Hi all,

I am a devout atheist, but am curious about what others think on this matter. Does anyone see any contradiction between an omnipotent god - if there is one, let us suppose for the sake of discussion that there is - and the free will of man? I have more to say on this, but would like to hear your opinions; atheists and alike theists are encouraged to reply.

Im sure this has come up in posts before, if so you have my apologies.

Check out some pages other than the first. There has been a thread about this every week for months.

The apparant contradiction lies not with Gods omnipotence - rather its omniscience.

The apparant contradiction would follow something like:

"I can only make one possible choice in every decision of my life if God knows beforehand what choice i will make, either i have no freewill or God is not truely omniscient."

Yes this topic arises more often than not.

Atheists will tell you that God negates our freewill.

Theists will tell you that we still make the choice and that God just knows what we will choose.

thanks guys, i will have a look

quote:Originally posted by darth_vector:

I am a devout atheist

Kinda ruins the whole point of being atheistic, being devout.

The way I figure it:

God may know what we're going to do, but he does not make us do it. Yes, he gave us freewill. Yes, he knows everything. No, he doesn't control us.

It's just like if a normal human could see the future. That person would know what people would choose to do, but he could never force them to do it.

So, just because God knew what we were going to do, does not mean He made us. We thought about it, considered outcomes, and made our choice. He just knew it all along.

Sorry if this post is poorly explained. I'm going on no sleep, and it seemed to me that this post made sense.

You are not thinking in terms of omnisceince and omnipotence. In order for their to be time, there must be some sort of determinism. A+B+C...+AAAAA....+ABBABCA... etc, forever, will always equal some set amount. This represents the inputs in our lives and specific actions that we make. I won;t go greatly into it, but it has a lot to do with scientific proofs of experiments.

Now, God being omniscient simply means that he can comprehend everything that goes into a decision and what the exact outcome is, something a human brain cannot do. This does not affect free will because of omnipotence. In order to be omnipotent, a being must be able to do anything, whether logical, paradoxical or neither.

It would not make sense that an omniscient God could see our choices without them being predetermined by something, but an omnipotent God can make determinism false simple by willing it. Omnipotence is power over everything, guys.

quote:Originally posted by Gorloche:

You are not thinking in terms of omnisceince and omnipotence. In order for their to be time, there must be some sort of determinism. A+B+C...+AAAAA....+ABBABCA... etc, forever, will always equal some set amount. This represents the inputs in our lives and specific actions that we make. I won;t go greatly into it, but it has a lot to do with scientific proofs of experiments.

Not necessarily. It's (to me) clear just on contemplation, and no scientific proofs are required. However, you forget about the Quantum uncertainity principle thingy which I forget the exact name of now. Ask in Mad Scientists; they'll know.

quote:In order to be omnipotent, a being must be able to do anything, whether logical, paradoxical or neither.

Maybe not.

Omnipotent means "having absolute power over all". Now, looking at the definition of power (http://tinyurl.com/8mu28), there is nothing there that suggests having unlimited power means that you can do paradoxial things. Paradoxial things are by nature impossible to do; being all-powerful merely means that you can do all possible things. Or so went one argument I've heard.

[This message has been edited by Twisted_Ferret (edited 09-09-2005).]

Ever read the dune saga?

A huge chunk of it is devoted to the effects of prophecy. If the outcome of ANYTHING is known with absolote certainty then the outcome is certain.

Yee Gods thats bad, how can belivers belive that with out becoming totally depressed? With an all powerfull, all seeing god everything is fixed, utterly, even gods own behavour *shudder*. He would have to know, and he could not be wrong.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

Kinda ruins the whole point of being atheistic, being devout.

That sort of stood out to me too.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

Kinda ruins the whole point of being atheistic, being devout.

i thought the right term was strong, strong atheist...

maybe i'm wrong...

... or not (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist)

Okay, I'll bite.

Let's say, theoretically, I can see 24 hours into the future, and exactly 24 hours from now, you will die in a car accident. Whatever I do, or you do, even if we contacted eachother and even discussed the fact you were going to die, the fact still remains, you WILL die. If I see the future, then what I see will definately, absolutely happen: it wouldn't be the future otherwise. Do you want to die? Probably not, no. But you will, and you can't change it.

Let's say after I tell you, you avoid entering a vehicle; to try and change fate, but inevitably, fate will go Final Destination on your ass. Whatever choices you make, whatever you do or know or want, you WILL die and nothing will change that.

It's not the choosing that's the problem, you DO have a choice. The outcome as seen by God (or me in the example) is simply the same.

