Can an omniscient being exist with a universe that has free will?

Quote from: Marcus Aurelius on February 16, 2011, 02:01:02 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 01:55:17 PM

I think this is a really thin argument. You could say that you have free will, but god still knows what choice you are going to make. I don't see how that would take away from your free will. He isn't interfering with your decision.

It's not about God interfering with your decision, it's about your decision being pre destined that robs you of your freedom.  It basically makes you a puppet of fate from which you cannot escape.

What do you mean pre-destined? You're going to complete a set of actions in your lifetime whether or not someone knows what those actions are. God knowing what you are going to do has no effect on your free-will as long as he doesn't make you do something different.

Quote from: Marcus Aurelius on February 16, 2011, 02:01:02 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 01:55:17 PM

I think this is a really thin argument. You could say that you have free will, but god still knows what choice you are going to make. I don't see how that would take away from your free will. He isn't interfering with your decision.

It's not about God interfering with your decision, it's about your decision being pre destined that robs you of your freedom.  It basically makes you a puppet of fate from which you cannot escape.

What do you mean pre-destined? You're going to complete a set of actions in your lifetime whether or not someone knows what those actions are. God knowing what you are going to do has no effect on your free-will as long as he doesn't make you do something different.

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 02:06:03 PM

Quote from: Marcus Aurelius on February 16, 2011, 02:01:02 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 01:55:17 PM

I think this is a really thin argument. You could say that you have free will, but god still knows what choice you are going to make. I don't see how that would take away from your free will. He isn't interfering with your decision.

It's not about God interfering with your decision, it's about your decision being pre destined that robs you of your freedom.  It basically makes you a puppet of fate from which you cannot escape.

What do you mean pre-destined? You're going to complete a set of actions in your lifetime whether or not someone knows what those actions are. God knowing what you are going to do has no effect on your free-will as long as he doesn't make you do something different.

If it truly was a choice, it wouldn't be predictable. Because God knows what you will do, it will never happen any other way. So is that really choice?

Does the man remain in the room freely?  Locke says no, because it is only a matter of convenience that the man's preference was the choice that was available to him.

No, you didn't. It was a yes or no question. You only attempted to render the question moot.

Lets say on day x God knows that when I have to make the choice between eating Cheerios and eating Cornflakes, I choose to eat cornflakes.

When that day comes along, I have to eat the cornflakes. If I don't, that means that God is not omniscient, becuase he did not know what I was going to do.

I did not have free-will in the matter because I had to eat the cornflakes, it could not have happened any other way.

The man had the choice to either stay in the room or attempt to leave. He exercised his free will to stay. No problem. Had he tried to leave, only then would his free will have been jeopardised.

Let's say you put the cart before the horse and call it an argument. Will you convince anyone?

I'm noticing that my points are going unanswered...

Quote from: fluffycornsnake on February 16, 2011, 02:28:54 PM

Let's say you put the cart before the horse and call it an argument. Will you convince anyone?

That does not answer my assertion at all. Tell me where the reasoning in invalid or which premise is false. Otherwise, admit that you are wrong.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on February 16, 2011, 02:34:15 PM

Quote from: fluffycornsnake on February 16, 2011, 02:28:54 PM

Let's say you put the cart before the horse and call it an argument. Will you convince anyone?

That does not answer my assertion at all. Tell me where the reasoning in invalid or which premise is false. Otherwise, admit that you are wrong.

You're the one who's wrong. You have the ability to choose whichever cereal you want, god merely knows which one you are going to choose. He isn't interfering with your free will.

You have the ability to choose whichever cereal you want, god merely knows which one you are going to choose. He isn't interfering with your free will.

God is not playing an influential role. It is the fact that he can know something with certainty that has implications.

An inability to do something else is a lack of freewill. Doing something else would make god's knowledge incorrect.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on February 16, 2011, 02:34:15 PM

Quote from: fluffycornsnake on February 16, 2011, 02:28:54 PM

Let's say you put the cart before the horse and call it an argument. Will you convince anyone?

That does not answer my assertion at all. Tell me where the reasoning in invalid or which premise is false. Otherwise, admit that you are wrong.

