Is the abrahamic God omniscient, and does that conflict with free will?

[Nakosis]

I don't understand how knowing the future is the same as controlling the future.

Suppose each person throughout all time had a camera over their shoulder recording all the choices that we made during our lives, and G-d has the ability to view all those movies, how does viewing our choices equate to G-d controlling our choices?

If you know the actual future that means no one can do anything other then what they are going to do. Meaning you couldn't "choose" to do something else.

The, to me incorrect, concept of freewill is that you could choose a different future. If you could that would mean the future you knew was not really the future. So not that you'd control the future but that you could not alter it. The ability to alter the future some believe is a necessary component of freewill.

I think the right concept of freewill is simply the ability to do what you want to do. People are going to choose what they want to choose. So the ability to have an alternate future would require a person do what they didn't choose to do.

So since a person can't do something they didn't make a choice to do, there is no freewill. This concept of freewill doesn't make any sense to me but I guess that is the argument.

 

[Nakosis]

How can a "God" that doesn't exist be omniscient?
*

A god that doesn't exist can be whatever you want them to be. Existent gods would be where that becomes difficult.

 

[Akivah]

On the basis that what is known is true, and that choice implies options, the idea that that g-d or anyone knows a future choice robs us of any options, so what we do was never really our choice.

I'm still not seeing your reasoning.

We have the free choice to do anything. The fact that G-d knows our choices has no effect on the choices that we made. We know what happened in a footbal game this past week. That we know that a quarterback threw a pass to a particular person doesn't mean that the quarterback wasn't allowed to make a choice at the moment.

We make choices all the time. That our choices may be recorded doesn't mean that we didn't make choices at the time.

 

[Akivah]

If you know the actual future that means no one can do anything other then what they are going to do. Meaning you couldn't "choose" to do something else.

No, the person already made their freewill choices. Just look back at any news cast. The person recorded on TV already made their choices. That their choices were recorded does not mean that they didn't have freewill to make them. The tape can be watched over and over again, but the person keeps making the same choice. It has no effect to the fact that they had freewill at the time they made their choice.

The, to me incorrect, concept of freewill is that you could choose a different future. If you could that would mean the future you knew was not really the future. So not that you'd control the future but that you could not alter it. The ability to alter the future some believe is a necessary component of freewill.

We can choose a different future at the time we make the choice. It is totallly up to us. That your choice was recorded or known in some fashion has no effect on your choosing at the time.

And as no mortal person knows their future, how could you possibly know what your future is, to make it different?

So since a person can't do something they didn't make a choice to do, there is no freewill. This concept of freewill doesn't make any sense to me but I guess that is the argument.

Still makes no sense to me. You choose everything you want to do. You make your own future through your choices.

 

[Skwim]

I think the right concept of freewill is simply the ability to do what you want to do. People are going to choose what they want to choose. So the ability to have an alternate future would require a person do what they didn't choose to do.

Right on

I too have always considered freewill to be the ability to have done differently.

 

[Nakosis]

No, the person already made their freewill choices. Just look back at any news cast. The person recorded on TV already made their choices. That their choices were recorded does not mean that they didn't have freewill to make them. The tape can be watched over and over again, but the person keeps making the same choice. It has no effect to the fact that they had freewill at the time they made their choice.



We can choose a different future at the time we make the choice. It is totallly up to us. That your choice was recorded or known in some fashion has no effect on your choosing at the time.

And as no mortal person knows their future, how could you possibly know what your future is, to make it different?



Still makes no sense to me. You choose everything you want to do. You make your own future through your choices.

Ok, so this this idea, the ability to have acted differently then they did you also believe is not possible. A similar but actually different concept of "freewill"

So we have one definition of freewill. The ability to to make a choice. This seems obvious. We all make choices.

The other definition of freewill is the ability to have made a choice other then the choice we made. As the other definition seems obviously true, this seems obviously impossible.

Some confusion in the debate I suppose is the equivocation of freewill.

There are those though who do believe it is possible to have made a different choice than the one that was made and therefore alter the future.

Actually I believe this is possible. In rare cases with rare people.

