action is right or wrong, good or evil...

But what about 4-dimensional thinking. Can you conceive of 4-dimensions? The answer is no, no you can't. Because we are 3-d beings and limited in our physical perceptions.

Moralistically, I submit that God would be a 4-d being. The actions he takes or does not take would simply be beyond our understanding. We'd only be able to see little snippets of it and some snippets would like "right" and others would look "wrong". However, if we were able to see in 4-d then we'd understand.

I mean, what good comes from a 4 year old getting cancer and dying? How can a 72 yr old mafia kingpin get away with a life of crime? Why do massacres continue to happen?

From our limited perspective it makes no sense, it seems "Wrong". But it isn't. It is just all part of the big picture.

So in terms of the question "Does god have free will". I would answer probably. But I'd also think he lives in a plane of existence where such a question is meaningless.

 

[Moral Orel]

But what about 4-dimensional thinking. Can you conceive of 4-dimensions? The answer is no, no you can't. Because we are 3-d beings and limited in our physical perceptions.

This is close to an answer that says he does. But no matter how many dimensions you add, there is still a "best" action. Morality is just one of those dimensions, so sure there may be other dimensions, but God would still need to do the "best" action based on the criteria of whatever other dimensions he happens to have, wouldn't he?

Moralistically, I submit that God would be a 4-d being. The actions he takes or does not take would simply be beyond our understanding. We'd only be able to see little snippets of it and some snippets would like "right" and others would look "wrong". However, if we were able to see in 4-d then we'd understand.

I mean, what good comes from a 4 year old getting cancer and dying? How can a 72 yr old mafia kingpin get away with a life of crime? Why do massacres continue to happen?

From our limited perspective it makes no sense, it seems "Wrong". But it isn't. It is just all part of the big picture.

But then you go back to us not knowing why something is good or bad. My argument is that everything God does must be totally good and the absolute best action that could be taken. The problem is that God must do that action because of omni-benevolence and perfection which seems to say that he does not have a choice in the matter.

If he lives in a plane of existence where free will doesn't matter, then wouldn't that be a plane without choices? Either you have choices or you don't. Either you are motivated to do some action, or you are forced to do some action.

 

[juvenissun]

God cannot do evil.

1. God cannot make mistakes.
2. God does not have free will to do evil or make mistakes.

Can you see the logic error of this question?

Can God make a rock which is so big that He can not lift it up?

Your lengthy question made the same mistake.

 

[Moral Orel]

Can you see the logic error of this question?

Can God make a rock which is so big that He can not lift it up?

Your lengthy question made the same mistake.

I'll give it to you that the "mistakes" part of that section is iffy. That really ties in more with the third section, but maybe just some better phrasing like, "God can't make it possible for him to err" or something like that. Point is the limiting of his choices.

And no, the other question asked if God's limitless power to create things could exceed his limitless power to move things. That question is about God's limitlessness. This question is about God's limits, which is tricky to think about. But if God is perfect, then he cannot make mistakes, if God is omni-benevolent, then he cannot do evil. There is no logical contradiction involved with trying to understand the impact of taking away the ability to do things.

 

[dgiharris]

This is close to an answer that says he does. But no matter how many dimensions you add, there is still a "best" action. Morality is just one of those dimensions,

There is 1-d morality, 2-d morality, 3-d morality, 4-d morality, 5-d morality etc...

My argument was simply that with our limited 3-d morality we would be incapable of seeing and understanding higher dimensions of morality. So basically, our arguments of what seems right or wrong are moot as far as god is concerned since he is on a higher plane

.... My argument is that everything God does must be totally good and the absolute best action that could be taken....

And this is where I think the flaw in your argument is. You are trying to confine god to YOUR limited parameters of God and best when the reality is that he operates in a morality and philosophical dimension more complex than you could fathom.

.... My argument is that everything God does must be totally good and the absolute best action that could be taken. The problem is that God must do that action because of omni-benevolence and perfection which seems to say that he does not have a choice in the matter.

If he lives in a plane of existence where free will doesn't matter, then wouldn't that be a plane without choices? Either you have choices or you don't. Either you are motivated to do some action, or you are forced to do some action.

........If he lives in a plane of existence where free will doesn't matter, then wouldn't that be a plane without choices? Either you have choices or you don't. Either you are motivated to do some action, or you are forced to do some action.

I want to focus on how you are binary here, how you are basically 1 dimensional here with either yes or no.

If we lived in a 1-dimensional universe you would argue vehemently that we only have two choices, we can "only" go left or right. This would seem like an absolute fact to you because in your universe those are the only choices.

If we lived in a 2-d universe you would argue vehemently that we can only go East, West, North, or South. You would confine us to a 2-d plane because that is all you know and you'd argue vehemently that is all that exists.

