Does God have free will?

[Aqualung]

Sounds like double talk to me... Maybe a little circular logic...

Maybe. But I was just clearifying when the change took place, and I was never the one to say that God doesn't change his mind. He never changes his plan, but sometimes he has to change how that plan works, because of the sins of man.

 

[bartdanr]

Didn't he change his mind from the old testament to the new? He went from just destroying cities, lands and people to sending them to hell for eternity.

Hi Radar, thanks for the post.

If you just focus on the Bible, then yes, I think you'd have some serious difficulty reconciling the concepts of God in them.

Peace

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Hi Terry, thanks for your post.

If God has perfect knowledge of what will occur in the future, and that perfect knowledge includes the knowledge of his/her own actions, then God could never "change his/her mind." If s/he did so, then that would mean that his/her foreknowledge was either incomplete or false.

Does that make sense?

Peace

You seem to be fixed on the notion that God's omniscience prevents him doing any thing or changing things.... This is a very strange view of omniscience.... which implies he can do any thing.

Terry
_____________________________-
Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.

 

[bartdanr]

You seem to be fixed on the notion that God's omniscience prevents him doing any thing or changing things.... This is a very strange view of omniscience.... which implies he can do any thing.

Terry
_____________________________-
Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.

Hi Terry, thanks for the post.

I think you're confusing omniscience with omnipotence. Omniscience is "all-knowing" and omnipotence is "all-powerful".

I believe that it is a logical imopossibility to speak of a being who has an absolute knowledge of what will, beyond question, occur--and that this being also has the power to change what will occur in the future. If s/he can change what s/he foreknows, then this would mean that his/her foreknowledge is false.

Now, I think it is logical to believe in a being that knows what might occur, given a certain initial condition, and indeed that this will, in fact occur if nothing is done (i.e., the knowledgable being does not intervene to change what otherwise will occur.) And it is logical for that being to have the power to intervene and change that course. It is also logical to believe that a being foreordains everything that occurs.

(Of course, "logical" doesn't mean "true", it just means "theoretically possible.")

Example: if I had the foreknowledge that I would, beyond a shadow of doubt, be hit by a truck while walking to work next Tuesday at exactly 7:57am, then I cannot change that fact. If I could change it, then my foreknowledge is not "beyond a shadow of a doubt" and it is not absolute. However, it is theoretically possible to have foreknowledge that unless I decide to take another course of action certain things will inevitably take place. I could decide to stay home that day; I could decide to wait until 8:00am to walk to work. This way, I still would have freedom of action; however, if my knowledge of the future is complete and immutable, then it is utterly impossible to take any action that will steer a course away from it.

Does this make sense?

Peace

 

[michel]

Just a little 'down to earth' reality check, if no one minds; "Does God have free will ?" (the title of this thread) - I don't know, how can I ? - I can have no conception of what God is like.


Isn't this a tad unnecessary? - I mean, does he have a beard, and if so, what colour ? - Why do we try so hard to dress him up with human traits?:help:

 

[bartdanr]

Just a little 'down to earth' reality check, if no one minds; "Does God have free will ?" (the title of this thread) - I don't know, how can I ? - I can have no conception of what God is like.


Isn't this a tad unnecessary? - I mean, does he have a beard, and if so, what colour ? - Why do we try so hard to dress him up with human traits?:help:

Hi Michel, thanks for your post.

Well, this forum would be pretty pointless if we weren't into speculating or discussing ideas about what God is like, wouldn't it be?

I would say if we can have no conception of what God is like, then we are agnostics (maybe we all truly are, in that we don't know about God, we have faith). It would be pointless to say "God is love", or "God is really powerful" or even "God exists" if we can have no conception of what God is like.

Peace

 

[michel]

Hi Michel, thanks for your post.

Well, this forum would be pretty pointless if we weren't into speculating or discussing ideas about what God is like, wouldn't it be?

I would say if we can have no conception of what God is like, then we are agnostics (maybe we all truly are, in that we don't know about God, we have faith). It would be pointless to say "God is love", or "God is really powerful" or even "God exists" if we can have no conception of what God is like.

Peace

Ah there is a big difference between the attributes that we know God has (infinite Love for one) - and trying to visualize him with Human attributes.

It would be so easy for me to say "Of course he has free will" he is all things - but I doubt that you would be happy with that answer.

 

[bartdanr]

Ah there is a big difference between the attributes that we know God has (infinite Love for one) - and trying to visualize him with Human attributes.

