Predestination

[variant]

This stuff SHOULD be mysterious, if it is in fact real.

Why religious people want to wrestle it into sensibility is beyond me.

The desire I think is to make these things known, to gain control and understanding. That is a natural physiological impulse. To buttress the self. Natural curiosity, egotism, you pick.

Perhaps its because there's something very dangerous in holding beliefs that are unhinged from reason. And that danger is very off-putting to the skeptics out there... and to the skeptic inside every religious person's own head.

The danger is that rationality is how we anchor our thought processes in reality.

Giving up on it and it lays the door open for any possibility and thus anything including insanity.

(Personally, I'm OK with holding irrational beliefs)

I'm not even sure you can believe something you haven't the faculties to understand.

Our mental capabilities seem to stop at the waters edge on this one so how can our beliefs proceed further out?

It's a bit like trying to 'hold' the ocean with your hands, the tool doesn't meet the job.

 

[variant]

It's probably unwise for me to jump into any thread that's already over a hundred posts long, but I notice two problems with the above.

Foreknowledge is not Predestination...and Predestination is not Fatalism (which is suggested by "must walk along a predetermined path.")

I understand that there are differences between how a religious person who believes in predestination believes and my own schematic of the problem.

If I have completely misunderstood the issue then what is wrong with my set of assumptions?

That should be fairly easy to explain if it is so evident.

 

[Albion]

I understand the differences between how a religious person who believes in predestination believes and my own schematic of the problem.

If I have completely misunderstood the issue then what is wrong with my set of assumptions?

It's not that I'm on the offensive, but I do think it might help any discussion to get straight what the belief is.

1. Foreknowledge means that God knows the future. Any theist would agree to that. Predestination means he has decided what to make happen in advance.

2. The Christian idea of Predestination, however, deals with the individual being saved or not saved, not the whole array of happenings that occur during our lives.

Once a discussion turns toward speculation on how God is pulling or not pulling the strings on every moral choice or cultural trend, etc. etc. the debate normally darkens...but for no good reason since this is outside the concept.

 

[brightlights]

I've been a Christian for the majority of my life and I have never heard the question of predestination answered intelligently. Therefore I was wondering what others say about predestination.

What's the question?

 

[variant]

1. Foreknowledge means that God knows the future. Any theist would agree to that. Predestination means he has decided what to make happen in advance.

Then our assumptions are shared no? God knows the future and has decided what to make happen.

2. The Christian idea of Predestination, however, deals with the individual being saved or not saved, not the whole array of happenings that occur during our lives.

Well you've already given up the Ghost in my opinion on this matter, you've admitted that God is all powerful and knows things in advance and has no problem deciding before hand what is going to happen.

To get out of this problem you have to limit God in some way or remove some of it's power, because on it's face there isn't anything limiting either God's foreknowledge or it's power, quite the opposite.

Once a discussion turns toward speculation on how God is pulling or not pulling the strings on every moral choice or cultural trend, etc. etc. the debate normally darkens...but for no good reason since this is outside the concept.

It's because concepts don't have any breaks.

 

[Hentenza]

I am saying that if you think God is omniscient and omnipotent including an absolute foreknowledge of the future you also think that morality is meaningless.

That is not what I think at all.

The action is creating the universe limited to a known outcome. This is done by force. Using the words "choice" and such in this scenario is just logically invalid.

It is not done by force. I think that is where we disagree. There are no temporal limits for an omniscient being so, even if He knew your choices in advance, the choices were still yours.

Destiny is incompatible with choice. If you must walk along a predetermined path, it matters not if you feel free along the way.

There is no predetermined path. You made your choices, He knows them. He did not set a path for you to follow; He merely knew which path you would choose.

 

[durangodawood]

I get your point, but it only reinforces what I was thinking when I wrote my post immediately before this. It's the opponents of Predestination who make it into a tangled web of exceptions, questions, and complications. The belief itself is fairly clean cut.

Perhaps you are right.

Maybe it is the non-believers who initiate the attempt to "reason it out", leading to the tangled web. The logical implications ARE a tangled mess.

At that point, the believer should just say "its a mystery".... because, of course, it IS.

 

[variant]

That is not what I think at all.

As the other poster and I agree, you are free to believe contradictory things.

It is not done by force. I think that is where we disagree. There are no temporal limits for an omniscient being so, even if He knew your choices in advance, the choices were still yours.

There is no predetermined path. You made your choices, He knows them. He did not set a path for you to follow; He merely knew which path you would choose.

He knew which path you chose in the universe he creates which means there is only ever one path. Nothing can make the paths multiple in a universe created by an omniscient being. There is only one.

 

[Hentenza]

As the other poster and I agree, you are free to believe contradictory things.

What?

He knew which path you chose in the universe he creates which means there is only ever one path.

Nope. There are several paths. You chose one; He knows which one you chose.

Nothing can make the paths multiple in a universe created by an omniscient being. There is only one.

Completely disagree.

 

[variant]

What?

You are free to contradict yourself.

Nope. There are several paths. You chose one; He knows which one you chose.

I'm tired of belaboring this point which you simply refuse to think about.

The path must be the one God knows will happen at the beginning of the universe, this happens before "you" exist at the dawn of creation.

If your actions are always entirely predictable then there isn't room for choice. There isn't any room for "you" either as none of your actions will come from you at all, they will all ultimately be caused directly by God.

For you to have a choice there have to be multiple paths at the beginning of the universe and thus it can not be predicted what will happen until after you make a choice, or can not be predicted with absolute accuracy what will happen until after the fact.

"Choice" where the outcome is known and without self determination or freedom is not choice it's something else.

 

[Hentenza]

You are free to contradict yourself.



I'm tired of belaboring this point which you simply refuse to think about.