[This message has been edited by Pyronos (edited 09-11-2005).]

Not much of a choice, really. You have to extend the example for it to be valid for God: He not only sees that you will die, but every little thing you do or think up until your death. In your example, you cannot avoid your death; if you extend this to my example, you couldn't avoid anything. So again, there's not much of a choice. None at all, in fact.

So. Doesn't this, like, effectively disprove the existance of God, or something?

http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif)

*universe vanishes*

quote:Okay, I'll bite.

Let's say, theoretically, I can see 24 hours into the future, and exactly 24 hours from now, you will die in a car accident. Whatever I do, or you do, even if we contacted eachother and even discussed the fact you were going to die, the fact still remains, you WILL die. If I see the future, then what I see will definately, absolutely happen: it wouldn't be the future otherwise. Do you want to die? Probably not, no. But you will, and you can't change it.

Let's say after I tell you, you avoid entering a vehicle; to try and change fate, but inevitably, fate will go Final Destination on your ass. Whatever choices you make, whatever you do or know or want, you WILL die and nothing will change that.

It's not the choosing that's the problem, you DO have a choice. The outcome as seen by God (or me in the example) is simply the same.

No, you are wrong.

You are mixing determinism with fatalism. Fatalism is the whole 'final destination' part, and that even if you know how/when/why you will die you can do nothing about it and your choices have no effect on the event - the world doesn't work like that.

Determinism on the other hand - the way the world does work, doesn't work the way you tried to describe. If somehow someone looked into the future and told me how i was going to die, them telling me would become a cause for a number of other events that could eventually lead to the prevention of my death (assuming it was something like a car accident).

Our choices do matter, our choices do change what happens in the future. God supposedly knows all the causes and their effects in the universe and therefore can know the future certainly - our choices are just byproducts of causality.

I've always been severely bothered by the concept of omnipotence too.

Let's take the Bible. When God made Adam and Eve, he made every aspect of who they were, every facet of their personality. He knew that they were going to disobey him ahead of time based on how he made them. How could He, with a clear conscience (hyuk hyuk), make them knowing that they'd sin, and then blame them for it? Knowing that their actions would lead to "His only begotten son" suffering on the cross, etc. In that way, God was knowingly creating sin (isn't He the creator of all things?), and is sorta a hypocrite.

In any case, the concept of omnipotence gets my vote for the most nonsensical aspect of Christianity.

[This message has been edited by Shadout Mapes (edited 09-12-2005).]

quote:

>>Kinda ruins the whole point of being >>atheistic, being devout.

yeah, that was a joke!

quote:

>>i thought the right term was strong, >>strong atheist...

>>

>>maybe i'm wrong...

no, your not wrong

>>I've always been severely bothered by the >>concept of omnipotence too.

>>

>>Let's take the Bible. When God made Adam >>and Eve, he made every aspect of who they >>were, every facet of their personality. He >>knew that they were going to disobey him >>ahead of time based on how he made them. >>How could He, with a clear conscience

>>(hyuk hyuk), make them knowing that they'd >>sin? Knowing that their actions would lead >>to "His only begotten son" suffering on >>the cross, etc. It seems just a little >>stupid to me. Or maybe He's just and >>asshole.



exactly! its not like they really commited a sin anyway, they just ate the "fruit of knowldege". what is wrong with striving to reduce one's ignorance?

i tend to agree with Niceguy (dune rocks by the way). if the outcome is known then there is no choice. at most there is only the illusion of choice. with such a problem one cant even begin to define right and wrong. how can what hitler (or binladen, the butcher of lebanon.....long list) be bad if they were destined to do it by god? how can mother teresa, pele, duke atreities... (short list) be good if everything they did was destined to happen?

thx for all the replies by the way, makes for interesting reading!

[This message has been edited by darth_vector (edited 09-12-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Shadout Mapes:

I've always been severely bothered by the concept of omnipotence too.

Let's take the Bible. When God made Adam and Eve, he made every aspect of who they were, every facet of their personality. He knew that they were going to disobey him ahead of time based on how he made them. How could He, with a clear conscience (hyuk hyuk), make them knowing that they'd sin, and then blame them for it? Knowing that their actions would lead to "His only begotten son" suffering on the cross, etc. In that way, God was knowingly creating sin (isn't He the creator of all things?), and is sorta a hypocrite.

In any case, the concept of omnipotence gets my vote for the most nonsensical aspect of Christianity.



Yeah I've always had troubles with that. But who says he isn't just a prick setting everyone up for failure. Or why not say it's just a story to teach morals and whoever wrote it hoped you wouldn't look to far into it.

actually, the church says hes not a prick. god is supposed to be all good, at least according to catholics. muslims and jews dont have this inconvenience.

