26 Mar 08
2 edits
Originally posted by vistesdI've made that argument (though you've stated it better than I have) and still feel it's a valid one.
Thanks, man: how ya doin’?
As I recall, your argument is something like—
(1) An omniscient god would know what is the best of all possible worlds.
(2) An omnipotent God can create the best of all possible worlds.
(3) An omni-good God will create the best of all possible worlds.
(4) God is O-O-O.
(5) God is the creator of the world.
...[text shortened]... “omni-good”. If some theist wants to argue that God’s omni-goodness entails malevolence, fine.
However, my musings on the matter have went a little beyond "the best of all worlds" argument. The whole concept of an "all knowing" entity who "exists out of time" i.e. experiences all points on an infinite timeline simultaneously is problematic. Since individual points in time really have no meaning for this thing, "when" does it ever decide to do anything? Logically how could it? Quite simply, such a creature would be aware of what it did FOREVER but have no power EVER to decide to change what it was "about" to do. It would be a being utterly without free will in any sense of the word.
Upon consideration, the Christian theists here seem to be approaching Eastern concepts of "God" though still clinging to dualism. Perhaps such a view is akin to Taoism:
There is a thing, formless yet complete.
Before heaven and earth it existed.
Without sound, without substance,
it stands alone and unchanging.
It is all-pervading and unfailing.
One may think of it as the mother of all beneath Heaven.
We do not know its name, but we call it Tao.
25. [Bodde].
Deep and still, it seems to have existed forever.
4.
From the Tao Te Ching
26 Mar 08
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderNow, that’s interesting! As I understand it, either—
I've made that argument (though you've stated it better than I have) and still feel it's a valid one.
However, my musings on the matter have went a little beyond "the best of all worlds" argument. The whole concept of an "all knowing" entity who "exists out of time" i.e. experiences all points on an infinite timeline simultaneously is pr
Deep and still, it seems to have existed forever.
4.
From the Tao Te Ching
(a) God is a “timely” being, constrained within time (or by processual time?); or
(b) God is a “timeless” being [forever at some eternal T(0)].
In the first case, God can make willful decisions, but omniscience is at least problematic (and God is not omnipotent with regard to time). In the second case, God cannot be thought of as willing at all, and becomes more like eastern concepts of an ultimate determining principle (like the Tao?). Monotheists, however, tend to want it both ways.
Correct me if I haven’t stated it correctly. I want to think about it a bit (see if I can think of any way to resolve the contradiction, or how a theist might try to resolve it).
26 Mar 08
Originally posted by vistesdThat's a correct formulation.
Now, that’s interesting! As I understand it, either—
(a) God is a “timely” being, constrained within time (or by processual time?); or
(b) God is a “timeless” being [forever at some eternal T(0)].
In the first case, God can make willful decisions, but omniscience is at least problematic (and God is not omnipotent with regard to time). In t ...[text shortened]... f I can think of any way to resolve the contradiction, or how a theist might try to resolve it).
26 Mar 08
Originally posted by twhiteheadThe answer to this whole connundrum is that God does not know "the " future he just knows "your" future , cos to him it is the present already. He doesn't need to predict what you will choose in 2011 , he's just watching you choose right now (as it were). An eternal being has no need for basics like prediction. Why does everyone seem to picture God as if he were a highly psychic bookmaker?
But how does he do it. The laws of physics make it impossible to accurately predict the weather. The weather is a chaotic system and therefore large scale changes are subject to the random effects of quantum dynamics.
If God is, as you claim, able to know the future, then it tells us that what we believe to be quantum randomness is not in fact random, and it therefore does - considerably - impact on our free will.
26 Mar 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterIf there is no future or past for God, he doesn't have free will as he has always been incapable of doing anything but what he did i.e. he never choose to do anything. This makes him an automation.
The answer to this whole connundrum is that God does not know "the " future he just knows "your" future , cos to him it is the present already. He doesn't need to predict what you will choose in 2011 , he's just watching you choose right now (as it were). An eternal being has no need for basics like prediction. Why does everyone seem to picture God as if he were a highly psychic bookmaker?
26 Mar 08
Originally posted by LemonJelloImagine I had a working time machine and could travel into your future.
I would reject Premise 3 as well. As a compatibilist, I would reject Premise 3 for what are (I think) a host of good reasons. But, again, I'm insistent on leaving that out of this discussion. The fact seems to be that a vast majority of people have a libertarian view of freedom. We see this again and again in forums such as this where, more or less wi ...[text shortened]... ecessity that it establishes about our future willings?
