Free will and omniscience?

[yossarian22]

Agent Smith - I know I've come into this thread extremely late, but with respect to the OP, what makes you think that you know God so well anyway? If He even exists, there's nobody on this planet that knows 1% of what He would be all about. The whole argument is pointless.

Don't ruin our fallacious fun...

 

[kadzbiz]

Don't ruin our fallacious fun...

:foot: I'll just get back in my box.........

 

[lew0049]

Illogical for a human. You're still comparing everything to humans. Why would God need to create imperfect beings? - He could (with his omnipotence) create things with as much knowledge as he wants.


Anyway, I also think this is getting a bit too off-topic now

Think about what you are saying and think about mankind. If we were not imperfect beings and/or experience pain, then how could we see the good in things. How could we learn from mistakes or have courage? Courage would be a word without meaning. With the possibility of creating something with the potential to have so much intelligence, comes the possibility of the exact opposite - everything has a counterbalance.

"My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: fish would not feel wet. Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too-for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist-in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless-I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality-namely my idea of justice-was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be a word without meaning.”

"Precisely because [God] is all powerful, he can’t do some things. He can’t make mistakes. Only weak and stupid beings make mistakes. One such mistake would be to try to create a self-contradiction, like two plus two equals five or a round square. Now, the classic defense of God against the problem of evil is that it’s not logically possible to have free will and no possibility of moral evil…. Built into the situation of God deciding to create human beings is the chance of evil and, consequently, the suffering that results…. The source of evil is not God’s power but mankind’s freedom…. The overwhelming majority of pain in the world is caused by our choices to kill, to slander to be selfish, to stray sexually, to break our promises, to be reckless.”
“[T]he fact that God deliberately allows certain things, which if we allowed them would turn us into monsters, doesn’t necessarily count against God…. If I said to my brother, who’s about my age, ‘I could bail you out of a problem but I won’t.’ I would probably be irresponsible and perhaps wicked. But we do that with our children all the time. We don’t do their homework for them. We don’t put a bubble around them and protect them from every hurt. [daughter threading needle story/analogy]… So it’s at least possible that God is wise enough to foresee that we need some pain for reasons which we may not understand but which he foresees as being necessary to some eventual good. Therefore, he’s not being evil by allowing that pain to exist. Dentists, athletic trainers, teachers, parents-they all know that sometimes to be good is not to be kind. Certainly there are times when God allows suffering and deprives us of the lesser good of pleasure in order to help us toward the greater good of moral and spiritual education. Even the Greeks believed the gods taught wisdom through suffering…. Courage, for example, would be impossible in a world without pain…. Let’s face it: we learn from the mistakes we make and the suffering they bring. The universe is a soul-making machine, and part of that process is learning, maturing, and growing through difficult and challenging and painful experiences. The point of our lives in this world isn’t comfort, but training and preparation for eternity…. [Twilight Zone story]… The point is that a world without suffering appears more like hell than heaven…. [P]retend you’re God and try to crate a better world in your imagination…. Every time you use force to prevent evil, you take away freedom. To prevent all evil, you must remove all freedom and reduce people to puppets, which means they would then lack the ability to freely choose love. You may end up creating a world of precision that an engineer might like-maybe. But one thing’s for sure: you’ll lose the kind of world that a Father would want.”

 

[lew0049]

sorry for the quotes but some things are better explained by others... the first time I read books that contained context such as this, my initial (but not intended) reaction was to try to find fault with the context. All of the while, I can admit to myself now that I wasn't even reading what was being said but simply trying to question it (when I was a 100% atheist and thought the concept of God was ridiculous). I'm sure I still do the same now but in hindsight to this discussion, I know I did. have a good one
-chip

 

[Sola'lor]

Sorry this is going to be off topic. If there are any other discussions about these topics I'll jus start another thread.

So, you don't trust God? It seems that you trust Him enough to forget His killing of million of people because it must be part of His plan. Don't you then trust Him enough to know that giving you that information and making you that way is in your best interest?