It would be so easy for me to say "Of course he has free will" he is all things - but I doubt that you would be happy with that answer.

Hi Michel, thanks for the post.

First, I would question that we "know" that God has infinite Love. That is a statement of belief, and I would have to examine the evidence for and against it before I stated that "God has infinite love" or "God does not have infinite love." We also would need to define what "infinite love" means.

Second, how is "infinite love" any more or less of a "human" attribute than "free will"?

Peace

 

[michel]

Hi Michel, thanks for the post.

First, I would question that we "know" that God has infinite Love. That is a statement of belief, and I would have to examine the evidence for and against it before I stated that "God has infinite love" or "God does not have infinite love." We also would need to define what "infinite love" means.

Second, how is "infinite love" any more or less of a "human" attribute than "free will"?

Peace

I doubt that you'll accept the source, because it is from scripture; the evidence is that God allowed -not just allowed, but put his only begotten son- in the position of having to be stoned, crucified, so that our sins could be forgiven; that is the extent of God's love for mankind - I think that's pretty impressive - I couldn't put either of my Children through that, could you?

Infinite love, as I said, is a characteristic that comes through because of God's actions; there is nothing in the scriptures that point to God having free will - so therefore, there is no 'proof' (and that is even if you accept the first to be 'proved', which I doubt.

 

[bartdanr]

I doubt that you'll accept the source, because it is from scripture; the evidence is that God allowed -not just allowed, but put his only begotten son- in the position of having to be stoned, crucified, so that our sins could be forgiven; that is the extent of God's love for mankind - I think that's pretty impressive - I couldn't put either of my Children through that, could you?

Infinite love, as I said, is a characteristic that comes through because of God's actions; there is nothing in the scriptures that point to God having free will - so therefore, there is no 'proof' (and that is even if you accept the first to be 'proved', which I doubt.

Hi Michel, thanks for the reponse.

If you accept the Bible as authority, then consider the numerous times where it is said that God chooses a particular course of action. It even shows him/her changing his/her mind. Indeed, there are many places where rather 'human' characteristics (such as a wide variety of emotions) are attributed to God, and are given as explanations of his/her actions. I think it's pretty clear that, according to the Bible, God operates with what we might call a "free will".

As to God sending his/her son to die for us as an example of perfect love: this is a bit off-topic, and perhaps we should start a new thread: but I do not consider it an example of perfect love, as described in the Bible or understood by most Christians.

Peace

 

[flacsmada]

God has mapped a lot of things out in His word and choosing our own "hill" isn't part of His map. He says in romans 12:1 "therefore i urge you brothers in view of GOd's mercy to offer your bodies as a living sacriface Holy and pleasing to Him." He simply ask us to submit to Him, but we tend to turn to our own ways, or choose our own Hill.

Adam

 

[michel]

Hi Michel, thanks for the reponse.

If you accept the Bible as authority, then consider the numerous times where it is said that God chooses a particular course of action. It even shows him/her changing his/her mind. Indeed, there are many places where rather 'human' characteristics (such as a wide variety of emotions) are attributed to God, and are given as explanations of his/her actions. I think it's pretty clear that, according to the Bible, God operates with what we might call a "free will".

As to God sending his/her son to die for us as an example of perfect love: this is a bit off-topic, and perhaps we should start a new thread: but I do not consider it an example of perfect love, as described in the Bible or understood by most Christians.

Peace

I suppose you are right; I was thinking more in terms of the 'Now' - in that I don't believe God plays an 'active part' - I do accept the Bible, but not as the 'be all and end all' , which might well be disputed by others.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Hi Terry, thanks for the post.

I think you're confusing omniscience with omnipotence. Omniscience is "all-knowing" and omnipotence is "all-powerful".

I believe that it is a logical imopossibility to speak of a being who has an absolute knowledge of what will, beyond question, occur--and that this being also has the power to change what will occur in the future. If s/he can change what s/he foreknows, then this would mean that his/her foreknowledge is false.

Now, I think it is logical to believe in a being that knows what might occur, given a certain initial condition, and indeed that this will, in fact occur if nothing is done (i.e., the knowledgable being does not intervene to change what otherwise will occur.) And it is logical for that being to have the power to intervene and change that course. It is also logical to believe that a being foreordains everything that occurs.

(Of course, "logical" doesn't mean "true", it just means "theoretically possible.")

