God and Free Will

[DonkNitUP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
God clearly cant be all knowing yet still give free will. Before you were born, not even having set a foot on this Eath God knows ur future if he is all knowing. How is this free will? It is.

Also, God is all good, right? Well before you set a foot on this earth he also knows if you are going to heaven or hell (since he is all knowing) so basically before you are born, God (as most religious people know Him) knows some people are going to hell. some kind of all-good god that is!

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you considered that maybe God knows what the actions of your free will will be? If somebody can genuinely see in to the future and know what will happen to you, this doesn't stop you from making those choices. I don't see why no other theist has mentioned this (well they might have, but I haven't read it yet).

Free will =/= no omni 3 God

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, its been mentioned.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think the point still stands that i have mentioned in a previous post. once God has taken ur life u no longer have free will as he has acted upon it

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that is stated too strongly. Once God has taken your life, that influences your choices, but doesnt eliminate free will.

Couldnt you just as easily posit "once atheism has taken your life, you have no free will"? I dont see the distinction.

[/ QUOTE ]

i meant.. if we assume (and there is for this arguments sake) that there is a God and he takes ur life (noahs arks flood, 10 commandments or at any other point in the Bible where it says God killed someone, then we have to assume there is no free will.
If God is standing on the outside looking in at our choices that is fine. But as soon as he influences our choices (by him killing us) we no longer have a choice. -- Basically I was just saying what i said in a previous post. I know Bunny said we have only so long to make our choices and then God can interact but i think its still not free will if, at any point, he interacts and causes something.
As for if there was no God then the argument wouldnt need to be made, i wouldnt think

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
i meant.. if we assume (and there is for this arguments sake) that there is a God and he takes ur life (noahs arks flood, 10 commandments or at any other point in the Bible where it says God killed someone, then we have to assume there is no free will.
If God is standing on the outside looking in at our choices that is fine. But as soon as he influences our choices (by him killing us) we no longer have a choice. -- Basically I was just saying what i said in a previous post. I know Bunny said we have only so long to make our choices and then God can interact but i think its still not free will if, at any point, he interacts and causes something.
As for if there was no God then the argument wouldnt need to be made, i wouldnt think

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont see how this follows - assuming there is no God and I am going through life, making free choices and a tree falls on me killing me...has the tree curtailed my free will in some way? Only in the sense that it limits the period of time in which I can exercise it but this is true of everything I do - I cant breathe after that either but it doesnt mean breathing doesnt exist.

[DonkNitUP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i meant.. if we assume (and there is for this arguments sake) that there is a God and he takes ur life (noahs arks flood, 10 commandments or at any other point in the Bible where it says God killed someone, then we have to assume there is no free will.
If God is standing on the outside looking in at our choices that is fine. But as soon as he influences our choices (by him killing us) we no longer have a choice. -- Basically I was just saying what i said in a previous post. I know Bunny said we have only so long to make our choices and then God can interact but i think its still not free will if, at any point, he interacts and causes something.
As for if there was no God then the argument wouldnt need to be made, i wouldnt think

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont see how this follows - assuming there is no God and I am going through life, making free choices and a tree falls on me killing me...has the tree curtailed my free will in some way? Only in the sense that it limits the period of time in which I can exercise it but this is true of everything I do - I cant breathe after that either but it doesnt mean breathing doesnt exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

no no..i dont think im trying to get across what im saying...if there is no God, we obviously have free will.
(lets assume noahs ark is a true story, or 10 commandments or some other piece in the Bible where God kills, but for this example the ark.)
If there is no God:
1. A flood happens, you die.. sorry you are SoL thats just survival of the fittest
If there is a God that doesnt intervene with lives:
2. A flood happens, you die.. same as number 1.. survival of the fittest still applies because God didnt control your death
If there is a God (who has killed people as in the Bible):
3. A flood happens WHICH HE CAUSED, you... you do not have free will. There is no survival of the fittest there because he intervened and purposely did it

