Okay, this is the same as what I'm calling "ultimate will".
Of course.
I don't agree with the bit in bold and don't understand the bit in italics. When using the definition in bold by objection to 2b (see my reposted post) vanishes. When I say free will, I simply mean that the person has a choice: they can decide to do one thing or they can decide to do another.

I'm not exactly sure I follow your argument. Some would claim that since God has an infinite will and we only have a finite will we can understand nothing of the mind of God and His ways are far above ours. (This view has pretty good Biblical support) The conclusion being that speculation into issues such as this involving the mind of God cannot achieve anything. (I doubt that this is your argument)
The alturnative view is that since we are made in the image of God, our minds have a close resemblance to His and therefore we can try to follow his thoughts.
As usual on any such issues, I fence sit.

Yes and no. What about if the Creator designed the Creation to do what the Creation wanted? True it could "only do what the Creator designed it to do". But what if the Creator had secondary desires of his creation: That out of its own choice it should love its Creator. Inherent in the major desire "out of its own choice" (in which it can only do what the Creator designed it to do) is the possibility that it will not fulfill its secondary purpose. In this case it is not doing only what the Creator had designed it to do.

I've already objected to this line of reasoning once in my 2. It is not Pre-destiny as such because God is not related to time, and therefore doesn't already know.

True to the extent that you will have God designed and given free will and use it, false in that not everyone follows all of God's will.

I completely don't follow.

Yes, you said before it happened. Putting "God" and "before" in the same sentence is not really a good idea, God doesn't have "before"s or "after"s, presumably.

Yes. My point is that the problem you are trying to spell out would only arise if there was an omniscience being inside time. Then we would have a more serious problem. Thus it would be quite problematic if Jesus had claimed to be omniscient while on earth. Instead he mentions several times that he only knows of the future what the Father in Heaven chooses to reveal to him.

Predestiny can often be a Christian concept, although I don't know enough about it to know how it is supposed to work. If I recall correctly, Saint Augustine theorised Double Predestination: That God predestined certain (all? I can't remember) people for Hell and certain (all?) people for Heaven ("all" meaning all who go to the respective places). I don't see much of a role for free will in such a system, but I know virtually nothing about it.
Suffice of say that predestiny is not a non-Christian concept.
Just one with which I am extremely unfamiliar.
~Sigh~ Would any other Christians like to comment. Please? Pretty please?

Sincerely confused,
-Tercel

Well, what we have is actually another Bablical contradiction.

First god makes man.
Then god says that he is pleased, that all that he made was good.
Then he puts a tree in the garden...why? If man was the work of a infinitely intelligent being? Or was it that god wanted man to be evil, but did not want to be blamed for making man evil...?

Here's a twist on the free will portion of the discussion:
God made Adam and Eve, including the decision making procedures in their minds/wills. In order to make a choice, the decision making mechanism must have some sort of "bias", or it would not choose anything at all or simply choose something randomly(if possible). The procedure must value one thing over another in oder to make any choice. Who put those initial values there? Who made the decision making procedures? God supposedly did, yet is not responsible for the actions based on the values that were given to his creation. If there is cause and effect, then there is no free will.
The only response to my own thoughts is that perhaps God, being able to do any logical thing, made a mechanism free of initial values and outside influence. That sounds stupid, but perhaps there are other factors. Any thoughts?

Hi Tercel,

I have to disagree with you on a few points (though I agree with some).

"The alturnative view is that since we are made in the image of God, our minds have a close resemblance to His and therefore we can try to follow his thoughts"

What does "made in the image of God" have to do with the mind of God? Being that God is supposed to be all-knowing, I don't see how our minds can be in any way similar.


"Yes and no. What about if the Creator designed the Creation to do what the Creation wanted? ...But what if the Creator had secondary desires of his creation: That out of its own choice it should love its Creator. Inherent in the major desire "out of its own choice" (in which it can only do what the Creator designed it to do) is the possibility that it will not fulfill its secondary purpose. In this case it is not doing only what the Creator had designed it to do."

So you're saying the creation does what the creation wants to do? Remember, the creator created the creation to do that. (this is starting to sound like comedy) As far as the creation loving the creator, it sounds like the omnipotent creator is a little lonely. But to the end of this segment, what else is there besides what the creator created the creation to do? Anything the creation does is what it's supposed to do (or is "God" imperfect?).


"I've already objected to this line of reasoning once in my 2. It is not Pre-destiny as such because God is not related to time, and therefore doesn't already know."

