God, Free-will, and the knowledge of God - Is his knowledge causation?

[Ajax]

Is that the best you can do? Try to find brain-teasers to confuse people?
G-d knows what choices we WILL make (from our perspective), because we have
already made them (from G-d's perspective).

You are trying to justify your beliefs and you shoot yourself in the foot...

1) How do you know what God's perspective is?
2) Does the infallible and omniscient God know our choices before we make them, as claimed in the bold typing? It appears that you agree.
3) If in God's eyes we have already made our future choices, then are there any other different choices we can make from our perspective, other than what the infallible God already knows?
4) Remember, theists believe that God supposedly knows and sees everything that will happen, till the end of the universe(s).

Is that the best you can do? Try to find brain-teasers to confuse people?

Well our friend said that "what God knows is contingent upon what we choose", so my reply was not a brain-teaser, but a legit question.

 

[muhammad_isa]

1) How do you know what God's perspective is?

Logical deduction..
If one believe in Christian/Islamic G-d, then we believe that G-d gave knowledge of future to prophets.
Some people believe that G-d does not categorically know (so could be wrong), or He has preordained
our destiny (which is illogical, as then we have no free-will) etc.

..so with our modern understanding of physics, one can imagine a logical, coherent possibility

2) Does the infallible and omniscient God know our choices before we make them, as claimed in the bold typing? It appears that you agree.

From our perspective, yes .. but it makes little sense, or is hard to envisage, to speak about G-d knowing
our decisions before we make them .. as G-d is not subject to our perception of 'measured time' .. as He is not part of the space-time continuum.

3) If in God's eyes we have already made our future choices, then are there any other different choices we can make from our perspective, other than what the infallible God already knows?

Of course not .. because the future is merely a human perception, which we perceive as not having happened yet .. but G-d perceives differently.

4) Remember, theists believe that God supposedly knows and sees everything that will happen, till the end of the universe(s).

Yes.

 

[Ajax]

G-d knows what choices we WILL make (from our perspective), because we have
already made them (from G-d's perspective).

Again from ChatGPT...

Question:
Is the following argument logically valid?

Answer:
Let's analyze the argument for logical validity. The argument can be broken down as follows:

1. Premise 1: God is infallible and omniscient.
2. Premise 2: God knows what choice we will choose in the future, out of say 5 different choices.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, we cannot choose any other choice other than the one God knows, or God is not infallible and omniscient.

Analysis​

1. Understanding the Premises:
   
   • Premise 1: States that God is infallible (cannot be wrong) and omniscient (knows everything, including future events).
   • Premise 2: States that God knows the specific choice we will make in the future from a set of options.
2. Conclusion:
   
   • This conclusion presents a conditional statement: either we cannot choose differently from what God knows we will choose, or God is not infallible and omniscient.

Logical Structure​

The argument can be expressed in a more formal structure as follows:

1. PPP: God is infallible and omniscient.
2. QQQ: God knows what choice we will choose in the future, out of say 5 different choices.
3. RRR: We can choose a different choice from what God knows.

The argument aims to show that RRR leads to a contradiction with PPP and QQQ:

1. If PPP and QQQ are true, then God knows our future choice infallibly.
2. If RRR (we can choose differently) were true, it would imply that God’s knowledge could be wrong, which contradicts PPP.

Thus, the argument is structured as follows:

1. PPP (God is infallible and omniscient).
2. QQQ (God knows our future choice).
3. If RRR (we can choose differently from what God knows), then PPP is false (God would not be infallible and omniscient).

Therefore, the conclusion is: 4. Either RRR is false (we cannot choose differently) or PPP is false (God is not infallible and omniscient).

Logical Validity​

The argument follows a form of logical disjunction (either-or statement) and relies on the principle of non-contradiction. Here’s the reasoning in simpler terms:

1. If God is infallible and omniscient, then whatever God knows must be true.
2. If God knows a specific future choice we will make, that choice must occur because God’s knowledge is infallible.
3. Therefore, it is not possible for us to choose differently from what God knows, because that would imply God’s knowledge was incorrect, contradicting His infallibility and omniscience.

Thus, the argument is logically valid. The conclusion follows necessarily from the premises assuming the premises are true. The form of the argument correctly derives the conclusion from the premises, showing that one must either deny that we can choose differently or deny that God is infallible and omniscient.

Conclusion​

Yes, the argument is logically valid. It correctly follows from the premises that if God is infallible and omniscient, and God knows what choice we will make, then we cannot choose differently. If we could choose differently, it would contradict the premise that God is infallible and omniscient.

+++

Now, you are completely unaware if a) God has different perspective from us b) lives in a different dimension/time c) if God actually exists and d) all the other excuses all of you used. All his attributes are man made, but for the sake of this discussion, we accepted temporarily that he is supposedly infallible, omniscient and omnipotent, although the last two contradict each other.
All your excuses, apart from being purely hypothetical, also imply that you have actual knowledge of God, therefore can be rejected.

