The Problem of Free Will

[Soul2Soul]

Thanks for asking. It means at times prior to when item Y (Fred's choice) is going to occur, X (knowledge of Fred's choice) has a truth value.

Thank you for providing your definition. From what I can make of it - foreknowledge does not include (consideration of) Fred's final choice/decision ... is that right?

So in other words - (fore)knowledge of Fred's choice expires the moment Fred makes that final choice .... otherwise foreknowledge exists?

But going by the definition of foreknowledge which is "knowledge of something before it exists or happens" according to Dictionary.com ---- I am not seeing how this does not involve Fred's final choice?

Is foreknowledge (borrowing from the above definition) in this case "knowledge of Fred's final choice (something) before Fred's final choice (it) exists or happens"?

 

[talquin]

Why would I suppose that God isn't sure of what he should do?

Well, if God performs any kind of actions that require him to make a choice, then he wouldn't know what his choice is going to be before he makes the choice.

If God knows what he's going to choose, then if he exercises his omnipotence to choose differently, then he isn't omniscient.

If God knows what he's going to choose and is compelled to choose that to keep his omniscience intact, then he isn't omnipotent.

 

[Albion]

Well, if God performs any kind of actions that require him to make a choice, then he wouldn't know what his choice is going to be before he makes the choice.

We don't think that God is just an exalted human like the Greek or Roman deities. As the Bible presents him, he is all in all, above all human failings, and all powerful. Of course he knows his own mind and the future.

If God knows what he's going to choose and is compelled to choose that to keep his omniscience intact, then he isn't omnipotent.

That's a false premise.

 

[talquin]

Thank you for providing your definition. From what I can make of it - foreknowledge does not include (consideration of) Fred's final choice/decision ... is that right?

So in other words - (fore)knowledge of Fred's choice expires the moment Fred makes that final choice .... otherwise foreknowledge exists?

But going by the definition of foreknowledge which is "knowledge of something before it exists or happens" according to Dictionary.com ---- I am not seeing how this does not involve Fred's final choice?

Is foreknowledge (borrowing from the above definition) in this case "knowledge of Fred's final choice (something) before Fred's final choice (it) exists or happens"?

Foreknowledge is merely a way of saying knowledge at points in time prior to when something occurs. So if X (or God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 a/b choice) has a truth value on day 1, then God has "foreknowledge".

Some Christians will contend that foreknowledge is inapplicable to God, as God resides outside of time. But even if you plug an outside of time being into my OP scenario, you still get a conflict.

 

[talquin]

Well, if God performs any kind of actions that require him to make a choice, then he wouldn't know what his choice is going to be before he makes the choice.

We don't think that God is just an exalted human like the Greek or Roman deities. As the Bible presents him, he is all in all, above all human failings, and all powerful. Of course he knows his own mind and the future.

If true, then he could do something other than what he knows he's going to do. So it's either impossible for him to know infallibly what he's going to do or he is incapable of doing anything.

If God knows what he's going to choose and is compelled to choose that to keep his omniscience intact, then he isn't omnipotent.

That's a false premise.

Is he under any obligation to keep his omniscience intact?

IOW, he could sacrifice his omniscience by keeping his omnipotence intact. Or he could sacrifice his omnipotence by keeping his omniscience intact.

 

[Albion]

If true, then he could do something other than what he knows he's going to do. .

No, that's just a word game like saying "If God were all powerful, he'd be able to make a square circle." The premise is faulty and doesn't bear upon the discussion.

 

[talquin]

No, that's just a word game like saying "If God were all powerful, he'd be able to make a square circle." The premise is faulty and doesn't bear upon the discussion.

Let's say God does know everything, including what choices he will make. Let's say for an upcoming A/B choice, God knows he will choose A. Now let's say God can do anything. When the A/B choice comes up, God exercises his power to do anything and chooses B. That's the conflict I'm talking about.

 

[Soul2Soul]

Foreknowledge is merely a way of saying knowledge at points in time prior to when something occurs. So if X (or God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 a/b choice) has a truth value on day 1, then God has "foreknowledge".

Some Christians will contend that foreknowledge is inapplicable to God, as God resides outside of time. But even if you plug an outside of time being into my OP scenario, you still get a conflict.

But isn't foreknowledge prior knowledge at points in time about what and when the occurrence itself will be?

Foreknowledge is "knowledge of something before it exists or happens"

Dictionary.com

 

[Albion]

Let's say God does know everything, including what choices he will make. Let's say for an upcoming A/B choice, God knows he will choose A. Now let's say God can do anything. When the A/B choice comes up, God exercises his power to do anything and chooses B. That's the conflict I'm talking about.

