Freewill Revisited

[Trailblazer]

If God is omnipotent and omniscient he knows about all evil and how to avoid it. If he is omnipotent he is able to avoid it at no cost to himself. That makes him responsible for it himself and evil for doing nothing.

Sorry, the part you left out is that God does not DO the evil. Humans do the evil, so that makes humans responsible for the evil. God does not have to avoid something He is not even doing.

Just because God is capable of preventing evil does not mean that God is evil for not preventing evil. God could not prevent evil unless God overrode human free will and stopped human evil, but that is just not how God operates. Human free will is sacrosanct and everything is based upon it. We reap what we sow.

 

[sealchan]

If we don't have any power in determining how a choice arises, then what constitutes the act of choosing?

That depends on what you identify as the chooser. Maybe the intuition that what we are is some sort of commander of the USS Brain and that everything else that is thought or can be thought is presented to the commander (ie the Cartesian Theater) for his/her approval is inherently wrong.

What if who we are is determined by the choice itself and the experience of "decisioning" the process of our coming into being? Free will then becomes the ability of a who to experience that process as distinct from other whos. To be a who is to be in a community of whos who can communicate. Then who a who thinks another who is is an ongoing process of watching choices coming to pass in a unique sequence (story) and that story is comparable to that whos own ongoing process of decisioning.

We all think that we have the same kind of free will but we all recognize that similar inputs yield different outputs for different whos.

Free will is a thing riding on the endlessly complex dance horse of determination.

 

[sealchan]

Oh yes and what about the integration of influences in a hub of influence calibration? What if an outcome is the result of an algorithm which is able to adapt to the outcomes of previous decisions and oftentimes decisions result as the sum of product of multiple influences such that no single influence can take the credit for the outcome of the algorithm?

Who or what then determined the choice?
The answer is the learning algorithm...me!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry, the part you left out is that God does not DO the evil. Humans do the evil, so that makes humans responsible for the evil. God does not have to avoid something He is not even doing.

Just because God is capable of preventing evil does not mean that God is evil for not preventing evil. God could not prevent evil unless God overrode human free will and stopped human evil, but that is just not how God operates. Human free will is sacrosanct and everything is based upon it. We reap what we sow.

Passing the buck does not excuse your God. You also appear to forget that your version of God created the universe. His refusal to act when it would cost him nothing amounts to depraved indifference.

 

[Trailblazer]

Passing the buck does not excuse your God. You also appear to forget that your version of God created the universe. His refusal to act when it would cost him nothing amounts to depraved indifference.

God created humans with the capacity to eliminate all evil in the world and sent us Messengers to give us the teachings and laws that are necessary to do so. Humans passing the buck to God just shows their own laziness and immorality.

Besides that, atheists who say this about God have never thought it through. They have never stopped to think how God could eliminate evil without taking over human free will. God would have to make people act good when they are not good thus creating an injustice, an unfairness. This would upset the entire system of rewards and punishments upon which everything is reared. Good is rewarded and evil is punished.

“The Great Being saith: The structure of world stability and order hath been reared upon, and will continue to be sustained by, the twin pillars of reward and punishment…” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 219​

 

[Subduction Zone]

God created humans with the capacity to eliminate all evil in the world and sent us Messengers to give us the teachings and laws that are necessary to do so. Humans passing the buck to God just shows their own laziness and immorality.

Besides that, atheists who say this about God have never thought it through. They have never stopped to think how God could eliminate evil without taking over human free will. God would have to make people act good when they are not good thus creating an injustice, an unfairness. This would upset the entire system of rewards and punishments upon which everything is reared. Good is rewarded and evil is punished.

“The Great Being saith: The structure of world stability and order hath been reared upon, and will continue to be sustained by, the twin pillars of reward and punishment…” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 219​

I am sorry but this just looks like nonsense made up on thefly. It does not address the problems at all.

 

[stvdv]

Your version of God now runs into the problems that Epicurus wrote on:
Quote by Epicurus: “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? T...”
...God knows of the evil that would arise from your version of freewill, and doing nothing though able, he becomes the cause of evil.

I would add 2 more:
* God is able to prevent evil AND willing to prevent evil BUT not acting to prevent evil {being all knowing He knows it will solve eventually anyway}
* God is the eternal witness {not judging so no need to act when you don't see things as good/evil BUT knowing stuff to be karmic; action/reaction}

Note: I do not believe in a biblical God. I do believe in the concept of Consciousness as explained in Indian Scriptures. In Consciousness everything is possible: Omniscience, Omnipotence, Omnipresent, Witnessing, Acting, Judging or not. BUT in the end all this is just one big illusion if seen from Consciousness

 

[sealchan]

Sorry, the part you left out is that God does not DO the evil. Humans do the evil, so that makes humans responsible for the evil. God does not have to avoid something He is not even doing.