That leads me to my next question - Why did God put the Tree of Knowledge right in the middle of fucking Paradise if it's forbidden!? I get that even most Christians claim that the whole Eden story is allegorical, but even taking that into account, where did sin come from, and why did God dangle it in front of our noses while laughing to himself?

Cf:

"I always thought about that Garden of Eden story," said Ford.

"Eh?"

"Garden of Eden. Tree. Apple. That bit, remember?"

"Yes, of course I do."

"Your God person puts an apple tree in the middle of a garden and says, do what you like guys, oh, but don't eat the apple. Surprise surprise, they eat it and He leaps out from behind a bush shouting 'Gotcha.' It wouldn't have made any difference if they hadn't eaten it."

"Why not?"

"Because if you're dealing with someone who has the sort of mentality which likes to leave hats on the pavement with bricks under them and you know perfectly well they won't give up. They'll get you in the end."

"What are you talking about?"

"Nevermind, eat the fruit."

lmao, thats brilliant!

Relativity.

Free will is nothing but relative. To God, you have no free will. But since we lack omniscience, we do not know, nor can we know per our own time-space, the future. I could punch my computer exactly 5 minutes after i finish this post, or i could not. I dont know what may happen, maybe bug will land on it, maybe not?

God does know what i will do. I do not. I have more or less potential free will if you can look at it that way. I cannot know precisely how the next five minutes will unfold and the situation that it will present, but i have the ability to predict what will happen. Like if i pull the trigger on a gun, a bullet will exit the barrel.

I dont think i have the right example to precisely show you what im talking about, but you can probably surmise what im saying.

The fact that I don't know what will happen does not mean I have free will. If from God's perspective - the "ultimate" one, you could say - I have no free will, then I don't. For example, let's say the government implanted a secret new mind-control device in my brain. Using this device, they can force me to do things - and at the same time, make me think that it's my own idea. But since I don't know this, I apparently have free will? No. Your own knowledge does not factor in to the equation.

Unless you're trying to say something else in that post...?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by darth_vector:

[B]Hi all,

I am a devout atheist, but am curious about what others think on this matter. Does anyone see any contradiction between an omnipotent god - if there is one, let us suppose for the sake of discussion that there is - and the free will of man? I have more to say on this, but would like to hear your opinions; atheists and alike theists are encouraged to reply.



I believe in god. i believe in the Holy Trinity(to a certain exstent),

but i also believe that,

a person who does not believe in God but still leads a "good"/peaceful life is definetly my equal.



There is nothing worse than those who pass judgement on atheists. That is for God and God alone...?

Omnipotence, the ability to control everything in the universe, doesn't mean God does everything in the universe.

Imagine you were a computer programmer and you created a virtual world like the Sims but with virtual artificial intelligences who determined whatever they wanted to do. You, being in control of the computer, could easily see everything going on in this world, and could easily change or control whatever you wanted - if you wanted. Whether you did that or not wouldn't change the fact that you're omnipotent in that world.

That scenario doesn't give you the ability to forsee what will happen in the future, but as a human being you move through time in a linear fashion. The typical definition of God does not limit him to existing within the four dimensions of our space-time, it defines him as being eternal and omnipresent - it is what God is, not what God can do. If he exists at all points of space-time concurrently, he should be able to see all events throughout time simultaneously, it's a matter of perspective.

This "problem" of conceptualising god illustrates one of the main reasons atheists think theists are irrational. The reality is that misunderstanding most commonly arises when people, atheist and theist alike, try to imagine god as having human characteristics.

Is it egotistical or narrow minded I don't know, but it's obviously the wrong way to go about things. What's funny in this case is that atheists think they are pointing out how stupid theists are, when in fact they are falling prey to an error in reasoning.

I find that there are certain questions which are cluttered with so many opinions, most of which can be destroyed through logic, that it is best to simply turn my back on all of it. It may not be beyond the humans ability to understand it, but it is beyond the humans ability to agree on it and/or just live despite differences in opinion. So much of this can do nothing more than drive a wedge between us all when put in the hands of human stupidity.

"The mass do not now take their opinions from dignitaries in Church or State, from ostensible leaders, or from books. Their thinking is done for them by men much like themselves, addressing or speaking in their name, on the spur of the moment…."

-John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

quote:Originally posted by imperfectcircle:



Is it egotistical or narrow minded I don't know, but it's obviously the wrong way to go about things. What's funny in this case is that atheists think they are pointing out how stupid theists are, when in fact they are falling prey to an error in reasoning.