It's not that I don't trust God. It's just that I believe doing so would voilate what could be the most fundamental right in existence. The right to self. But I also agree with the statement the knowledge isn't enough. Of course you could always say that an omnipotent God could change it so that knowledge is enough. I believe that God has all power. But I also believe that having all power doesn't mean God will/can do all things. God, in my view, isn't some strange being with all power that can do anything at any time for any purpose. I believe this is where this scripture comes into play:

Alma 42:13, 22, 25
13 Therefore, according to justice, the plan of redemption could not be brought about, only on conditions of repentance of men in this probationary state, yea, this preparatory state; for except it were for these conditions, mercy could not take effect except it should destroy the work of justice. Now the work of justice could not be destroyed; if so, God would cease to be God.

22 But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a repentance granted; which repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise, justice claimeth the creature and executeth the law, and the law inflicteth the punishment; if not so, the works of justice would be destroyed, and God would cease to be God.

25 What, do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you, Nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God.

These scriptures are talking about is mercy and justice. It is speaking of why God can't let those who don't repent into His presence. Why He can't forgive those who don't repent. If He gave mercy to those who didn't repent then it would be robbing justice. And as it says God would cease to be God. Yes God has the power to do that but if He did He would loose His power and cease to be God.

This also relates to my comments here in the "The morality of Jesus' sacrifice" thread. My comments in that thread were taken from this talk by and LDS leader, W. Cleon Skousen.

Another Scripture about thise is:
Mormon 9:19
19 And if there were miracles wrought then, why has God ceased to be a God of miracles and yet be an unchangeable Being? And behold, I say unto you he changeth not; if so he would cease to be God; and he ceaseth not to be God, and is a God of miracles.

This one is talking about miracles and states that id Gos performed miracles anciently then He must still perform them today. If He didn't He would cease to Be God. Same principle.

This is why I can't accept those theories you present about God suddenly changing things. Or suddenly making spoiling a child not counter productive. As I said before God's power can do all things but doing certain things would cause God to loose His power.

I think I might have to start another thread about this topic since it is getting pretty far off topic here.

Also I don't forget His killing of a large number of wicked people. I just accept it and trust that God, in His infinite wisdom, knows what He's doing.

Illogical for a human. You're still comparing everything to humans. Why would God need to create imperfect beings? - He could (with his omnipotence) create things with as much knowledge as he wants.

I don't believe God created us, ex nhilio(sp?) I believe is the term. Creating something from nothing. I don't believe in that. It is impossible to create something from nothing. I believe God organizes things. He takes prexisting matter or energy and converts it to fit what He is doing. According to the Big Bang theory there is the exact same ammount of matter and energy now as there was when the universe started. Although matter can be converted to energy and energy can be converted to matter. I believe this also.

So I don't beleive God created us. I believe God took what we were and helped us to become what we are and what we will become.

Sorry to derail the thread but I have a simple question for Sola'lor. How many spirit children did you think your God made?

If every spirit child gets just one shot at a physical body, then you're looking at 96 Billion spirits and growing exponentially.

If you take into consideration reincarnation, then you still have at least 6 Billion spirits and counting.

I don't believe in reincarnation. I do believe in ressurection though. But to answer your question I believe God has had and will continue to have infinate number of children. Although not all will come to this earth.

Moses 1:4
4 And, behold, thou art my son; wherefore look, and I will show thee the workmanship of mine hands; but not all, for my works are without end, and also my words, for they never cease.

 

[agent_smith]

Agent Smith - I know I've come into this thread extremely late, but with respect to the OP, what makes you think that you know God so well anyway? If He even exists, there's nobody on this planet that knows 1% of what He would be all about. The whole argument is pointless.

I made this argument based on what Christians, and I'm sure many other religions, believe God is.

Debating God is meaningless unless you first attempt to define God. Omniscient and omnipotent are two definitions that many theists like to use.