Just because God is capable of preventing evil does not mean that God is evil for not preventing evil. God could not prevent evil unless God overrode human free will and stopped human evil, but that is just not how God operates. Human free will is sacrosanct and everything is based upon it. We reap what we sow.

Sure, people do evil, like, for example, someone goes to a school and shoots a bunch of kids. But He who KNOWINGLY gave the shooter the gun bears responsibility as well whether God or human. That is how knowledge of good and evil works...you know it's bad, then you do it, your responsible. The doer and the enabler are BOTH responsible.

 

[sealchan]

God created humans with the capacity to eliminate all evil in the world and sent us Messengers to give us the teachings and laws that are necessary to do so. Humans passing the buck to God just shows their own laziness and immorality.

Besides that, atheists who say this about God have never thought it through. They have never stopped to think how God could eliminate evil without taking over human free will. God would have to make people act good when they are not good thus creating an injustice, an unfairness. This would upset the entire system of rewards and punishments upon which everything is reared. Good is rewarded and evil is punished.

“The Great Being saith: The structure of world stability and order hath been reared upon, and will continue to be sustained by, the twin pillars of reward and punishment…” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 219​

It's not passing the buck. Besides an atheist has no one to pass the buck to in this case. The buck is passed whether someone gives up their own sense of responsibility. In any case the knowing enabler who knows the likely outcome is also responsible. God had the power and knowledge to act differently so He shares the responsibility.

 

[sealchan]

I would add 2 more:
* God is able to prevent evil AND willing to prevent evil BUT not acting to prevent evil {being all knowing He knows it will solve eventually anyway}
* God is the eternal witness {not judging so no need to act when you don't see things as good/evil BUT knowing stuff to be karmic; action/reaction}

Note: I do not believe in a biblical God. I do believe in the concept of Consciousness as explained in Indian Scriptures. In Consciousness everything is possible: Omniscience, Omnipotence, Omnipresent, Witnessing, Acting, Judging or not. BUT in the end all this is just one big illusion if seen from Consciousness

Yes and the Indian scriptures handle the God perspective much better than the Biblical scriptures in that way. In the Bible ambiguity is used in place of a rich mystical metaphysics leaving the believer to fill in the blanks.

For me the God of the Bible must be seen as having created an amoral creation, Satan is redeemable in theory and we are growing more and more co-responsible with God for the outcomes of our action.

 

[stvdv]

Yes and the Indian scriptures handle the God perspective much better than the Biblical scriptures in that way. In the Bible ambiguity is used in place of a rich mystical metaphysics leaving the believer to fill in the blanks.

For me the God of the Bible must be seen as having created an amoral creation, Satan is redeemable in theory and we are growing more and more co-responsible with God for the outcomes of our action.

Indian Scriptures did a good job. They have divided the Scriptures in: Duality, non-Duality and one in between. So for all there is something good to find. And what is really good IMO is that because it is described in the Scriptures there is not so much fighting "my way is the better way". Duality is obviously the biggest group. But at least the large group can't belittle the other small groups (without making fools of themselves).

Christianity is also mainly duality. Unfortunately this large group Christians belittle Christianity and even Jesus by their arrogant dualistic claims IMHO

I spend about 4 years in a church after returning from India. Lucky for me I had a great Advaita Teacher, who even pointed out the Advaita parts in the Bible and in the life of Jesus. So there were enough verses to fulfill my spiritual need. But what was missing in the Church was that I could not share with Christians, because they always ended up judging whenever it went out of their scope of understanding. So I became more silent and finally left.

I do believe The Truth will finally triumph. So one day these Christians need to stop being so judgmental (if Jesus words are true "Do not Judge...")

That day will be the Day of Peace on Earth I think. At least that's my experience "the less I judge, the more peaceful I feel".

 

[Trailblazer]

I am sorry but this just looks like nonsense made up on the fly. It does not address the problems at all.

No, it is not made up.... it comes from the teachings of the Baha'i Faith.
What problems?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, it is not made up.... it comes from the teachings of the Baha'i Faith.
What problems?

Then it appears that the Bahai' Faith was made up on the fly. But then what faith based on deities is not?

And seriously have you not been paying any attention?

 

[Trailblazer]

Sure, people do evil, like, for example, someone goes to a school and shoots a bunch of kids. But He who KNOWINGLY gave the shooter the gun bears responsibility as well whether God or human. That is how knowledge of good and evil works...you know it's bad, then you do it, your responsible. The doer and the enabler are BOTH responsible.

That is true to a degree, but the person who gave the shooter the gun is not as evil as the shooter, because that person (a) did not know what the shooter planned to do with the gun and (b) did not do the shooting. Evil is in degrees as is good. I am thinking about starting a thread on good and evil because I am dealing with an evil person in my life right now and also good people. I wonder, does God allow evil just so He can bring out the good people?