The Bible describes God as being quite human.

quote:Imagine you were a computer programmer and you created a virtual world like the Sims but with virtual artificial intelligences who determined whatever they wanted to do. You, being in control of the computer, could easily see everything going on in this world, and could easily change or control whatever you wanted - if you wanted. Whether you did that or not wouldn't change the fact that you're omnipotent in that world.

Carrying on your example: You program a Sims-like game. You program the nature of the AIs, you set their position, etc. Now, not only are you all-powerful in this world but you also know what all will happen. Whatever your little people do, then, is because of you. They really have no choice in the matter. You may not be directly manipulating them, but what they do is a result of your actions all the same. Like a row of dominos: If you tip the first one, you know the last one is going to fall. You did it, though you didn't directly touch it.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

The Bible describes God as being quite human.

And people who form ideas about God based on taking scripture as literal truth are fundamentalists, who make the same mistake of thinking god is personal as most atheists. Many people believe in god without adhering strictly to one set of religious texts, or even one religion.

quote:Carrying on your example: You program a Sims-like game. You program the nature of the AIs, you set their position, etc. Now, not only are you all-powerful in this world but you also know what all will happen. Whatever your little people do, then, is because of you. They really have no choice in the matter. You may not be directly manipulating them, but what they do is a result of your actions all the same. Like a row of dominos: If you tip the first one, you know the last one is going to fall. You did it, though you didn't directly touch it.

My example was more to point out the distinction between a creator having ultimate power and necessarily using it, but in the context of that example you're missing the point that they are supposed to be self determining. An artificial intelligence would make decisions based on rules I made (which they could later change themselves), but not on any instructions or additional input I give them later. So all I'm doing is setting up the initial conditions, and beyond that I'm not interfering. I can't help have influenced it to a certain degree by deciding those initial conditions, but after a certain point my own personal influence will no longer be a factor. If you're going to use such a strict definition for free will that anything whose initial conditions weren't chosen by itself isn't free, then nothing in any universe could ever be considered free. Because for something to come into existence, it has to be created, and for something to go from non-existence to existence, something else has to create it.

[This message has been edited by imperfectcircle (edited 09-13-2005).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by imperfectcircle:

Imagine you were a computer programmer and you created a virtual world like the Sims but with virtual artificial intelligences who determined whatever they wanted to do. You, being in control of the computer, could easily see everything going on in this world, and could easily change or control whatever you wanted - if you wanted. Whether you did that or not wouldn't change the fact that you're omnipotent in that world.



brill.

A poor analogy of this:

You create the ballpark and the game, the players must obey the rules of the ballpark. You can draft players with certain abilities to play with/against one another. The players do what is within the rules of the ballpark, and their own ability to do. Though you draft the players, created the ballpark and it's rules, you don't control them actually pitching the ball.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

The fact that I don't know what will happen does not mean I have free will. If from God's perspective - the "ultimate" one, you could say - I have no free will, then I don't. For example, let's say the government implanted a secret new mind-control device in my brain. Using this device, they can force me to do things - and at the same time, make me think that it's my own idea. But since I don't know this, I apparently have free will? No. Your own knowledge does not factor in to the equation.

Unless you're trying to say something else in that post...?

Your post is the direct opposite of Gods manipulation of free will. Your scenario says that a higher force controls your thoughts and actions, however God does not work like that. He knows what your going to do, but you always make your own decision.

If i take out a bridge and i see your car coming, i KNOW that your going to die, but which way you swerve is up to you.

quote:Originally posted by imperfectcircle:

And people who form ideas about God based on taking scripture as literal truth are fundamentalists, who make the same mistake of thinking god is personal as most atheists. Many people believe in god without adhering strictly to one set of religious texts, or even one religion.

Ah. Then I have no argument with you, as I was basing my refutations from a literal interpretation of the Christian Bible, which includes a human and interventionalist God.

quote:Your post is the direct opposite of Gods manipulation of free will. Your scenario says that a higher force controls your thoughts and actions, however God does not work like that. He knows what your going to do, but you always make your own decision.

If i take out a bridge and i see your car coming, i KNOW that your going to die, but which way you swerve is up to you.