So are you saying the omni-this/ omni-that creator that knows everything all of a sudden doesn't know? Sounds like a flaw; maybe the fundamentalists need to redefine what they mean when they talk about their "immutable" God.

"True to the extent that you will have God designed and given free will and use it, false in that not everyone follows all of God's will."

And I am saying that it is impossible NOT to follow God's will (he created everything; you confused me as to whether or not God "knows" everything, I thought the all perfect God who created the tree of knowledge knew everything, but I have been known to be wrong.)

I can't make that argument I made about living out the script any clearer than that (or at least I don't know how to ).


"Yes, you said before it happened. Putting "God" and "before" in the same sentence is not really a good idea, God doesn't have "before"s or "after"s, presumably."

In human terms (as I said before) God is in time. It's simply a way of talking so that an argument can be made. I agree that God transcends time, but how can you talk about no time when there is time in an argument? You'll have to teach me that one.

"Yes. My point is that the problem you are trying to spell out would only arise if there was an omniscience being inside time. Then we would have a more serious problem. Thus it would be quite problematic if Jesus had claimed to be omniscient while on earth. Instead he mentions several times that he only knows of the future what the Father in Heaven chooses to reveal to him."

Ok, is Jesus a part of God or not? If God simply talks to him about the future, then an argument could be made that YOU are the Christ. After all, what I am getting out of what you said is that Jesus isn't really God (which is where I stand on the issue anyway).


Ok, I was really under the assumption that God knew everything regardless of time, place, etc. Is this not true all of a sudden? Or are you saying that for the sake of argument? Seems that every christian I've met with (up until this point in time) believes that God knows everything and there is no "time" where God doesn't know everything. Please define what you mean by "God".

Its been fun so far,

hubj.

Oneworld,

Actually, although most Christians won't admit it, God not only created evil, but God takes full responsibility for doing so. I believe the contradiction you have shown actually proves (as well) that God isn't really perfect either. Not unless God's version of perfection is to play games with what it creates; also, blessing some and torturing others.

Also, now that you pointed that out, what do you think about Gen 1 and 2? How in the first chapter man (and woman) was created to eat and multiply and, in the second chapter, God punishes the two by making them do what was already being done in the furst chapter? I guess the story writer was in a rush for something else (a little head from his wife perhaps?). Well, that's my 2 cents.

"Made in the image of God" cannot mean we look like God. So what does it mean? The obvious alturnatives are that we are spiritual and/or beings with minds like God. This would suggest that it is very possible that God has a mind which is to some extent similar to ours... true, the attributes of God necessitate that His mind is somewhat different to ours too.

What else is there besides what the creator created to the creation to do? There is that which it must decide to do itself, love God, love others etc, it can either decide to do that or it can decide not to. God can't force it to do so, because in doing so he'd stop it doing the very thing he's trying to force it to do. And yes there are some things God can't do. And no, the fact that God can't perform a logically inconsistent act doesn't mean he's not omnipotent.
Definition of Omnipotence: The ability to realise any logically consistent idea.

Maybe they do, maybe fundamentalists need to redefine a lot of other things too. But I'm not a fundamentalist, and please don't get me started on them.

And my argument is that if God desires free will for his creation and desires that creation to do something out of free will, then God cannot enforce this desire no matter what "omni"s you give him because the act of enforcing the latter would prevent it occuring. ie Enforcement is logically inconsistent. I can't make my argument any clearer than this either.

It's impossible. The best method I've come across is to use the present tense in relation to God.

Yes and no. The doctrine of the Trinity is always difficult. Anyway, while on Earth Jesus was not in possesion of his omnis and only could do what the Father enabled him.

We could be here till next year before I think of a suitable definition of God.
God knows everything regardless of time, place etc. Yes.
"Seems that every christian I've met with (up until this point in time) believes that God knows everything and there is no "time" where God doesn't know everything." I do too.

But the argument that God knows things in advance and therefore they are not free, relies on some faulty trans-time logic which I'm trying to demonstrate.
Let us set up a system. First we have a world in time in which people have entirely free will to make their decisions. Secondly we have a being outside of time which observes that world. What causes the people to act the way they do? Is it the being outside of time which merely observes? No, of course not, it is the free will with which they made their decisions in the first place.
At every point in time on the world it would be true to say about that Being "that Being knows all that ever happens in the world of time, it knows what happened in the past, and it knows what will happen in the future". Yet this Being's knowledge in no way pre-determines the future, the future is still entirely determined by the actions of the people in the world.