You're the one who's wrong. You have the ability to choose whichever cereal you want, god merely knows which one you are going to choose. He isn't interfering with your free will.

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 02:36:27 PM

You have the ability to choose whichever cereal you want, god merely knows which one you are going to choose. He isn't interfering with your free will.

Quote from: ﮎingulaЯiτy on February 16, 2011, 02:11:54 PM

God is not playing an influential role. It is the fact that he can know something with certainty that has implications.

Quote from: ﮎingulaЯiτy on February 16, 2011, 02:02:25 PM

An inability to do something else is a lack of freewill. Doing something else would make god's knowledge incorrect.

Where does this "God has no timeline" come from anyway?

Please read.

Lets say on day x God knows that when I have to make the choice between eating Cheerios and eating Cornflakes, I choose to eat cornflakes.

When that day comes along, I have to eat the cornflakes. If I don't, that means that God is not omniscient, becuase he did not know what I was going to do.

I did not have free-will in the matter because I had to eat the cornflakes, it could not have happened any other way.

Something knowing what your actions will be does not mean that they are controlling your actions.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on February 16, 2011, 02:46:02 PM

Please read.

Lets say on day x God knows that when I have to make the choice between eating Cheerios and eating Cornflakes, I choose to eat cornflakes.

When that day comes along, I have to eat the cornflakes. If I don't, that means that God is not omniscient, becuase he did not know what I was going to do.

I did not have free-will in the matter because I had to eat the cornflakes, it could not have happened any other way.

No1 has addressed this yet, I am assuming because they can't.

I'm noticing that my points are going unanswered...

Quote

Most of these posts seem to be placing temporal limitations on God. 'Past' and 'future' are human terms. From God's perspective, all moments are the Present. God knows what you will eat for breakfast 'tomorrow', because 'tomorrow' is as real as 'today'. In a manner of speaking, God can already see you eating your breakfast tomorrow. God can see you eating breakfast 30 years from now and everything between.

You are discussing the way god might come to gain his knowledge, not what conditions must be met for such knowledge to be possible.

Quote

Locke's argument is also irrelevant. God cannot actively limit us just by 'knowing stuff'. God merely sees all temporal actions in eternity. How can this possibly have an effect on the actions themselves?

God is not playing an influential role. It is the fact that he can know something with certainty that has implications.

Quote from: fluffycornsnake on February 16, 2011, 02:28:54 PM

The man had the choice to either stay in the room or attempt to leave. He exercised his free will to stay. No problem. Had he tried to leave, only then would his free will have been jeopardised.

The thought experiment is highlighting capability of choice which is why the decision isn't between 'staying or trying to leave'. It is a decision to stay or leave. If leaving is impossible it is not really a choice.

What are these implications you're talking about?

Posting your argument over and over isn't going to make it more valid.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on February 16, 2011, 02:53:27 PM

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on February 16, 2011, 02:46:02 PM

Please read.

Lets say on day x God knows that when I have to make the choice between eating Cheerios and eating Cornflakes, I choose to eat cornflakes.

When that day comes along, I have to eat the cornflakes. If I don't, that means that God is not omniscient, becuase he did not know what I was going to do.

I did not have free-will in the matter because I had to eat the cornflakes, it could not have happened any other way.

No1 has addressed this yet, I am assuming because they can't.

With God, you may have already eaten the cornflakes.

You freely choose to eat Cheerios. God knows that you will make that choice because, God having no strict timeline, has seen you eat those Cheerio's. Free will remains intact. Simples.

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 02:45:45 PM

What are these implications you're talking about?

If something can be known with certainty, that certainty is an inevitable truth. To be sure of something is to acknowledge that nothing else can happen instead. If something else couldn't happen, god couldn't be sure.

Quote from: ?ingula?i?y on February 16, 2011, 03:00:22 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 02:45:45 PM

What are these implications you're talking about?

If something can be known with certainty, that certainty is an inevitable truth. To be sure of something is to acknowledge that nothing else can happen instead. If something else couldn't happen, god couldn't be sure.

An omnipotent god would know with complete certainty what you are going to do in your life. This knowledge isn't in any way go to affect your actions.

Quote from: ﮎingulaЯiτy on February 16, 2011, 02:11:54 PM

You are discussing the way god might come to gain his knowledge, not what conditions must be met for such knowledge to be possible.