It was an example; it appeared to me that your original post was claiming that from God's perspective we don't have free will, but from ours we do, as we don't know what's going to happen.

quote:Imagine you were a computer programmer and you created a virtual world like the Sims but with virtual artificial intelligences who determined whatever they wanted to do. You, being in control of the computer, could easily see everything going on in this world, and could easily change or control whatever you wanted - if you wanted. Whether you did that or not wouldn't change the fact that you're omnipotent in that world.

for starters it "virtual artificial intelligence", which is an imitation of the real thing, not the thing itself. secondly, this world would be totaly predictable, even if you included "random" events because these would be predictable too. believe me, im a programmer.



quote:You create the ballpark and the game, the players must obey the rules of the ballpark. You can draft players with certain abilities to play with/against one another. The players do what is within the rules of the ballpark, and their own ability to do. Though you draft the players, created the ballpark and it's rules, you don't control them actually pitching the ball.

god didnt "draft" us. he made us - supposedly - and controls every minute detail. this is no different to the programming case above.

quote:If i take out a bridge and i see your car coming, i KNOW that your going to die, but which way you swerve is up to you.

bad example. suppose god is omniscient and takes away the bridge. he knows i will die but not which way i will swerve? if he doesnt know this detail he is not omniscient, and if he does i dont have the choice of swerving the other way. it simple appears to me that i do.

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

Your scenario says that a higher force controls your thoughts and actions, however God does not work like that. He knows what your going to do, but you always make your own decision.

If God knows the outcome to everything, everysingle decision that you are going to make, that can only mean that it is obivous to Him that there is only one possible outcome. An outcome pre-destined by Himself.

quote:Omnipotence, the ability to control everything in the universe, doesn't mean God does everything in the universe.

True, but God created everything in the universe, and also knows everything that these creations will do. Considering that he originally set into motion the psychological permutations that spawned decisions and "free thought," and he knew every single deed and outcome based on what His original creation was, nothing escapes God's will. The domino example was perfect: compared to God's omnipotence, all we are are dominos, he set our actions in motion knowing the outcome, and we are incapable of reversing it. It does not matter if God exists at all points in time, we do not, and as such, we have no control over the "domino effect."

quote:I can't help have influenced it to a certain degree by deciding those initial conditions, but after a certain point my own personal influence will no longer be a factor.

I'll have to disagree with you here. If you already knew every single facet, variable, permutation, and detail of what was to come from your creations, down to the smallest quanta, than the situation is completely controlled, no margin of error allowed, and your influence is still at 100%. Besides, if you created everything, then the only possible factors that could effect your creations are your other creations. Essentially, what I'm getting here is that every single action, thought, and decision can be traced back to God, and God knew of that decision while he was creating the seed, thus God controls it.

quote:This "problem" of conceptualising god illustrates one of the main reasons atheists think theists are irrational. The reality is that misunderstanding most commonly arises when people, atheist and theist alike, try to imagine god as having human characteristics.

Yes, I'll admit my claims that God is "an asshole" were just jabs at the Christian conception of God. You bring up a very good point here, I'll have to use it the next time I'm debating an athiest.

quote:If i take out a bridge and i see your car coming, i KNOW that your going to die, but which way you swerve is up to you.

Poor analogy, God would know which way I would swerve, he's known since he created the universe, but nontheless decided while creating the universe that this was to be what would happen, and left Fate to her machinations.

I'm really enjoying this debate, great points from both sides. Does anyone here find a flaw in the "Domino" analogy?

[This message has been edited by Shadout Mapes (edited 09-14-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by darth_vector:

for starters it "virtual artificial intelligence", which is an imitation of the real thing, not the thing itself. secondly, this world would be totaly predictable, even if you included "random" events because these would be predictable too. believe me, im a programmer.

I think you're forgetting that your brain is a biological computer, and that distinguishing artificial intelligence produced by an organic computer from one produced by a silicon based computer is a matter of semantics. Artificial intelligence doesn't exist now because the proper hardware and programming hasn't been created, but since it's been done through millions of years of evolution starting with amino acids. You can't compare tamagotchis with a theoretical fully fledged artificial intelligence just like you can't compare flies with human beings, it's a difference in terms of sophistication, nothing else. What makes us "real" artificial intelligences rather than "virtual" artificial intelligences?

quote:

I think you're forgetting that your brain is a biological computer, and that distinguishing artificial intelligence produced by an organic computer from one produced by a silicon based computer is a matter of semantics. Artificial intelligence doesn't exist now because the proper hardware and programming hasn't been created, but since it's been done through millions of years of evolution starting with amino acids. You can't compare tamagotchis with a theoretical fully fledged artificial intelligence just like you can't compare flies with human beings, it's a difference in terms of sophistication, nothing else. What makes us "real" artificial intelligences rather than "virtual" artificial intelligences?