It doesn't exist because you've already posited that he knows the future. He cannot know what he will do and then do the opposite. That would be to NOT know everything, not know the future, and not know what he will do.

 

[juvenissun]

If on day 1, it were asked, "does know what Fred's day 2 a/b choice will be?", would the answer be "Yes"? If so, then it follows that it has a truth value as of day 1 - meaning that is has a value of A or a value of B.

If not, then at what point in OUR timeline, does God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 A/B choice acquire a truth value?

In your argument, you may replace "God" by any name. Your argument will still be valid.

But, would this "God" still be God in that case?

You try to use logic to confine God. That is your mistake right from your very very first post in this forum. It is NOT logically sound.

 

[talquin]

It doesn't exist because you've already posited that he knows the future. He cannot know what he will do and then do the opposite. That would be to NOT know everything, not know the future, and not know what he will do.

In other words, you are saying an all-knowing God can't do anything and an all-powerful God wouldn't know everything. I don't disagree.

 

[talquin]

In your argument, you may replace "God" by any name. Your argument will still be valid.

But, would this "God" still be God in that case?

You try to use logic to confine God. That is your mistake right from your very very first post in this forum. It is NOT logically sound.

At what point in OUR timeline, does God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 A/B choice acquire a truth value?

 

[juvenissun]

At what point in OUR timeline, does God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 A/B choice acquire a truth value?

Before Fred was born.
There is no reason for this answer. It goes by definition.

 

[Albion]

Before Fred was born.
There is no reason for this answer. It goes by definition.

I agree with your thinking. Our friend is picturing God as little more than a smart human...and then posing a series of "what ifs" that cannot apply if God is actually God.

 

[juvenissun]

I agree with your thinking. Our friend is picturing God as little more than a smart human...and then posing a series of "what ifs" that cannot apply if God is actually God.

He is crazy about logic. He should know, first of all, that God is beyond logic.

 

[Albion]

He is crazy about logic. He should know, first of all, that God is beyond logic.

I think it's even worse than that. If we are going to inquire into God's doings, , we can't begin by denying that he has divine powers and characteristics. That's like asking "what if" the tortoise was flying over a pond, would he dive into the water to catch a fish?

 

[talquin]

At what point in OUR timeline, does God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 A/B choice acquire a truth value?

Before Fred was born.
There is no reason for this answer. It goes by definition.

Let's say variable Y represents Fred's day 2 A/B choice. Given your answer, Y has a truth value prior to when Fred was born. However, if Fred freely assigns an A or B value to Y on day 2, then this puts your response in conflict with the presupposition that Fred can freely choose A or B. Are you not aware of this?

 

[talquin]

If on day 1, it were asked, "does know what Fred's day 2 a/b choice will be?", would the answer be "Yes"? If so, then it follows that it has a truth value as of day 1 - meaning that is has a value of A or a value of B.

If not, then at what point in OUR timeline, does God's knowledge of Fred's day 2 A/B choice acquire a truth value?

In your argument, you may replace "God" by any name. Your argument will still be valid.

That is true. And my argument is valid if God is an outside of time being or a being which operates within time.

But, would this "God" still be God in that case?

Well, I guess that depends on your definition of "God". If I call you "God", does that make you God?

You try to use logic to confine God. That is your mistake right from your very very first post in this forum. It is NOT logically sound.

Humans have made certain claims about God which are logic based and are subject to the rules of logic. Some of these claims conflict with each other. I am merely responding to the claims which are made.

To say that God is exempt from the rules of logic while making claims which are subject to the rules of logic is to engage in the fallacy of special pleading.

 

[talquin]

But isn't foreknowledge prior knowledge at points in time about what and when the occurrence itself will be?

Foreknowledge is "knowledge of something before it exists or happens"

Dictionary.com

I would say you're correct about foreknowledge. This is part of why the problem of free will can't be reconciled.

 

[juvenissun]

That is true. And my argument is valid if God is an outside of time being or a being which operates within time.


Well, I guess that depends on your definition of "God". If I call you "God", does that make you God?


Humans have made certain claims about God which are logic based and are subject to the rules of logic. Some of these claims conflict with each other. I am merely responding to the claims which are made.

To say that God is exempt from the rules of logic while making claims which are subject to the rules of logic is to engage in the fallacy of special pleading.

Given initial definitions to what the God should be, the rest of theology would ALL be logically sound. In any argument, just do not question the initial definition. Unfortunately, that is what you usually do.

If you define the God as a Being of all knowing, then do not question if He knows or not. He simply knows by definition. If you do not like that, then do not define a god as one who is all knowing. But, if so, you are not talking about the Christian God. A Buddha might be one who is not all knowing. Would you like Buddha better?