But as a 3-d being, we can look above the 1-d and 2-d dimensions and see that we can move in the Z axis and go where we like in the 1-d or 2-d space bypassing their simple limitation.

This is how a 4-d or 5-d or 6-d or X-d being would look at our dimension. They would see a much more complex space and be able to move within our 3-dimensions in ways we would think are impossible.

What I am arguing is I am attempting to draw an analogy between physical dimensions and moral dimensions. I'm trying to get you to see that even though on our moral dimensions things may reduce to simple choices that in a higher order moral dimension, things can look different. And if God exists on a higher plane, then he can take actions that may seem immoral to us given our limited perspective but in his dimension those choices are right.

Basically, it's a long winded way of saying your argument doesn't really apply...

 

[juvenissun]

I'll give it to you that the "mistakes" part of that section is iffy. That really ties in more with the third section, but maybe just some better phrasing like, "God can't make it possible for him to err" or something like that. Point is the limiting of his choices.

And no, the other question asked if God's limitless power to create things could exceed his limitless power to move things. That question is about God's limitlessness. This question is about God's limits, which is tricky to think about. But if God is perfect, then he cannot make mistakes, if God is omni-benevolent, then he cannot do evil. There is no logical contradiction involved with trying to understand the impact of taking away the ability to do things.

Everything you said about God has the basic logic err.
For example, as you said: "if God is perfect ...", then of course God can not be "imperfect". Can God be both perfect and imperfect?
It has nothing to do with God. It has everything to do with YOU.

 

[Moral Orel]

My argument was simply that with our limited 3-d morality we would be incapable of seeing and understanding higher dimensions of morality. So basically, our arguments of what seems right or wrong are moot as far as god is concerned since he is on a higher plane

I am totally accepting as fact that God does only good things and only the best things. I am not arguing that God has ever done anything wrong, in fact it is a basic tenant of the argument that he has only done right. I think you are confusing my argument with the argument about evil existing in the world, and this argument has nothing to do with that whatsoever.

And this is where I think the flaw in your argument is. You are trying to confine god to YOUR limited parameters of God and best when the reality is that he operates in a morality and philosophical dimension more complex than you could fathom.

"Best" is not philosophical unless you define what it is that you are describing the quality of. I am not defining that except to the point of stating that what dimensions we can see (morality) he does the best action. For whatever other dimensions there are, he would do the "best" thing there as well. "Best" merely means 100% towards that end of the spectrum. If red is the best, and blue is the worst, then a shade of purple falls somewhere in between. If God is 100% perfect and good, and not limited in power or knowledge, then he will always do red in the dimension where that matters. The concept of 100% is math and not really something for philosophical debate.

I want to focus on how you are binary here, how you are basically 1 dimensional here with either yes or no.

If we lived in a 1-dimensional universe you would argue vehemently that we only have two choices, we can "only" go left or right. This would seem like an absolute fact to you because in your universe those are the only choices.

If we lived in a 2-d universe you would argue vehemently that we can only go East, West, North, or South. You would confine us to a 2-d plane because that is all you know and you'd argue vehemently that is all that exists.

But as a 3-d being, we can look above the 1-d and 2-d dimensions and see that we can move in the Z axis and go where we like in the 1-d or 2-d space bypassing their simple limitation.

This is how a 4-d or 5-d or 6-d or X-d being would look at our dimension. They would see a much more complex space and be able to move within our 3-dimensions in ways we would think are impossible.

Again, it isn't the difference of saying that God can only move up or down, it is saying that where he has a choice of moving up or down, he always move all the way up. Add the dimension of left and right, he always move all the way to the right. Add any other dimension that has any other parameters, and God always falls on the furthest end of the "good" spectrum. Whether that be morality or not.

Are you imagining that there are dimensions that are neutral and don't have a "best" action? If so, then God has a limited number of choices based on the variety found within that dimension. But his choices in the dimensions we are privy to do have a "best" option. Just because we don't see some action that God did as being the best, doesn't mean it isn't the best. That's fine, I am agreeing with that for the sake of this argument.

And if God exists on a higher plane, then he can take actions that may seem immoral to us given our limited perspective but in his dimension those choices are right.

Again, and again I will state, everything that God did is moral, just, good, and the best possible thing that could be done. This isn't a question of whether God is capable of making the right decision, it is a question of whether God is capable of making a decision at all or whether he must choose the best option, not whether we think they are the best.

 

[Moral Orel]

Everything you said about God has the basic logic err.
For example, as you said: "if God is perfect ...", then of course God can not be "imperfect". Can God be both perfect and imperfect?
It has nothing to do with God. It has everything to do with YOU.

I honestly don't understand this. I said that if God is perfect, then he doesn't have a choice. Do you believe he has a choice somehow, or does he not have a choice? Does having free will make you less than perfect? What are you trying to say?