 

[Trailblazer]

It's not passing the buck. Besides an atheist has no one to pass the buck to in this case. The buck is passed whether someone gives up their own sense of responsibility. In any case the knowing enabler who knows the likely outcome is also responsible. God had the power and knowledge to act differently so He shares the responsibility.

What God could have done is not create humans with free will to do good and evil, but what would have been the alternative? If we could not make a choice to do good or evil then would we not just be programmed robots? If we could not have done a better job than God them we have no room for complaint.

What we do not see - yet - is the big picture, why good and evil exist. We won't actually understand that until after we die but we can have some intimation of it in this world if we read scriptures. I would think it is embedded in the Bible, but I know good and evil are explained in the Baha'i Writings although we have to think about it and draw our own conclusions.

So for the sake of argument, let's just say that God knew that given free will some people would do evil. Sure, an omniscient God knew that, but maybe there is a reason for the evil we do not fully understand. Don't you think that the best course of action is to try to understand why there is evil rather than blaming God? Sometimes we do have to blame and punish the evil person who committed the deed, but God did not do the deed.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then it appears that the Bahai' Faith was made up on the fly. But then what faith based on deities is not?

And seriously have you not been paying any attention?

Paying attention to what?

You said "I am sorry but this just looks like nonsense made up on the fly."
WHY does it look like that?

You said "It does not address the problems at all."
What are the problems?

 

[sealchan]

What God could have done is not create humans with free will to do good and evil, but what would have been the alternative? If we could not make a choice to do good or evil then would we not just be programmed robots? If we could not have done a better job than God them we have no room for complaint.

What we do not see - yet - is the big picture, why good and evil exist. We won't actually understand that until after we die but we can have some intimation of it in this world if we read scriptures. I would think it is embedded in the Bible, but I know good and evil are explained in the Baha'i Writings although we have to think about it and draw our own conclusions.

So for the sake of argument, let's just say that God knew that given free will some people would do evil. Sure, an omniscient God knew that, but maybe there is a reason for the evil we do not fully understand. Don't you think that the best course of action is to try to understand why there is evil rather than blaming God? Sometimes we do have to blame and punish the evil person who committed the deed, but God did not do the deed.

I dont disagree with you. My own journey toward God started when I complained to God about the quality of His creation, so I really dont want to say that people shouldn't judge God about the state of reality. It would stop people like me from developing a relationship with God. Being heard from my own point of view is a requirement in any two way relationship.

Now how can humanity mature if it isnt given an opportunity to fail (do evil)? It can't. But at the same time I can't agree that we shouldn't take our frustrations to God as if He was at least partially responsible.

Now if someone complains to someone and they get no response, then that leaves matters in that someone's own hands as to making things right. One of two things can happen: a) the person goes out and does the work God would want them to do, or b) that person would learn just how hard it is to fix that problem because of the will of other people. So you end up in a potentially better place either way if the person is compassionate and sincere and not just feeling sorry for themselves. But God is not going to be convenient for that sort of attitude.

 

[Vaderecta]

I have no political agenda and thus am not trying to spin this one way or the other. I am registered independent. I don't care if you like guns or don't. I'm not making a left or a right argument.

Look at the data. We do stuff and then task our consciousness with explaining what we did. What is the point of consciousness? That is where I am coming from. Does it have an advantage over less conscious folk? (In the short term I think that is a stupid question to ask but look at things in a longer time frame.)

All dominant species of this planet have existed and enjoyed success longer than all sapiens. (All is a strong term but I am pretty sure in this context it is the correct term)

Not to change the goal posts but it seems like we don't have freewill but due to modern advancements we have unprecedented control over our environment then ever before. Couple that with consciousness and now it seems that ability is chipping away at the idea that humans do not have freewill. It seems our tech is both giving us more freewill while simultaneously taking it away.

There is some problem in this argument. That's what I wanted to discuss. 1800 humans might have had some influence over their freewill but today's humans seem to have more control. That might be a false argument but I'm not sure why. It really feels like modern humans have more freewill then our predecessors. Does this ancient freewill argument need to be refined based on current tech?

 

[Trailblazer]

I dont disagree with you. My own journey toward God started when I complained to God about the quality of His creation, so I really dont want to say that people shouldn't judge God about the state of reality. It would stop people like me from developing a relationship with God. Being heard from my own point of view is a requirement in any two way relationship.

I surely know what you mean. I have done my fair share of complaining about God and His creation and I still do. I have a feeling He understands how I feel.

 

[ecco]

My question was as much to start a discussion on what omniscience implies as anything else. Do you know what the logical consequences of God being omniscient are?

The Christian God is considered to omniscient, omnipotent and eternal by most Christians. Doesn't that include you?

The logical consequences are that God planned the "fall of man".

He gave A&E and all their descendants, the ability to choose freely.

He foreknew that A&E would partake of the fruit. He foreknew that Cain would kill Abel. He foreknew that He would kill almost everything in the Flood.

He knew this for most of eternity before He ever, omnipotently created anything.