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i meant.. if we assume (and there is for this arguments sake) that there is a God and he takes ur life (noahs arks flood, 10 commandments or at any other point in the Bible where it says God killed someone, then we have to assume there is no free will.
If God is standing on the outside looking in at our choices that is fine. But as soon as he influences our choices (by him killing us) we no longer have a choice. -- Basically I was just saying what i said in a previous post. I know Bunny said we have only so long to make our choices and then God can interact but i think its still not free will if, at any point, he interacts and causes something.
As for if there was no God then the argument wouldnt need to be made, i wouldnt think

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont see how this follows - assuming there is no God and I am going through life, making free choices and a tree falls on me killing me...has the tree curtailed my free will in some way? Only in the sense that it limits the period of time in which I can exercise it but this is true of everything I do - I cant breathe after that either but it doesnt mean breathing doesnt exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

no no..i dont think im trying to get across what im saying...if there is no God, we obviously have free will.
(lets assume noahs ark is a true story, or 10 commandments or some other piece in the Bible where God kills, but for this example the ark.)
If there is no God:
1. A flood happens, you die.. sorry you are SoL thats just survival of the fittest
If there is a God that doesnt intervene with lives:
2. A flood happens, you die.. same as number 1.. survival of the fittest still applies because God didnt control your death
If there is a God (who has killed people as in the Bible):
3. A flood happens WHICH HE CAUSED, you... you do not have free will. There is no survival of the fittest there because he intervened and purposely did it

[/ QUOTE ]
I understand you are asserting there is a difference because God intervened and purposely did it. I dont see why this should be true though. Change my example to be a murderer intervening and purposely killing me rather than a tree falling on me. Does my murder mean I dont have free will?

[guesswest]

[ QUOTE ]
if there is no God, we obviously have free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this obvious? It'd remove one of the barriers to free will but the biggie would still stand. Namely this idea that the universe works causally and our 'actions' are just a part of that causal sequence.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason I asked about internal contradictoins vs contradictions between attributes is - if a contradiction emerges and you have to change the meaning of one of these attributes, which one do you change, which do you diminish? And how to you decide that, is it arbitrary?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry - missed this when you posted it. I try and form my opinion based on evidence - hence rationally. If I cant do that, I am forced by my theistic beliefs to make an irrational choice (ie I go by what feels right or I maintain contradictory beliefs).

For example, in the originally posed problem:
"God knows everything" (is omniscient)
"God exists everywhere simultaneously" (is omnipresent)
Leads to the conclusion that there is no free will. I have evidence there is free will, so must amend one of these premises. I have previously found "God exists everywhere simultaneously" to lead to other contradictions - this is my reason for limiting his omnipresence rather than his omniscience.

My position throughout this thread is that I change and amend my beliefs as my understanding deepens. Ultimately I believe in God and think there is a fact of the matter about all these questions. God knows the truth about them and my struggles with defining terms is not something he has to go through. Adopting this position seems best to me (in a pascal's wager kind of way) since if I am right and a logically consistent God exists then I will come to a better knowledge of him (which is probably a good thing). If God doesnt exist then I will probably discover this truth through trying to nail down and clarify exactly what the consequences of his existing would be.

[DonkNitUP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if there is no God, we obviously have free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this obvious? It'd remove one of the barriers to free will but the biggie would still stand. Namely this idea that the universe works causally and our 'actions' are just a part of that causal sequence.

[/ QUOTE ]

so say we are atheist and there is no god.. you are telling me that without a God the universe is based on predistination? if so, what rational are you using to come up with this?

[DonkNitUP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i meant.. if we assume (and there is for this arguments sake) that there is a God and he takes ur life (noahs arks flood, 10 commandments or at any other point in the Bible where it says God killed someone, then we have to assume there is no free will.
If God is standing on the outside looking in at our choices that is fine. But as soon as he influences our choices (by him killing us) we no longer have a choice. -- Basically I was just saying what i said in a previous post. I know Bunny said we have only so long to make our choices and then God can interact but i think its still not free will if, at any point, he interacts and causes something.
As for if there was no God then the argument wouldnt need to be made, i wouldnt think