Because God is outside of time, he knows all that happens within time. Does he know events "before" they happen? Or "after" they happen? Or "while" they happen? Of course not, God is not in time and therefore none of these words can possibly be applied to him. God simply "knows" all events. And at any point within time we can state that God is all-knowing. But this of course implies nothing about whether events are pre-determined - they may well be, but this conclusion is not forced from God's omniscience.

-Tercel

God created potential for evil. We used that potential. There are two main views on evil, but the one I think is most logically defensible is Saint Augustine's view that evil is not a substance. In this view something is evil insofar as it fails to conform to God's will and is good insofar as it conforms to God's will. From this definition it can rapidly be seen that God can not possibly create evil. Evil comes from God giving us free will and us choosing to do something which is against God's will.

Hi Tercel,

You said "God created potential for evil."

"I form light, and I create darkness; I produce well-being and I create evil.."-Isaiah 45:7 The OT identifies God as the source of evil in other places as well; Jer. 4:6, Amos 3:6, Mic. 2:3, Eccles 1:13, and Job 2:10.

Before Satan came on the scene the OT God carried out a certain amount of evil.

Parsiafal

About half the translations have "create evil" the other half have "bring disaster".

In general these passages do not refer to God creating evil, but rather refer to him bringing punishment or causing suffering.

So an argument could, I suppose, be made against the translations which imply God as the creator of evil. I'm not going to do this.
Responsibility for Evil is one of the major differences between the Christian God and the Jewish God. The Jewish God is dystheistic (ie responsible for both Good and Evil) whereas the Christian God is Eutheistic (ie purely Good). This is a basic difference in theology, and this is why the writings in the Old Testament believe God to be responsible for evil.
If you think this counts as one of your "contradictions" by all means go add it to your list, but don't bother me with it: I'm not a fundamentalist.

??? When did Satan come on the scene?

Tercel,

I like your interpretations of how this thing works. Of course I guess I'll have to agree with you that we could argue about this from now until doomsday, but hey, we have to do something with our lives right? Anyway, time for yet another response.

"The obvious alturnatives are that we are spiritual and/or beings with minds like God."

I guess Adam and Eve didn't need that silly old Tree of Knowledge in order to have a mind like God, did they?

" There is that which it must decide to do itself, love God, love others etc, it can either decide to do that or it can decide not to."

What do you suppose Adam did when he was by himself? But as to decisions made by the created, I beg to differ. There is really no point in us arguing it any further because you believe we are made to choose things, and I believe we only do what we were made to do to begin with, thus no free will.

Some things "God can't perform" huh? Your God gets more and more interesting everytime I talk to you.

Sorry about the fundie remark, I wasn't saying you were, I was just making an assumption that a fundie probably influenced your definition of God (similar to myself, though I no longer buy it).

"And my argument is that if God desires free will for his creation and desires that creation to do something out of free will, then God cannot enforce this desire no matter what "omni"s you give him because the act of enforcing the latter would prevent it occuring. ie Enforcement is logically inconsistent."

Well, that argument doesn't apply because that is what God made the human to do. I'm still not clear as to your definition of God, so I'm going to leave the rest of that one alone.

"It's impossible. The best method I've come across is to use the present tense in relation to God."

Present tense for a timeless God? Then, why are you telling me about time then?

"Yes and no. The doctrine of the Trinity is always difficult. Anyway, while on Earth Jesus was not in possesion of his omnis and only could do what the Father enabled him."

Yes and no? What kind of answer is that? It still leaves me puzzled as to whether or not Jesus=God. Trinity isn't really difficult, however, the difficulty comes in when you explain Jesus and maybe even the holy spirit, but forget to explain God (if you explain God, you really don't need the holy spirit or Jesus). This is probably why many people are monotheistic. It's not complicated like trinity is. You might as well say you worship 3 Gods. At least you could explain what you believe.

If God is outside of time as you claim, then are you saying that the Special Creation theory is false? It seems that God would have to be in time in order to create things in time. ANyway, I think pre-determination would be ever present. Not by force, but because if God knows things to be, then the things God knows have to be. They can't be any other way. Also, your time-less God claim seems to contradict eternity as well, being that eternity is an infinite measure of time. But that's another discussion.

It's been fun,

hubj.

[This message has been edited by hubjones (edited June 10, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by hubjones (edited June 10, 2001).]