 

[Trailblazer]

What I have done is point out the absurdity of believing that any being can be both omniscient and omnipotent at the same time. And that is especially true of the Abrahamic God as described in all of the holy books that lay out the various doctrines of belief.

Why is it absurd to believe that God can be both omniscient and omnipotent at the same time?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Again from ChatGPT...

No comment on my post #453 from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy ? (Peer-reviewed academic resource)

..you just look for some article that contradicts that particular comprehensive analysis of the modal fallacy of determinism?

Tell you what, you tell me what's wrong with my ref. and I'll tell you what's wrong with yours.
i.e. show me where the modal logic is fallacious or why it is not.

 

[Trailblazer]

You obviously don't find these two statements super contradictory, do you?

No, I do not. Explain why you think they are contradictory.

Really? Do our choices dictate to God what he should know?

No, of course not. God simply knows what choices we will make, so what God knows is identical to the choices we make.

This is your belief; it is not knowledge. Which indicates that you also fall in the same trap as many, of claiming to know how an inconceivable God acts.

When did I ever say it is knowledge? Nobody can KNOW anything about God except for what scriptures reveal. We either believe those scriptures of we don't.

All God's attributes were given to him by men, who wanted other people to believe in him.

That is your personal opinion. You have no evidence that was the case.

I guess you are referring to the Bible?
Why would the men who wrote the Bible want people to believe in God?

And finally you came up with this, which is exactly what we have been saying...
... because God knows what we will choose before we ever choose it in this world.
If God knows what we will choose, before we ever choose it in this world, then the rest of our choices which we undoubtedly have, become obsolete, because as you rightly wrote, God can never be wrong because God is infallible..

If God knows what we will choose, before we ever choose it in this world, why would the rest of our choices become obsolete?

I guess you still do not understand. We can choose between a or b or c.
Whatever we choose will be what God knew we would choose, but it is still OUR choice.

 

[Ajax]

Why is it absurd to believe that God can be both omniscient and omnipotent at the same time

Last sentence of message #426 and message #424

 

[Ajax]

No comment on my post #453 from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy ? (Peer-reviewed academic resource)

..you just look for some article that contradicts that particular comprehensive analysis of the modal fallacy of determinism?

Tell you what, you tell me what's wrong with my ref. and I'll tell you what's wrong with yours.
i.e. show me where the modal logic is fallacious or why it is not.

I read it, but modal fallacy does not and can not apply to an accepted as totally infallible and omniscient God.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I read it, but modal fallacy does not and can not apply to an accepted as totally infallible and omniscient God.

Clearly, you haven't a clue what you are talking about..
Perhaps you are Chatgpt's son?

Playing chess against a machine is one thing (difficult to beat) .. but programming a bot
to be an academic professor is another.

 

[Ajax]

No, I do not. Explain why you think they are contradictory.

You can not see the contradiction between "We will choose what we want to choose, a or b or c" and the "We will choose what God knows we will choose"???
God supposedly knows and sees what you will choose before you were born, but you don't even know yet the event that you will choose in the future, let alone what your options will be. Unless you think -as I thought you implied - that God is bound by our choices, or will know any choice out of hundreds we will have, which is absurd, because then God does not know our future.

No, of course not. God simply knows what choices we will make, so what God knows is identical to the choices we make.

So God knows the choices we will make, before the beginning of the world, before we were born, before we actually decide. So where exactly is our free will, if our choice is identical (as you said) to God's knowledge which exists before the beginning of the world?

When did I ever say it is knowledge? Nobody can KNOW anything about God except for what scriptures reveal. We either believe those scriptures of we don't.

How do you know then that God is out of time? How do you know that God even exist? It's belief, not knowledge.

That is your personal opinion. You have no evidence that was the case.

I guess you are referring to the Bible?
Why would the men who wrote the Bible want people to believe in God?

Why not? Who wrote the scriptures? Do you have any doubt that men wrote them? Do you have any doubt that men decided God's attributes?Or doo you have any evidence that God spoke to those men?

If God knows what we will choose, before we ever choose it in this world, why would the rest of our choices become obsolete?

Because you wrote it..."because God knows what we will choose before we ever choose it in this world."

Whatever we choose will be what God knew we would choose, but it is still OUR choice.

There we go again.... Our choices will dictate to God, what he will know....No, sorry, it's the other way around.
Read message #463 please...

 

[muhammad_isa]

@Ajax ..just to 'jog your memory' ..
Let’s recall Maimonides’s argument:

… “Does God know or does He not know that a certain individual will be good or bad? If thou sayest ‘He knows’, then it necessarily follows that [that] man is compelled to act as God knew beforehand he would act, otherwise God’s knowledge would be imperfect.”