The idea of determinism. The future is caused by the past. In other words events that happen in your past caused you to make the choices you made. Because of these causes you made the choice that you did and could not have made a different choice.

Where I believe this type of freewill is possible is with individuals who have released their desires and can act without being influenced by the past.

For example someone causes you harm. Because of religious/spiritual belief you forgive them. That harm they caused is no longer an influence of the past that causes your decisions.

If it were possible to let go of all past causes for one's actions, Then their actions could be the creative "first cause" that would be necessary to have a future that was not caused by the past.

 

[Willamena]

If you know the actual future that means no one can do anything other then what they are going to do. Meaning you couldn't "choose" to do something else.

The, to me incorrect, concept of freewill is that you could choose a different future. If you could that would mean the future you knew was not really the future. So not that you'd control the future but that you could not alter it. The ability to alter the future some believe is a necessary component of freewill.

I think the right concept of freewill is simply the ability to do what you want to do. People are going to choose what they want to choose. So the ability to have an alternate future would require a person do what they didn't choose to do.

So since a person can't do something they didn't make a choice to do, there is no freewill. This concept of freewill doesn't make any sense to me but I guess that is the argument.

Perhaps you didn't intend to word it that way, but... we don't "choose a future," at all. We choose here, now. The future is incidental, and far from fixed. It's a chaos of probabilities. Even dropping a ball with the assurance that it will fall down, has a degree of inherent uncertainty.

Thank goodness.

 

[Skwim]

The idea of determinism. The future is caused by the past. In other words events that happen in your past caused you to make the choices you made. Because of these causes you made the choice that you did and could not have made a different choice.

Where I believe this type of freewill is possible is with individuals who have released their desires and can act without being influenced by the past.

For example someone causes you harm. Because of religious/spiritual belief you forgive them. That harm they caused is no longer an influence of the past that causes your decisions.

Although these particular past events may not be causing one's actions, other causes are. If they weren't then one would do absolutely nothing at all. The alternative is that what one does is an utterly random event.

The future is incidental, and far from fixed. It's a chaos of probabilities. Even dropping a ball with the assurance that it will fall down, has a degree of inherent uncertainty.

There may be an uncertainty as to what we believe to be the outcome, but that outcome is truly fixed by the causes that bring it into being.

 

[Willamena]

I'm still not seeing your reasoning.

We have the free choice to do anything. The fact that G-d knows our choices has no effect on the choices that we made. We know what happened in a footbal game this past week. That we know that a quarterback threw a pass to a particular person doesn't mean that the quarterback wasn't allowed to make a choice at the moment.

We make choices all the time. That our choices may be recorded doesn't mean that we didn't make choices at the time.

If you knew ahead of time that the quarterback would throw to a particular player and no one else--it would happen that way and cannot happen any other way--then as you sit there and watch the player make that choice, what other option did he have (something else he might have chosen)? None.

 

[Willamena]

No, the person already made their freewill choices. Just look back at any news cast. The person recorded on TV already made their choices. That their choices were recorded does not mean that they didn't have freewill to make them. The tape can be watched over and over again, but the person keeps making the same choice. It has no effect to the fact that they had freewill at the time they made their choice.

A choice between what must happen and what did happen is not a choice. It's the same thing.

We can choose a different future at the time we make the choice. It is totallly up to us. That your choice was recorded or known in some fashion has no effect on your choosing at the time.

If it's known that you chose A, though, then choosing B could never have happened.

And as no mortal person knows their future, how could you possibly know what your future is, to make it different?



Still makes no sense to me. You choose everything you want to do. You make your own future through your choices.

 

[Willamena]

There may be an uncertainty as to what we believe to be the outcome, but that outcome is truly fixed by the causes that bring it into being.

I know you believe that, but there is no evidence for it.

 

[idav]

Perhaps you didn't intend to word it that way, but... we don't "choose a future," at all. We choose here, now. The future is incidental, and far from fixed. It's a chaos of probabilities. Even dropping a ball with the assurance that it will fall down, has a degree of inherent uncertainty.

Thank goodness.