Now , whether you had free will or no free will would make no difference to my knowledge of your choices. I would be able to know what you will choose in 2011 quite easily and you having free will would make no difference at all to me. Why? Because , if I had said time machine I could just watch you making that free choice with my own eyes. My knowledge of your free will choice would not stop your choice being free neither would I be prevented from knowing if you are free.
In short , whether compatibilism is true or free will is true has no bearing on me and my time machine or my knowledge. There is no reason why I could not know your free choice.
The real question here is not "is an eternal omniscient God incompatible with free will? " but " could an eternal being exist?" -- because hypothetically an eternal being is going to know what you choose tomorrow WHATEVER you choose.Why? He's already in tomorrow watching you choose. You cannot escape a being who is always in your tommorrow , even libertarian free will cannot prevent him knowing.
I can see how people find the idea weird or quite shocking but I can also see how it's also highly logical on another level.
26 Mar 08
Let me clarify by using as an example the first Terminator movie.
For those of you who don't know, the premise of the movie (briefly) is that a Department of defense supercomputer starts a nuclear exchange in an attempt to wipe out the human race. It very nearly succeeds in doing so, but a few humans survive. Led by a resourceful leader, John Connor, they eventually defeat the supercomputer but just prior to its destruction it sends a cyborg back in time. It's mission? To kill John Connor's mother so he is never born and thus cannot lead the rebellion that destroys the SC in the future.
Now there are two possibilities: Either A) This plan has a chance of success because at each moment in time there are future possibilities which can be affected by actions (human or otherwise) i.e. many worlds or B) The timeline is fixed and nothing one can do can change it (in fact in the movie in response to the cyborg being sent back in time, John Connor sends one of his soldiers back in time to destroy it; this soldier winds up impregnating John Connor's mother making his existence dependent on the time travel. This is called a "time loop" in sci fi).
With a 3 O God only B is possible; prior timelines cannot be changed and God retain his omniscience. However, in B God himself is just as constrained as anybody else by what has and what will happen and has no ability to change his past, present or future actions (else omniscience fails). This makes God not only an entity that lacks free will, but one who KNOWS he lacks free will. A very curious omnipotent being.
26 Mar 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterYou keep ignoring that when your 3 O God created the universe, he knew, IN ADVANCE, every single decision that anyone would make. And that those decisions were dictated by the universe he created. You never could make a different decision from any of the decisions you made if their exists only a single timeline, created by your God, and which must be maintained or your God's omniscience fails.
Imagine I had a working time machine and could travel into your future.
Now , whether you had free will or no free will would make no difference to my knowledge of your choices. I would be able to know what you will choose in 2011 quite easily and you having free will would make no difference at all to me. Why? Because , if I had said time machine ...[text shortened]... weird or quite shocking but I can also see how it's also highly logical on another level.
26 Mar 08
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderThere's an awful lot of unsupported statements here. I understand that it makes sense to you , but have you an argument to explore ?
You keep ignoring that when your 3 O God created the universe, he knew, IN ADVANCE, every single decision that anyone would make. And that those decisions were dictated by the universe he created. You never could make a different decision from any of the decisions you made if their exists only a single timeline, created by your God, and which must be maintained or your God's omniscience fails.
How would God know what you were going to choose in 2008 unleess he creates the universe and you with it? If he doesn't create the universe then you will not exist in 2008 and there is nothing to know. Therefore I fail to see how he could know IN ADVANCE of creating the universe. Mind you he doesn't know anything in advance anyway. He knows it in eternity.
26 Mar 08
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterDon't start your usual dodging. My post is utterly clear; the "unsupported statements" are central tenets of your dogma, being the logical consequences of a thing having 3 O attributes. I've presented my argument; if you have nothing to say about it stop cluttering up the thread.
There's an awful lot of unsupported statements here. I understand that it makes sense to you , but have you an argument to explore ?
26 Mar 08
Originally posted by no1marauderOk , you chose not to think about it then. The answer is two- fold. Firstly , think about the relationship between a 2dimensional circle and a 3d sphere. A 3d sphere contains the cirlce within it and is present in 2 dimensions as well as 3. A 3d sphere exists both in 2dimensions and 3 dimensions. It can transcend 2 dimensions and also exist in both 2 and 3 dimensions.
Another dodge. How typical.
God is similar. In Jesus he exists in time but also in the trinity he is eternal. Jesus is where eternity (5 dimensions) intersects time (4d) and exists in both.
I'm sure you could at least had a stab at thinking this through?