Yes, this could be a problem. In fact I agree. The reason I said it is that most poeple I speak to seem to think otherwise; that "real" intelligence cant be reproduced by machines and that human brains are not just finite state machines. I disagree with this assesment, but it suited my argument http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

quote:Originally posted by Shadout Mapes:

True, but God created everything in the universe, and also knows everything that these creations will do. Considering that he originally set into motion the psychological permutations that spawned decisions and "free thought," and he knew every single deed and outcome based on what His original creation was, nothing escapes God's will. The domino example was perfect: compared to God's omnipotence, all we are are dominos, he set our actions in motion knowing the outcome, and we are incapable of reversing it. It does not matter if God exists at all points in time, we do not, and as such, we have no control over the "domino effect."

The domino effect implies some kind of determinism in the universe, that there are very fixed rules to existence and if you "restarted" the universe an infinite number or times, exactly the same thing would happen each time. This also means that this universe is the only one that ever existed, or ever will exist, but the problem here is that it contradicts the notion of god being infinite, as long as he is the cosmic "watchmaker" who designed the universe and set it in motion.

Does it make sense to you that God, being infinite, and being eternal, would only run this universe once? Perhaps he runs every different permutation of the universe, being infinite and eternal he has the time and capacity, and each time he knew in advance how things would turn out. These are the only two possibilities for beings in the universe to not have any free will over the decisions they make, moved around like pieces on a chess board by God.

But here are the problems with that. First, it presumes that God is some kind of individual with a personality. But if God has traits x, y and z, then it means he is lacking traits "not x", "not y" and "not z". This means he is not infinite, he is finite. Second, taking all those different universes as a whole set, there is still an imaginable set of potential universes seemingly identical to the ones God has set in motion, but where beings made choices from their own free will. If you define God as being that individual personality, plus the universes he has created, there is still a larger realm of possible things that are not a part of him, so again he is no longer infinite.

Putting that to one side for a second, you are still presuming that God "knows" what will happen in the future as opposed to "now". But how can God exist in any sense that you can call "now", because if he exists "now", then by definition he doesn't exist at any other time, which would mean he is not eternal and infinite. Keep in mind that the only reason we as humans perceive time as passing between past, present and future, is because we exist as seperate from the universe around us. Time is nothing more than the motion of particles relative to each other.

If God is every single particle in the universe, in the past, in the present and in the future, then he doesn't so much perceive the future, he is the past, present and future simultaneously.

So back to our universe, presuming that in some sense the past, present and future of our universe is fixed, and God exists along the entire timeline simultaneously, his knowing the outcome wouldn't be what makes our choices lack free will, it would be the deterministic nature of the universe, but that's beside the point. What matters is that if this universe exists alone as a closed system, there is an infinite number of possible alternate universes that could have existed, and if they do not God is not infintite, therefore they must exist, and God must equally exist at all points in time and space for them too. This makes God the sum total of all possible permutations and histories of the universe, he doesn't so much know everything as he is everything.

The question then is really nothing to do with if we are free because God knows everything that will happen for all time. Because if God knows everything that can potentially happen in any universe (to him it all "happens" at once), and they all exist, the question is: in this universe, is the future knowable because every single development is fixed in place due to deterministic laws, presumably of the physics of matter within the universe.

God's knowledge couldn't have any effect on the outcome of this universe, so what matters is whether we can freely choose things based on the structure and functioning of our brains.



[This message has been edited by imperfectcircle (edited 09-16-2005).]

My personal take on things is that our brains function chaotically on some subatomic level to the extent that probablities can be manipulated by a nonphysical "soul" that runs alongside the body occupying the same spacetime coordinates, giving us free will contrained by the influencing memories, biochemical disposition of the brain, etc, sort of free will with conditions. But obviously that requires an assumption on my part, just my two cents on the matter anyway.

[This message has been edited by imperfectcircle (edited 09-16-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by imperfectcircle:

a nonphysical "soul" that runs alongside the body occupying the same spacetime coordinates, giving us free will

There is no need for that hyphothesis, or evidence for it. People tend to make decisions in keeping with events in this reality, not some unknown parrellel universe.

quote:Originally posted by Viraljimmy:

There is no need for that hyphothesis, or evidence for it. People tend to make decisions in keeping with events in this reality, not some unknown parrellel universe.

I'm not trying to convince anybody of that last part, I'm very aware it's a complete assumption on my part. It was something revealed to me while I meditated after eating an eighth of magic mushrooms, so it's pretty impossible to explain what I mean by it in words, it came to me in images mostly. I love mushrooms.

quote:Originally posted by imperfectcircle:

The domino effect implies some kind of determinism in the universe that there are very fixed rules to existence and if you "restarted" the universe an infinite number or times, exactly the same thing would happen each time. This also means that this universe is the only one that ever existed, or ever will exist, but the problem here is that it contradicts the notion of god being infinite, as long as he is the cosmic "watchmaker" who designed the universe and set it in motion.