The assumption is that if we know what he will choose, he cannot choose anything else.
..but this commits the modal fallacy, because what he chooses is contingent on what G-d knows.
..and if one lays it out in logical grammar, rather than mere words, the mistake is easily spotted.

 

[Ajax]

Clearly, you haven't a clue what you are talking about..
Perhaps you are Chatgpt's son?

Playing chess against a machine is one thing (difficult to beat) .. but programming a bot
to be an academic professor is another.

Really?
The problem of future contingents which was firstly discussed by Aristotle and used in modal logic are statements about states of affairs in the future that are contingent: neither necessarily true nor necessarily false. They can not possibly apply to an infallible and omniscient God. Is it difficult for you to understand this?
The bot takes and gives it's answers from academic professors. I will remind you it's conclusion...

Yes, the argument is logically valid. It correctly follows from the premises that if God is infallible and omniscient, and God knows what choice we will make, then we cannot choose differently. If we could choose differently, it would contradict the premise that God is infallible and omniscient.

@Ajax ..just to 'jog your memory' ..
Let’s recall Maimonides’s argument:

My argument goes as follows:

1. Premise 1: God is infallible and omniscient.
2. Premise 2: God knows what choice we will choose in the future, out of different choices.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, we cannot choose any other choice other than the one God knows, or God is not infallible and omniscient.

Modal logic defines the premises 1 and 2 as contingent, which can not be according to theists. Both these premises are absolutely true in all Abrahamic religions. Not for skeptics like me though.

 

[muhammad_isa]

The problem of future contingents which was firstly discussed by Aristotle and used in modal logic are statements about states of affairs in the future that are contingent: neither necessarily true nor necessarily false. They can not possibly apply to an infallible and omniscient God. Is it difficult for you to understand this?

VERY "difficult for me to understand", as I have already demonstrated. Plain wrong, in fact.

If some future action/choice is known prior to its occurrence, that event does not thereby become “necessary”, “compelled”, “forced”, or what have you. Inasmuch as its description was, is, and will remain forever contingent, both it and its negation remain possible. Of course only one of the two was, is, and will remain true; while the other was, is, and will remain false. But truth and falsity, per se, do not determine a proposition’s modality. Whether true or false, each of these propositions was, is, and will remain possible. Knowing – whether by God or a human being – some future event no more forces that event to occur than our learning that dinosaurs lived in (what is now) South Dakota forced those reptiles to take up residence there.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

many people claim that a known future means that we are compelled to choose it, in the sense that we "have no choice" which is fallacious .. it doesn't mean that.

Fallacious? It is self-evidently true. If somebody knows what you will do before you do it, then you didn't choose to do it.

Believers who claim otherwise are making an incoherent claim. If choice means having the ability to choose otherwise, then doing what it was known you will do perhaps even before you knew yourself, then you had no choice, just the appearance of choice.

It is not that we are forced to choose something, it is that we will choose it.

But the will WAS forced if it could be reliably predicted.

Why is it absurd to believe that God can be both omniscient and omnipotent at the same time?

His explanation was that if you know what you will do before you do it (omniscient), then you lacked the power to do otherwise.

We can choose between a or b or c. Whatever we choose will be what God knew we would choose, but it is still OUR choice.

It wasn't a choice in the sense that we could have chosen otherwise.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Fallacious? It is self-evidently true. If somebody knows what you will do before you do it, then you didn't choose to do it..

Nope! Read my last post #473 ..

 

[Trailblazer]

You can not see the contradiction between "We will choose what we want to choose, a or b or c" and the "We will choose what God knows we will choose"???

There is no contradiction. We will choose what we want to choose, a or b or c, and God knows we will choose.

God supposedly knows and sees what you will choose before you were born, but you don't even know yet the event that you will choose in the future, let alone what your options will be. Unless you think -as I thought you implied - that God is bound by our choices, or will know any choice out of hundreds we will have, which is absurd, because then God does not know our future.

So God knows the choices we will make, before the beginning of the world, before we were born, before we actually decide. So where exactly is our free will, if our choice is identical (as you said) to God's knowledge which exists before the beginning of the world?

So what if God knows? What God knows has no effect upon what we are able to choose.
We have free will so we can choose from all the available options and God knows what we will choose because God is all-knowing.

How do you know then that God is out of time? How do you know that God even exist? It's belief, not knowledge.

I never claimed to know that as a fact. It is a belief. There are no facts about God that can be known, all we can do is believe.

Why not? Who wrote the scriptures? Do you have any doubt that men wrote them? Do you have any doubt that men decided God's attributes?Or doo you have any evidence that God spoke to those men?

Yes, men wrote those scriptures but those men were allegedly inspired by the Holy Spirit. Why would men make stuff up about God's attributes? That makes no sense. I can believe that some of the Bible is inaccurate since men are fallible and some of it is made up stories, but not all of it.