I thought about it. My conclusion is different than yours.

The path must be the one God knows will happen at the beginning of the universe, this happens before you exist at the dawn of creation.

Then you are not speaking about an omniscient being since an omniscient being, by necessity, must know all past, present, and future. What you are describing is a being that purposely set the past, present, and future. Two very different concepts. You are stuck on the last one without giving any thought to the former.

If your actions are always entirely predictable then there isn't room for choice. There isn't any room for "you" either as none of your actions will come from you at all, they will all ultimately be caused directly by God.

Our actions are not predictable but known. Again, two entirely different concepts.

 

[variant]

Then you are not speaking about an omniscient being since an omniscient being, by necessity, must know all past, present, and future. What you are describing is a being that purposely set the past, present, and future. Two very different concepts. You are stuck on the last one without giving any thought to the former.

I am speaking of a being that created the universe while under the condition of omniscience.

It can't possibly act non-purposefully.

Our actions are not predictable but known. Again, two entirely different concepts.

Predicting with absolute certianty and knowing are not different concepts.

 

[Hentenza]

I am speaking of a being that created the universe while under the condition of omniscience.

It can't possibly act non-purposefully.

Lets keep it simple. An omniscient being creates the universe. He knows that he created the universe and also knows all future choices of all future inhabitant of said universe. The inhabitants make choices from an abundant of options but the omniscient being knows which option each makes. One inhabitant, for example, sets on a path and reaches a fork in the road. There are now two choices, right or left. He makes the choice to go right. The omniscient being knew he would choose right. Where there a left and a right on the path or was there just one choice? Did the omniscient being force the inhabitant to choose the path to the right?

Predicting with absolute certianty and knowing are not different concepts.

Is not predicting, is knowing.

 

[variant]

Lets keep it simple. An omniscient being creates the universe. He knows that he created the universe and also knows all future choices of all future inhabitant of said universe. The inhabitants make choices from an abundant of options but the omniscient being knows which option each makes. One inhabitant, for example, sets on a path and reaches a fork in the road. There are now two choices, right or left. He makes the choice to go right. The omniscient being knew he would choose right. Where there a left and a right on the path or was there just one choice? Did the omniscient being force the inhabitant to choose the path to the right?

Yes. The choice was predetermined at the beginning of the universe, it could not have gone any other way since that point in time.

There is one pre-determined path set down with complete foreknowledge of where it would lead by God.

All actors in such a universe are merely playing out a script oblivious that they are not actually making their own choices.

There were not two choices right or left only right. It was always going to be right.

Is not predicting, is knowing.

The two concepts merge when one becomes absolute.

 

[Hentenza]

Yes. The choice was predetermined at the beginning of the universe, it could not have gone any other way since that point in time.

A point in time is a temporal concept that is not present in an omniscient being. At the time that the inhabitant made the choice there were two choices; after the inhabitant made the choice, by taking the right path, there are no longer two choices. The omniscient being merely knew which choice the inhabitant would take at that point in time. The choices for the inhabitant are not reduced at that point in time but after that point in time.

All actors in such a universe are merely playing out a script oblivious that they are not actually making their own choices.

There is no script.

There were not two choices right or left only right. It was always going to be right.

See above.

 

[variant]

A point in time is a temporal concept that is not present in an omniscient being. At the time that the inhabitant made the choice there were two choices, after the inhabitant made the choice and took the right path there are no longer two choices. The omniscient being merely knew which choice the inhabitant would take at that point in time. The choices for the inhabitant are not reduced at that point in time but after that point in time.

It doesn't help your concept to get more abstract, omniscience requires all knowledge and thus the being is still responcable for all the events in the universe because when it creates, it can't create without intent.

There were never two choices, if God wanted left he would have to create a different universe, while, there is nothing about the subject that can make the choice left.

That is because for omniscience to exist with omnipotence there can only be the path that agrees with it.

 

[Hentenza]

It doesn't help your concept to get more abstract, omniscience requires all knowledge and thus the being is still responcable for all the events in the universe because when it creates, it can't create without intent.

The concept is abstract. Define intent.

There were never two choices, if God wanted left he would have to create a different universe, while, there is nothing about the subject that can make the choice left.

God did not "set" right as the only option. In the example, two options were available. You are stuck on knowledge = determinism. The two are not equal.

That is because for omniscience to exist with omnipotence there can only be the path that agrees with it.

Not really. It only means that the omniscient being knows which option you are going to choose. It does not mean that the omniscient being forced you to choose between options.

 

[variant]

The concept is abstract. Define intent.

In this case acting toward a known outcome.

God did not "set" right as the only option. In the example, two options were available. You are stuck on knowledge = determinism. The two are not equal.

Left is removed at the point of creation. God knows when he creates the universe that right will happen.

Not really. It only means that the omniscient being knows which option you are going to choose. It does not mean that the omniscient being forced you to choose between options.

The omniscient being created the universe in which only one outcome was possible.

The person being part of that universe is irrelevant.

The foreknowledge and the omnipotence excludes there being a choice in the matter.

 

[Hentenza]

In this case acting toward a known outcome.

What if the outcome was merely to create?

Left is removed at the point of creation. God knows when he creates the universe that right will happen.



The omniscient being created the universe in which only one outcome was possible.

The person being part of that universe is irrelevant.

In my view the omniscient being formed His knowledge from your choices but there was never a time in which He had no knowledge of your choices.

 

[variant]

What if the outcome was merely to create?

God is omniscient in this scenario, he knows everything that will happen and made a conscious choice about it.

In my view the omniscient being formed His knowledge from your choices but there was never a time in which He had no knowledge of your choices.

Maybe a selectively omniscient being, a completely omniscient being is going to act in the way I described.

If the being wants me to have a independent choice it can't know about the outcome before it creates me.