Does it make sense to you that God, being infinite, and being eternal, would only run this universe once? Perhaps he runs every different permutation of the universe, being infinite and eternal he has the time and capacity, and each time he knew in advance how things would turn out. These are the only two possibilities for beings in the universe to not have any free will over the decisions they make, moved around like pieces on a <a style='text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=24&k=chess%20board" onmouseover="window.status='chess board'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">chess board</a> by God.

I originally thought about including determinism in my argument, then I realized that with God, no such argument is needed, since anything that could possibly be determined would be determined by him.

I used my example on the small scale of one universe because it was easier for me, and yes, I do think your last example is an accurate description of what I'm thinking, except for one thing. All I'm assuming is that God set these universes in motion, I don't see why that would lead to him moving us around "like <a style='text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=24&k=chess%20pieces" onmouseover="window.status='chess pieces'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">chess pieces</a>" - why is this conclusion neccesary?

quote:But here are the problems with that. First, it presumes that God is some kind of individual with a personality. But if God has traits x, y and z, then it means he is lacking traits "not x", "not y" and "not z". This means he is not infinite, he is finite. Second, taking all those different universes as a whole set, there is still an imaginable set of potential universes seemingly identical to the ones God has set in motion, but where beings made choices from their own free will. If you define God as being that individual personality, plus the universes he has created, there is still a larger realm of possible things that are not a part of him, so again he is no longer infinite.

You claim God must have a personality under my hypothesis, is this based on your "chess player" conclusion above? Otherwise, you're making a bit of a jump from omniscience to character traits.

In the later part of this paragraph, you pretty much refute omnipotence - which I have no problem with. I consider omnipotence to be one of the most absurd concepts created, and I'm attempting to be hypothetical in my arguments (hence why I confined myself to a single universe).

quote:Putting that to one side for a second, you are still presuming that God "knows" what will happen in the future as opposed to "now". But how can God exist in any sense that you can call "now", because if he exists "now", then by definition he doesn't exist at any other time, which would mean he is not eternal and infinite. Keep in mind that the only reason we as humans perceive time as passing between <a style='text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 3px double;' href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=24&k=past%20present%20and%20future" onmouseover="window.status='past, present and future'; return true;" onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">past, present and future</a>, is because we exist as seperate from the universe around us. Time is nothing more than the motion of particles relative to each other.

I remember contemplating this, looking back at my last post I'm surprised because I do come off sounding ignorant of this consideration. It makes omnipotence seem even more irrational. In any case, the since God apparently left us to our free will at the finite point of time (which he occupied, along with every other point) in which the universe was conceived, and he still created the universe (and all universes) in such a way so that no other outcome was possible. Since he exists at all points, and knows all, there is no other possibility (other than the nonexistence of omnipotence).

quote:If God is every single particle in the universe, in the past, in the present and in the future, then he doesn't so much perceive the future, he is the past, present and future simultaneously.

So back to our universe, presuming that in some sense the past, present and future of our universe is fixed, and God exists along the entire timeline simultaneously, his knowing the outcome wouldn't be what makes our choices lack free will, it would be the deterministic nature of the universe, but that's beside the point. What matters is that if this universe exists alone as a closed system, there is an infinite number of possible alternate universes that could have existed, and if they do not God is not infintite, therefore they must exist, and God must equally exist at all points in time and space for them too. This makes God the sum total of all possible permutations and histories of the universe, he doesn't so much know everything as he is everything.

If he is every particle (including us), what about free will?

quote:The question then is really nothing to do with if we are free because God knows everything that will happen for all time. Because if God knows everything that can potentially happen in any universe (to him it all "happens" at once), and they all exist, the question is: in this universe, is the future knowable because every single development is fixed in place due to deterministic laws, presumably of the physics of matter within the universe.

I'm afraid I don't follow. Isn't the point of this topic to determine if free will and omnipotence are mutually exclusive? Why is free will suddenly not the question? Also, as mentioned above, for an omnipotent God, deterministic elements of the universe would not neccesarily be scientific or governed by laws, they would be created by him (since obviously anything not created by God would imply God being finite).

quote:God's knowledge couldn't have any effect on the outcome of this universe, so what matters is whether we can freely choose things based on the structure and functioning of our brains.