Thats just it, uncertainty is inherent in everything, even for things we think should be inevitable. Anomalies are always going to be a factor for hard determinism to reckon with. Anomalies sometimes are too slight to notice but just that they exist is enough for freedom from hard determinism.

 

[Akivah]

If you knew ahead of time that the quarterback would throw to a particular player and no one else--it would happen that way and cannot happen any other way--then as you sit there and watch the player make that choice, what other option did he have (something else he might have chosen)? None.

Your reasoning attempts to equate the entity that is timeless and knows everything with the person that is mortal and lives in linear time.

The person in linear time is living their life and, in this example, choose to throw the ball to a particular person. There were other causes (defensive players) and life experiences (which play would most likely result in a successful outcome), but the player had a free choice about the disposition of the ball.

The timeless entity knows everything, that has ever happened, is happening, and will ever happen. He knows the choice that will be made. He doesn't force the player to make a choice. The player relies on his own thoughts, experiences, and beliefs.

The player has every option in the world open to him, including eating the football or punching the ref in the face (random actions). The timeless entity knows what the player will do. Freewill is fully intact.

 

[Nakosis]

Perhaps you didn't intend to word it that way, but... we don't "choose a future," at all. We choose here, now. The future is incidental, and far from fixed. It's a chaos of probabilities. Even dropping a ball with the assurance that it will fall down, has a degree of inherent uncertainty.

Thank goodness.

If I save money, am I not trying to choose a future in which I am not broke/homeless?

Sure it is a imagined future I am choosing which may or may not come to pass. I am choosing an imagined future which may become actual enough.

 

[Thruve]

If I save money, am I not trying to choose a future in which I am not broke/homeless?

Sure it is a imagined future I am choosing which may or may not come to pass. I am choosing an imagined future which may become actual enough.

Thats just it! FREEWILL allows you to do. The thing is he controls the outcome, not you. I still don't understand why a handful of people are claiming determinism under an omniscient god.

 

[Nakosis]

Thats just it, uncertainty is inherent in everything, even for things we think should be inevitable. Anomalies are always going to be a factor for hard determinism to reckon with. Anomalies sometimes are too slight to notice but just that they exist is enough for freedom from hard determinism.

Which may defeat determinism but neither does in support freewill.

Determinism seems a logical conclusion given our experience with reality. However we can't say for sure first causes don't exist.

Theories now say there was likely a first cause to start the universe off. If so then first causes do happen.

 

[Nakosis]

Thats the thing, God gave you the FREEWILL to do so, but, he controls the outcome, not you.

Meaning you believe God will manipulate reality to correct for any wrong choices/actions I make?

IOW I can choose to do something "evil" but God will fix it?

 

[Thruve]

Meaning you believe God will manipulate reality to correct for any wrong choices/actions I make?

IOW I can choose to do something "evil" but God will fix it?

No dude

In the example you provided, you may save as you so willfully choose but in the end you may still end up homeless. "Correct for any wrong choices/actions I make?"-> That whole clause is irrelevant.

 

[idav]

Which may defeat determinism but neither does in support freewill.

Determinism seems a logical conclusion given our experience with reality. However we can't say for sure first causes don't exist.

Theories now say there was likely a first cause to start the universe off. If so then first causes do happen.

Yeah first causes happen, obviously, we got a big bang didn't we. We don't know how often they happen though but I only need one.

It does support freewill, not that people agree that hard determinism has been defeated. Yes cause and effect is logical but going back far enough logic gets chucked out the spaceship at the speed of light.

 

[Willamena]

Your reasoning attempts to equate the entity that is timeless and knows everything with the person that is mortal and lives in linear time.

The person in linear time is living their life and, in this example, choose to throw the ball to a particular person. There were other causes (defensive players) and life experiences (which play would most likely result in a successful outcome), but the player had a free choice about the disposition of the ball.

The timeless entity knows everything, that has ever happened, is happening, and will ever happen. He knows the choice that will be made. He doesn't force the player to make a choice. The player relies on his own thoughts, experiences, and beliefs.

The player has every option in the world open to him, including eating the football or punching the ref in the face (random actions). The timeless entity knows what the player will do. Freewill is fully intact.

Timelessness would mean no future to know, so no contradiction.