Answerer

The notion that God has infinite wisdom is crap. If God really has a super-intelligent brain, he would have created morally perfect beings with free will at the very beginning instead of morally flawed humans and ended up doing more 'works' like the creation of flood, etc, in the end.

John 3

"I also wonder whether God's moral perfection limits His free will."

It seems to me that the more we try to define God, the more we limiting god.

Any characterization of God implies some sort of subjectivity. Right?

Jobar

Well, the Vedantist concept of Brahma is of a 'being' beyond all pairs of opposites- free/determined, good/evil, eternal/temporal. And since all our human thoughts require opposites to be opposite, God is, quite literally, unthinkable.

However, since Christians are so set on defining God, and separating him from the universe, they can't accept that concept. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"- they cannot say that God is also wordless.

Kenny

Thomas Metcalf,

Just for clarification’s sake, I want to make it clear that I am not taking the direction which process theology takes when it denies that God knows the future because the future does not yet exist to be known. It occurs to me that you may have gotten that impression from my comment that omniscience strictly entails only that God knows all that there is to be known. My only purpose in making such a comment was to show that in no sense does God’s omniscience entail that God know His own choices prior (whether logically or temporally) to His actually choosing them.

I am a metaphysical determinist ( though I do not believe in physical determinism) and a compatiblist with respect to free will. I do not believe that any event occurs without some sort of determining causal or logical explanation, and I believe that God is aware of all such explanations. I do not believe in the metaphysical reality of time, but consider it an artifact of our measurements and perceptions, and I affirm (contrary to many contemporary Christian philosophers, theologians, and apologists) the classical notion of divine timelessness.

I agree that it is certain that God will never perform an evil action. I would deny, however, that God’s moral perfection entails that there is only one action for God to take in any given situation. God’s moral perfection is maintained provided that God never commits an immoral action, but there may be several morally permissible, morally good actions, for God to take in any given situation. For instance, in Christian theology, it is usually maintained that God would have been moral if He had provided no means of redemption for human beings and treated them in strict accordance with His justice. God is also moral, however, in providing human beings with redemption through Christ’s atonement and thereby showing them mercy. I do, however, because I am a compatiblist, think that there really is only one action that God (or any other free agent, for that matter) would take in any given situation, but I do not see this as incompatible with God’s having free will.

The above paragraph applies here as well. In addition, as an advocate of divine timelessness, I don’t see there being much meaning in the phrase “every time God is faced with a decision.” As I said, I believe that God’s natural knowledge and God’s free knowledge come into being simultaneously as part of an eternal a-temporal act.

I don’t think that this example is any refutation of omnipotence defined as the ability to actualize any logically consistent state of affairs. The reason that God cannot actualize S’ is because S’ is logically incompatible with God’s omniscience. There is no logically consistent state of affairs where God brings it about that God learns. If S is defined as “X learns something, where X is a rational being limited in knowledge,” and S’ is defined as “X brings about S,” then S’ presents a logically consistent state of affairs if ‘Thomas Metcalf’ is substituted for X, but not if ‘God’ is substituted for X (since the definition of God as an omniscient being precludes His being limited in knowledge).

God Bless,
Kenny

[ October 26, 2002: Message edited by: Kenny ]</p>

Kenny

Since I’ve been arguing that “God therefore does not have free will” does not follow from “God therefore is omniscient,” I am uncertain as to what further response you are looking for. If choice is defined as bringing about a state of affairs through an act of volition (a pretty reasonbale definition, it seems to me) then there is no incompatibility with God's choosing and His being omniscient.

God Bless,
Kenny

[ October 26, 2002: Message edited by: Kenny ]</p>

Kenny

Well, I would say that if God exists and does have infinite wisdom, then we, as finite creatures with extremely limited knowledge, are in a pretty poor position to judge His actions. I think the teacher of Ecclesiastes presents an appropriate admonition here when he says “God is in heaven, you are on earth, so let your words be few.”

That being said, your post concerns the problem of evil, which isn’t really the subject of this thread. However, I think that there is a good point to be drawn out of your post. Like you, I find the free will defense to be inadequate as a solution to POE. I think that it is within God’s power to actualize a world in which the free creatures within it would never choose to do evil (however, those creatures would not be us). I think that God chose to actualize a world in which He knew the free creatures within it would chose to do evil because He knew that the goodness of redemption and the overcoming of evil, in the end, would make for a morally superior world than one in which there is no evil at all.

God Bless,
Kenny

Kenny

It depends on what you mean by “limit,” I suppose. Is being unlimited as opposed to limited, itself a limitation? Herein lies the absurdity of negative theology or saying that God transcends all opposites, in my opinion. I prefer Anselm’s definition of God’s unlimitedness: “God is that which none greater than can be conceived.” This statement asserts something positive about God, and yet at the same time captures a sense of God’s ineffability. No matter how greatly we can conceive of God being, God is greater still.

God Bless,
Kenny

[ October 26, 2002: Message edited by: Kenny ]</p>

Kenny

Quite right. The God of Christianity is not some nebulous ‘something’ beyond all opposites or characterizations. The God of Christianity is the deeply personal God who was the friend of Abraham, Who revealed Himself to Moses by name, Who delivered the Israelites from bondage and made them His chosen people, Who became incarnate at a specific place in a specific time as a specific person, Who provided redemption through the very singular historical event of Jesus dying on a cross and rising from the dead, Who transforms individual lives and takes up His dwelling in individual people. This has always been, to the world, one of the most philosophically offensive aspects of Christianity. To me, it is also one of the most beautiful aspects.

God Bless,
Kenny

Answerer

Thats what most theists think which I feel is damn wrong. Even the bible claimed that humans have the ability to differentiate good and evil, so it doesn't require us to have infinite wisdom to judge an action. Unless of course, you feel the flood, the shattering of tower, destruction of various cities and the ending of innocent lives are 'good' deeds.


<strong>
That being said, your post concerns the problem of evil, which isn’t really the subject of this thread. However, I think that there is a good point to be drawn out of your post. Like you, I find the free will defense to be inadequate as a solution to POE. I think that it is within God’s power to actualize a world in which the free creatures within it would never choose to do evil (however, those creatures would not be us). I think that God chose to actualize a world in which He knew the free creatures within it would chose to do evil because He knew that the goodness of redemption and the overcoming of evil, in the end, would make for a morally superior world than one in which there is no evil at all.

God Bless,
Kenny</strong>[/QUOTE]

As you had said, humans can't understand God fully, so what makes you think your God will stick to his promise. As far as 'facts' are concerned, your God had an extremely bad habit of changing his mind every now and then. Perhaps He can be trusted now, but what if He turn nasty one day. Well, you never know.
Since all theists are ignorant of God's true characteristics, therefore I feel that its rather foolish and risky for them to trust an unknown entity which they have not met for their entire lives. By the way, redemption is your God's new(not an old) idea for now.

galiel

Is god a determined being? Having this discussion on a Metaphysical Naturalism board is like asking, do UFOs exceed the speed of sound? Or, does Britney Spears' talent come from her mother's side or her father's side?