Yes. Are you asking me to provide reasons why God is omniscient?

Quote from: ﮎingulaЯiτy on February 16, 2011, 02:11:54 PM

Quote

Locke's argument is also irrelevant. God cannot actively limit us just by 'knowing stuff'. God merely sees all temporal actions in eternity. How can this possibly have an effect on the actions themselves?

God is not playing an influential role. It is the fact that he can know something with certainty that has implications.

But these implications are nothing more than semantic, as I have tried to say.

Quote from: ﮎingulaЯiτy on February 16, 2011, 02:33:46 PM

Quote from: fluffycornsnake on February 16, 2011, 02:28:54 PM

The man had the choice to either stay in the room or attempt to leave. He exercised his free will to stay. No problem. Had he tried to leave, only then would his free will have been jeopardised.

The thought experiment is highlighting capability of choice which is why the decision isn't between 'staying or trying to leave'. It is a decision to stay or leave. If leaving is impossible it is not really a choice.

It is a choice, because he chooses to stay! I cannot make this any clearer.

Quote from: ?ingula?i?y on February 16, 2011, 03:00:22 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 02:45:45 PM

What are these implications you're talking about?

If something can be known with certainty, that certainty is an inevitable truth. To be sure of something is to acknowledge that nothing else can happen instead. If something else couldn't happen, god couldn't be sure.

An omnipotent god would know with complete certainty what you are going to do in your life. This knowledge isn't in any way go to affect your actions.

Lets say on day x God knows that when I have to make the choice between eating Cheerios and eating Cornflakes, I choose to eat cornflakes.

When that day comes along, I have to eat the cornflakes. If I don't, that means that God is not omniscient, becuase he did not know what I was going to do.

I did not have free-will in the matter because I had to eat the cornflakes, it could not have happened any other way.

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 03:04:58 PM

Quote from: ?ingula?i?y on February 16, 2011, 03:00:22 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 02:45:45 PM

What are these implications you're talking about?

If something can be known with certainty, that certainty is an inevitable truth. To be sure of something is to acknowledge that nothing else can happen instead. If something else couldn't happen, god couldn't be sure.

An omnipotent god would know with complete certainty what you are going to do in your life. This knowledge isn't in any way go to affect your actions.

Stating your premise over and over doesn't make your conclusion anymore valid.

If he knows with complete certainty what you will do, than that means you can not choose to do anything but what he says you will, which means that you have no free will.

but in fact his knowledge is based on the choice.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on February 16, 2011, 03:10:42 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 03:04:58 PM

Quote from: ?ingula?i?y on February 16, 2011, 03:00:22 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 02:45:45 PM

What are these implications you're talking about?

If something can be known with certainty, that certainty is an inevitable truth. To be sure of something is to acknowledge that nothing else can happen instead. If something else couldn't happen, god couldn't be sure.

An omnipotent god would know with complete certainty what you are going to do in your life. This knowledge isn't in any way go to affect your actions.

Stating your premise over and over doesn't make your conclusion anymore valid.

If he knows with complete certainty what you will do, than that means you can not choose to do anything but what he says you will, which means that you have no free will.

He isn't telling you to do anything, he's merely observing your actions. If he told you what to do in the first place, you wouldn't have free will whether he knew what you were going to do or not.

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on February 16, 2011, 03:10:42 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 03:04:58 PM

Quote from: ?ingula?i?y on February 16, 2011, 03:00:22 PM

Quote from: Fortuna on February 16, 2011, 02:45:45 PM

What are these implications you're talking about?

If something can be known with certainty, that certainty is an inevitable truth. To be sure of something is to acknowledge that nothing else can happen instead. If something else couldn't happen, god couldn't be sure.

An omnipotent god would know with complete certainty what you are going to do in your life. This knowledge isn't in any way go to affect your actions.

Stating your premise over and over doesn't make your conclusion anymore valid.

If he knows with complete certainty what you will do, than that means you can not choose to do anything but what he says you will, which means that you have no free will.

He isn't telling you to do anything, he's merely observing your actions. If he told you what to do in the first place, you wouldn't have free will whether he knew what you were going to do or not.