Because you wrote it..."because God knows what we will choose before we ever choose it in this world."

God knows what we will choose before we ever choose it in this world but before we chose x, y and z were also options that were available to choose from. God knew which one we would choose (x, y, or z) because God is all-knowing.

There we go again.... Our choices will dictate to God, what he will know....No, sorry, it's the other way around.
Read message #463 please...

It is neither way around. Nothing dictates to God what He will know. God knows everything because God is all-knowing

Conclusion​

Yes, the argument is logically valid. It correctly follows from the premises that if God is infallible and omniscient, and God knows what choice we will make, then we cannot choose differently. If we could choose differently, it would contradict the premise that God is infallible and omniscient.

We will not choose differently from what God knows we will choose because God knows what we will choose and God is infallible and omniscient.

But before we chose what God knew we would choose (whatever that was) we could have chosen something else.

If we had chosen x, that would be what God knew we would choose.
If we had chosen y, that would be what God knew we would choose.
If we had chosen z, that would be what God knew we would choose.

 

[Ajax]

VERY "difficult for me to understand", as I have already demonstrated. Plain wrong, in fact.

No, it's not difficult, neither wrong. In my argument, God's omniscience and infallibility are absolute truths (as accepted in Abrahamic religions); they are not contingents, as modal logic defines.

 

[Trailblazer]

Fallacious? It is self-evidently true. If somebody knows what you will do before you do it, then you didn't choose to do it.

Explain why.

Believers who claim otherwise are making an incoherent claim. If choice means having the ability to choose otherwise, then doing what it was known you will do perhaps even before you knew yourself, then you had no choice, just the appearance of choice.

Explain why.

But the will WAS forced if it could be reliably predicted.

Explain why.

His explanation was that if you know what you will do before you do it (omniscient), then you lacked the power to do otherwise.

Explain why.

It wasn't a choice in the sense that we could have chosen otherwise.

Again, we can choose between a or b or c. Whatever we choose will be what God knew we would choose.
We will choose what God knows we will choose, but before we make that choice we could have chosen from all the available options.

If a, b, and c were all the available options:

If we had chosen a, then a would be what God knew we would choose.
If we had chosen b, then b would be what God knew we would choose.
If we had chosen c, then c would be what God knew we would choose.

 

[Ajax]

There is no contradiction. We will choose what we want to choose, a or b or c, and God knows we will choose.

So what if God knows? What God knows has no effect upon what we are able to choose.
We have free will so we can choose from all the available options and God knows what we will choose because God is all-knowing.

I never claimed to know that as a fact. It is a belief. There are no facts about God that can be known, all we can do is believe.

Yes, men wrote those scriptures but those men were allegedly inspired by the Holy Spirit. Why would men make stuff up about God's attributes? That makes no sense. I can believe that some of the Bible is inaccurate since men are fallible and some of it is made up stories, but not all of it.

God knows what we will choose before we ever choose it in this world but before we chose x, y and z were also options that were available to choose from. God knew which one we would choose (x, y, or z) because God is all-knowing.

It is neither way around. Nothing dictates to God what He will know. God knows everything because God is all-knowing

Conclusion​

Yes, the argument is logically valid. It correctly follows from the premises that if God is infallible and omniscient, and God knows what choice we will make, then we cannot choose differently. If we could choose differently, it would contradict the premise that God is infallible and omniscient.

We will not choose differently from what God knows we will choose because God knows what we will choose and God is infallible and omniscient.

But before we chose what God knew we would choose (whatever that was) we could have chosen something else.

If we had chosen x, that would be what God knew we would choose.
If we had chosen y, that would be what God knew we would choose.
If we had chosen z, that would be what God knew we would choose.

I'm sorry, but I can not understand you. You just provide statements without explaining how they can happen.
For example these two statements do not make sense to me...

1)"We will not choose differently from what God knows (before the beginning of the world if I may add), we will choose because God knows what we will choose and God is infallible and omniscient." Ok agreed.
2) "But before we chose what God knew we would choose (whatever that was) we could have chosen something else." How could we choose something else, if we can not choose differently from what God knows (as you said)?

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm sorry, but I can not understand you. You just provide statements without explaining how they can happen.
For example these two statements do not make sense to me...

1)"We will not choose differently from what God knows (before the beginning of the world if I may add), we will choose because God knows what we will choose and God is infallible and omniscient." Ok agreed.
2) "But before we chose what God knew we would choose (whatever that was) we could have chosen something else." How could we choose something else, if we can not choose differently from what God knows (as you said)?

Okay, now we are getting down to the nitty-gritty.

Let me turn that into a question.

Before we chose what God knew we would choose (whatever that was) why couldn't we have chosen something else?
The 'something else' will not be different from what God knows. It will be what God has always known we would choose.