 

[juvenissun]

I honestly don't understand this. I said that if God is perfect, then he doesn't have a choice. Do you believe he has a choice somehow, or does he not have a choice? Does having free will make you less than perfect? What are you trying to say?

A,
or Not-A.
There is no third choice.

If God is A,
Then God is not "Not-A". God can not be A "and" Not-A

Do you honestly know this? Change the wording will only confuse you. Back to the first page of logic 101.

 

[Moral Orel]

A,
or Not-A.
There is no third choice.

If God is A,
Then God is not "Not-A". God can not be A "and" Not-A

Do you honestly know this? Change the wording will only confuse you. Back to the first page of logic 101.

Right. And I'm not saying God is imperfect. Are you saying that if he did not have free will he would be imperfect? You aren't actually stating anything specific about what I have said, and that is why I am not understanding your point.

 

[Moral Orel]

No. IMO, that which is the Uncreated has no free will.

Free will implies choice, and choice implies that the chooser is limited by time and/or space.

I do not believe that the Uncreated is limited in such a fashion, so the Uncreated has no free will.

That's interesting. If I understand correctly, it is like saying that you have to make a choice before you make an action, which means time has to be involved and a governing agent on the chooser. So if God is timeless, then he can't make choices, he has to just act. Another argument in favor of the lack of free will, I suppose.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

~God~ doesn't seem applicable to being seen as having free will or having a lack thereof. He simply conforms to his nature, which is a perfect and sovereign will.

 

[juvenissun]

Right. And I'm not saying God is imperfect. Are you saying that if he did not have free will he would be imperfect? You aren't actually stating anything specific about what I have said, and that is why I am not understanding your point.

You may want an imperfect god (there are quite a few around). I don't.

My God is perfect. So my God "can not" be imperfect. And more ...
My God is faithful So my God "can not" be unfaithful.
My God is .......... So my God "can not" be .......
My God is .......... So my God "can not" be .......
...

I think that is a clear enough example to answer all your questions.

 

[Moral Orel]

You may want an imperfect god (there are quite a few around). I don't.

My God is perfect. So my God "can not" be imperfect. And more ...
My God is faithful So my God "can not" be unfaithful.
My God is .......... So my God "can not" be .......
My God is .......... So my God "can not" be .......
...

I think that is a clear enough example to answer all your questions.

Not really, because I said he was perfect. I never said he was imperfect. Him being imperfect is in no way part of my argument. The premise of my argument is that he is perfect. If he was imperfect, my argument would have nothing to talk about. So I really don't understand why you are accusing me of accusing God of being imperfect.

 

[juvenissun]

Not really, because I said he was perfect. I never said he was imperfect. Him being imperfect is in no way part of my argument. The premise of my argument is that he is perfect. If he was imperfect, my argument would have nothing to talk about. So I really don't understand why you are accusing me of accusing God of being imperfect.

You still don't get it. If you say it is A, then automatically, it is not "not-A". You do not have to say it.

 

[Moral Orel]

You still don't get it. If you say it is A, then automatically, it is not "not-A". You do not have to say it.

For the sake of my argument, I do not want to prove God is imperfect. Are you reading that into my intentions where it is not my intention?

 

[Moral Orel]

~God~ doesn't seem applicable to being seen as having free will or having a lack thereof. He simply conforms to his nature, which is a perfect and sovereign will.

So he has a will, but it is sovereign instead of free? And that means that free will does not apply, not that the will he has isn't free?

Free will applies to any entity with intelligence. You either have a choice in your actions, or you don't. If his sovereign will dictates what his actions are, and he isn't free to do any given thing, then he doesn't have a choice. If he doesn't have a choice, then he doesn't have free will.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

So he has a will, but it is sovereign instead of free? And that means that free will does not apply, not that the will he has isn't free?

Free will applies to any entity with intelligence. You either have a choice in your actions, or you don't. If his sovereign will dictates what his actions are, and he isn't free to do any given thing, then he doesn't have a choice. If he doesn't have a choice, then he doesn't have free will.

'Free will' isn't so mighty as it seems. It's been built up to be this benevolent beautiful thing, liberating and just in nature.

But it really isn't so. If predestination teaches that we function as we function now, and yet are under predestination, then free will is really frivolous. God is not, by principle, wish-washy. Free will has no meaning to an omnipotent being.

 

[Moral Orel]

'Free will' isn't so mighty as it seems. It's been built up to be this benevolent beautiful thing, liberating and just in nature.

I totally agree. I think free will is a curse. Imagine how great it would be to just watch the movie of your life go by where you felt good for doing good things (and you only did good things) and you never felt bad for the lack of doing bad things (because you wouldn't be tempted) and then go to a wonderful afterlife for all eternity because you never did anything wrong!

No sarcasm, I swear that would be better if there really is an afterlife.