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont see how this follows - assuming there is no God and I am going through life, making free choices and a tree falls on me killing me...has the tree curtailed my free will in some way? Only in the sense that it limits the period of time in which I can exercise it but this is true of everything I do - I cant breathe after that either but it doesnt mean breathing doesnt exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

no no..i dont think im trying to get across what im saying...if there is no God, we obviously have free will.
(lets assume noahs ark is a true story, or 10 commandments or some other piece in the Bible where God kills, but for this example the ark.)
If there is no God:
1. A flood happens, you die.. sorry you are SoL thats just survival of the fittest
If there is a God that doesnt intervene with lives:
2. A flood happens, you die.. same as number 1.. survival of the fittest still applies because God didnt control your death
If there is a God (who has killed people as in the Bible):
3. A flood happens WHICH HE CAUSED, you... you do not have free will. There is no survival of the fittest there because he intervened and purposely did it

[/ QUOTE ]
I understand you are asserting there is a difference because God intervened and purposely did it. I dont see why this should be true though. Change my example to be a murderer intervening and purposely killing me rather than a tree falling on me. Does my murder mean I dont have free will?

[/ QUOTE ]

bunny, i still dont understand your point. It seems to me if a murderer killed you that would be more of a basis for free will-- seeing how the murderer had a choice to kill you or not.

whether there is a god or not doesnt matter (according to your premise of having free will and god being a bystander or observer)--meaning no matter what there is free will.

How can you say we still maintain free will even if God kills us though? It seems to me that if a tree, a murderer, a stone, water or anything killed us then we were meant to die.
As soon as God INTERACTS WITH US(because of you saying he is an observer and does not interact with us in our world.. therefore our free will) how do you leave us the choice of COMPLETE free will?

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
bunny, i still dont understand your point. It seems to me if a murderer killed you that would be more of a basis for free will-- seeing how the murderer had a choice to kill you or not.

whether there is a god or not doesnt matter (according to your premise of having free will and god being a bystander or observer)--meaning no matter what there is free will.

How can you say we still maintain free will even if God kills us though? It seems to me that if a tree, a murderer, a stone, water or anything killed us then we were meant to die.
As soon as God INTERACTS WITH US(because of you saying he is an observer and does not interact with us in our world.. therefore our free will) how do you leave us the choice of COMPLETE free will?

[/ QUOTE ]
My question to you was why does God's killing me imply I do not have free will? Your answer was that it was because he intervened and purposely did it.
I then suggested this would imply that a murderer intervening and purposely killing me would also imply I have no free will - a conclusion you say does not follow.

I guess I would ask what's the difference? If my life is cut short by tree, God, murderer, old age...I've still been making choices up til then and have had free will for as long as I am alive. If it isnt the "intervening" and "purposive" nature of God acting which limits my free will, what is it?

To requote:
[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me if a murderer killed you that would be more of a basis for free will-- seeing how the murderer had a choice to kill you or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As soon as God INTERACTS WITH US...how do you leave us the choice of COMPLETE free will?

[/ QUOTE ]
Isnt this "more of a basis for free will" seeing how God had a choice to kill me or not?

[DonkNitUP]

how can u say God and the tree or the murderer are all the same..meaning you do not have free will in each scenario?
Obviously if all 3 kill you, you do not have free will. My stance is, is that if something part of nature or the physical Earth kills you that is part of this Earth and you die, whether an accident, part of nature or whatever. In your examples you say that God is present past and future and is not apart of your "choice or free will"... but once he interacts with us (kills us as with the flood or whatever) then he no longer gives us free will. Obviously everyone has to die. If it is done by nature.. a tree, a murdered, cancer, something physical on Earth, that is one thing.. for God.. the supernatural being.. for whom you say is a bystander and does not interact and influence our decisions, IMO i think that draws the line of free will.

A tree can not interact or draw conclusions and is not a higher being in which we go to.
A muderer has free will in which he draws his conclusions for which some of us have to follow.
God is the supernatural being in which he,according to you is the bystander watching our "choice" we make. How can u see once he kills you we are still maintaining free will?