It's not God's knowledge that's effecting the universe, it's the idea that if an entity other than ourselves created every permutation of every infinite universe and, existing at every point in time, had already discerned the outcome of such creations, then our brains are controlled by his own determinism (whether scientific or otherwise).

Thanks for the good reply.

[This message has been edited by Shadout Mapes (edited 09-17-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by imperfectcircle:

The domino effect implies some kind of determinism in the universe, that there are very fixed rules to existence and if you "restarted" the universe an infinite number or times, exactly the same thing would happen each time. This also means that this universe is the only one that ever existed, or ever will exist, but the problem here is that it contradicts the notion of god being infinite, as long as he is the cosmic "watchmaker" who designed the universe and set it in motion.

Does it make sense to you that God, being infinite, and being eternal, would only run this universe once? Perhaps he runs every different permutation of the universe, being infinite and eternal he has the time and capacity, and each time he knew in advance how things would turn out. These are the only two possibilities for beings in the universe to not have any free will over the decisions they make, moved around like pieces on a chess board by God.

But here are the problems with that. First, it presumes that God is some kind of individual with a personality. But if God has traits x, y and z, then it means he is lacking traits "not x", "not y" and "not z". This means he is not infinite, he is finite. Second, taking all those different universes as a whole set, there is still an imaginable set of potential universes seemingly identical to the ones God has set in motion, but where beings made choices from their own free will. If you define God as being that individual personality, plus the universes he has created, there is still a larger realm of possible things that are not a part of him, so again he is no longer infinite.

Putting that to one side for a second, you are still presuming that God "knows" what will happen in the future as opposed to "now". But how can God exist in any sense that you can call "now", because if he exists "now", then by definition he doesn't exist at any other time, which would mean he is not eternal and infinite. Keep in mind that the only reason we as humans perceive time as passing between past, present and future, is because we exist as seperate from the universe around us. Time is nothing more than the motion of particles relative to each other.

If God is every single particle in the universe, in the past, in the present and in the future, then he doesn't so much perceive the future, he is the past, present and future simultaneously.

So back to our universe, presuming that in some sense the past, present and future of our universe is fixed, and God exists along the entire timeline simultaneously, his knowing the outcome wouldn't be what makes our choices lack free will, it would be the deterministic nature of the universe, but that's beside the point. What matters is that if this universe exists alone as a closed system, there is an infinite number of possible alternate universes that could have existed, and if they do not God is not infintite, therefore they must exist, and God must equally exist at all points in time and space for them too. This makes God the sum total of all possible permutations and histories of the universe, he doesn't so much know everything as he is everything.

The question then is really nothing to do with if we are free because God knows everything that will happen for all time. Because if God knows everything that can potentially happen in any universe (to him it all "happens" at once), and they all exist, the question is: in this universe, is the future knowable because every single development is fixed in place due to deterministic laws, presumably of the physics of matter within the universe.

God's knowledge couldn't have any effect on the outcome of this universe, so what matters is whether we can freely choose things based on the structure and functioning of our brains.



Wonderful post and I will certainly have to think more on it, but at first glance it appears to me to contradict or not exactly fit with Fundementalist Christianity (or at least a literal interpretation of an apparently inerrant Bible). I think you've said before that you consider such limited thinking just as bad as devout Atheism, but just to make sure: are you aware that this does not fit with such fundementalism? Because if it's just intended for a general type of God who may or may not exist, I have no problem with it - but if you are defending a literal Biblical god, I will have to debate you and as I'm a lazy bugger I don't want to do that. http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif) Thanks.



[This message has been edited by Twisted_Ferret (edited 09-19-2005).]

Oh I'm not defending any literal interpretation of God for even a second, I think that mentality is contrary to a meaningful spiritual interpretation of the universe. I much prefer how the Greeks used to talk about God, they would would talk about all the good things in the world as part of God, "love is theos", "life is theos" etc. Then along came the Christian way of thinking about God and turned things on it's head, defining God as being these things. "God is love", "God is life", in a way separating God from the universe around and in us, and in the process creating an artificial abstract notion of God, about as relevent to people in the real world as some character in a novel.

For what it's worth btw, here's the idea of God that I subscribe to. Basically that god is a consciousness formed as an emergent property of all points of spacetime from all potential universes simultaneously, this is the input, while at the same time the output of this consciousness is to sustain the creative force behind each of those points, the energy that binds all universes together. This is essentially the concept put forward by the panentheistic (different from pantheism) concept of god, and if you think about it, it allows us to describe God as being omnipotent, while having no conflict with us having free will. Not only that, but it makes an appearance in Christianity too, although in the Orthodox Church.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism for anyone interested in reading a little more on it