Example: if I had the foreknowledge that I would, beyond a shadow of doubt, be hit by a truck while walking to work next Tuesday at exactly 7:57am, then I cannot change that fact. If I could change it, then my foreknowledge is not "beyond a shadow of a doubt" and it is not absolute. However, it is theoretically possible to have foreknowledge that unless I decide to take another course of action certain things will inevitably take place. I could decide to stay home that day; I could decide to wait until 8:00am to walk to work. This way, I still would have freedom of action; however, if my knowledge of the future is complete and immutable, then it is utterly impossible to take any action that will steer a course away from it.

Does this make sense?

Peace

Thats where you and I differ. God can do any thing. I would say he is both omnniscient and omnipotent They go with the terretory.

In your example you are not able see into the future so the example wont work, you are not God. but if God wants to change his mind, that's OK by me.

Terry
____________________________-
Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.

 

[bartdanr]

Thats where you and I differ. God can do any thing. I would say he is both omnniscient and omnipotent They go with the terretory.

In your example you are not able see into the future so the example wont work, you are not God. but if God wants to change his mind, that's OK by me.

Terry
____________________________-
Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.

Hi Terry, thanks for your post.

Here's another way to look at it: can God be wrong? Can God make be mistaken about the future?

Let's say that 1,000,000 years ago God said, "I can foresee exactly what will happen in the future, and exactly 999,961 years from now I'll make a guy with brown eyes that will call himself 'bardanr' on the Religious Forums.

Then let's say that 500,000 years ago God said, "No, wait--I change my mind. I'll make his eyes blue."

Now, did God know 1,000,000 million years ago that 500,000 years ago he'd 'change his/her mind'? If not, then his/her knowledge of the future was incomplete. And if s/he knew for certain that s/he was going to make my eyes brown, then his/her knowledge would be false--God would be wrong.

Now, if God did, in fact know that s/he was going to 'change his/her mind' 500,000 years ago, then he might know 1,000,000 years ago that his/her intention was to give me brown eyes, but s/he would also know that s/he would not follow through on his/her intention--no matter what God wanted at the time, s/he also knew that this desire would not come to pass: s/he would eventually make me with blue eyes.

If a being knows for certain what he or she will do in the future, I believe that has profound effects on the freedom of the will. There would never be a point in time where God could change the course of what inevitably take place.

Only if God's knowledge of the future is contingent and not absolute can God be said to 'change his/her mind' or even decide to do something.

Thus, a view of omniscience that includes an absolute foreknowledge of the future is incompatible with choice or freedom of the will. It's not a matter of religious faith or dogma, it's just a logical impossiblity.

Now, one may chose to believe in logical impossibilities, but then the universe becomes ultimately unintelligble.

Peace

 

[bartdanr]

I suppose you are right; I was thinking more in terms of the 'Now' - in that I don't believe God plays an 'active part' - I do accept the Bible, but not as the 'be all and end all' , which might well be disputed by others.

Hi Michel, thanks for your post.

I also wanted to add that without a free will, I think love is impossible. If I am compelled to take some action, I don't see how it can be loving. If God was compelled to allow his/her son to die, then it can't be said to be an act of love--it's an act of compulsion. (And if God is compelled to do anything, then it is hard to call him omnipotent--something has greater power than God.) So even if God's free will is not addressed as such in the Bible, the rest of the Bible--including the concept that "God has perfect love"--becomes meaningless.

Peace

 

[bartdanr]

I suppose you are right; I was thinking more in terms of the 'Now' - in that I don't believe God plays an 'active part' - I do accept the Bible, but not as the 'be all and end all' , which might well be disputed by others.

Hi Michel,

I just started a new thread, asking the question "Was Jesus' sacrifice significant?" Feel free to address the question about the meaning of the cross and how it demonstrated God's love to you.

I look forward to our continued dialogue.

Peace

 

[bartdanr]

If God smites people, then how come he doesn't send a hurricane after me, an Atheist in Massachusetts?

Instead he sent a hurricane down the bible belt.

That should tell everybody something about whether God is really involved in our lives.

Hi Anon, thanks for your post.

I don't know if I'd call New Orleans "the Bible belt." Indeed, now some people are saying Katrina was punishment for sin in that city.

However, your point is taken--and the problem of natural evil has been endlessly debated.

Regardless of why Katrina happened--the city's sin, natural forces over which God has no control, whatever--it is a terrible tragedy and I don't have an explanation; all I can offer is my help.

Peace