 

[agent_smith]

Think about what you are saying and think about mankind. If we were not imperfect beings and/or experience pain, then how could we see the good in things. How could we learn from mistakes or have courage? Courage would be a word without meaning. With the possibility of creating something with the potential to have so much intelligence, comes the possibility of the exact opposite - everything has a counterbalance.

You're using a lot of examples of other things here which are quite irrelevant.
You, also, are tying this down to human emotions - something I just said is the big mistake many people here are making.

e.g. "How could we learn from mistakes or have courage?" - God, if he exists, designed us to learn in this way. But because he is omnipotent, he COULD HAVE created us in a different way, to instantly know things and have wisdom.

Your entire argument is based on the presumption that God cannot do something - which goes against the church's teachings.

 

[Storm]

You, also, are tying this down to human emotions - something I just said is the big mistake many people here are making.

The thing is, you keep saying you're using the Christian version of God. The Christian version HAS emotions. You're cherry-picking traits.

 

[Sola'lor]

You're using a lot of examples of other things here which are quite irrelevant.
You, also, are tying this down to human emotions - something I just said is the big mistake many people here are making.

As an LDS I believe God is an exhalted human being. Not that that is LDS doctrine but it is implied in many teachings of the Prophets and it makes the most sense to me.

e.g. "How could we learn from mistakes or have courage?" - God, if he exists, designed us to learn in this way. But because he is omnipotent, he COULD HAVE created us in a different way, to instantly know things and have wisdom.

I don't believe that He could. Yes He has the power to but if He did He would cease to be God.

 

[agent_smith]

The thing is, you keep saying you're using the Christian version of God. The Christian version HAS emotions. You're cherry-picking traits.

I'm saying the Christian God is wrong because he cannot have emotions. I'm not ignoring the fact that Christians claim he has emotions.

Should I assume that God exists, just because I'm talking to people who believe in God? :no:

 

[agent_smith]

I don't believe that He could. Yes He has the power to but if He did He would cease to be God.

Why is that?

 

[logician]

The chaotic nature of the universe doesn't lend itself to the idea of an omniscient or omnipotent being, indeed, it doesn't lend itself to any kind of supernatural being that has any direct interest in what is happening on a continuing basis. Likewise, given the latest theories that the multiverse may be eternal, no creator god is needed, so poof - no god exists.

 

[Storm]

I'm saying the Christian God is wrong because he cannot have emotions. I'm not ignoring the fact that Christians claim he has emotions.

Should I assume that God exists, just because I'm talking to people who believe in God? :no:

Then, you have yet to show that He cannot have emotions.

 

[lew0049]

The chaotic nature of the universe doesn't lend itself to the idea of an omniscient or omnipotent being, indeed, it doesn't lend itself to any kind of supernatural being that has any direct interest in what is happening on a continuing basis. Likewise, given the latest theories that the multiverse may be eternal, no creator god is needed, so poof - no god exists.

Whoever said that needing a God has anything to do with believing that there is a supernatural being and the premise of my(and others) argument rests on this? And how is it that you came to the conclusion that an omniscient and omnipotent being doesn’t have direct interest in the world? Because of the universe/world is is chaotic and has pain and suffering? I hope that is not your reasoning.

Tell me something logician, if you were to take a step back and objectively look at the evidence for/against a supernatural being compared to the evidence for/againist these theories (which is utterly impossible thus I guess I'm presenting a catch 22) - you would logically conclude that the evidence for these infinite multi-universes is more compelling?

The fact of the matter is that scientists propose these multi-universe or Many Worlds hypothesises - all of the while these theoretical universes are inaccessible to mankind and thus there is absolutely no way to provide any evidence that this might be true. It's an idea without scientific proof and so I wonder what are the motives for these hypothesises...
Let's suppose it is true: then you could explain away anything proposed as it would make rational conduct of life impossible. Probabilities are completely out the window. It's like if you are playing poker and you deal yourself a str8 flush every hand , you could postulate that you aren't cheating b/c of just what the mutli-universe hypothesis states.
Klaus Dose stated-

More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance.
Behe stated – the probability of linking together just one-hundred amino acids to create 1 protein molecule by chance would be the same as a blindfolded man finding one marked grain of sand somewhere in the vastness of the Sahara Desert – and doing it not just once but three different times.

 

[lew0049]

You're using a lot of examples of other things here which are quite irrelevant.
You, also, are tying this down to human emotions - something I just said is the big mistake many people here are making.

e.g. "How could we learn from mistakes or have courage?" - God, if he exists, designed us to learn in this way. But because he is omnipotent, he COULD HAVE created us in a different way, to instantly know things and have wisdom.

Your entire argument is based on the presumption that God cannot do something - which goes against the church's teachings.

Not at all. What I am saying is, why would He have wanted too? You would rather know everything without experiencing it?

 

[Willamena]

Tell me something logician, if you were to take a step back and objectively look at the evidence for/against a supernatural being compared to the evidence for/againist these theories (which is utterly impossible thus I guess I'm presenting a catch 22) - you would logically conclude that the evidence for these infinite multi-universes is more compelling?

I would hazard a guess that both/any/all of those "more compelling ideas" are brought about by evidence.

 

[logician]

Whoever said that needing a God has anything to do with believing that there is a supernatural being and the premise of my(and others) argument rests on this? And how is it that you came to the conclusion that an omniscient and omnipotent being doesn’t have direct interest in the world? Because of the universe/world is is chaotic and has pain and suffering? I hope that is not your reasoning.

Tell me something logician, if you were to take a step back and objectively look at the evidence for/against a supernatural being compared to the evidence for/againist these theories (which is utterly impossible thus I guess I'm presenting a catch 22) - you would logically conclude that the evidence for these infinite multi-universes is more compelling?

The fact of the matter is that scientists propose these multi-universe or Many Worlds hypothesises - all of the while these theoretical universes are inaccessible to mankind and thus there is absolutely no way to provide any evidence that this might be true. It's an idea without scientific proof and so I wonder what are the motives for these hypothesises...
Let's suppose it is true: then you could explain away anything proposed as it would make rational conduct of life impossible. Probabilities are completely out the window. It's like if you are playing poker and you deal yourself a str8 flush every hand , you could postulate that you aren't cheating b/c of just what the mutli-universe hypothesis states.
Klaus Dose stated-

More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance.
Behe stated – the probability of linking together just one-hundred amino acids to create 1 protein molecule by chance would be the same as a blindfolded man finding one marked grain of sand somewhere in the vastness of the Sahara Desert – and doing it not just once but three different times.

Please provide evidence your god exists.

Nuff said.

 

[lew0049]

Please provide evidence your god exists.

Nuff said.

If that is the response you are going to offer then giving any type of in-depth response to your posts is absolutely pointless.

 

[Rochelle0913]

I think that as far as free will or destination is concerned, we may never have the true answer even upon death. Is it really relevant as long as we live with the illusion that we are running our own lives?
There was a psychology experiment where they would shock mice, i can't remember the details, but the result of the experiment showed that the mice who were given the illusion that they had power over making the shocks stop survived much longer than the mice who had no control.
In essence, when we feel we have an internal loci of control, we thrive much better than if we were to believe that we were helpless in gods hands because then each and every action of ours would be useless.
Whether we have freewill or not, I think god will allow us to continue believing we have it or he would have a lethargic, worthless species.
BUT what I want to know is that if god is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. . . He knows who will claim him as savior and be in heaven and who will deny him and burn in hell. So if he is so merciful, what would be the reasoning in creating people, that essentially, he is condemning to hell?

 

[logician]

If that is the response you are going to offer then giving any type of in-depth response to your posts is absolutely pointless.

The same can be said of your post, which equates belief in a god with scientific inquiry,