xoc

I just wanted to interject an old saw here about predestination(or determinism) vs. free will(like randomness) as it is such an age-old dilemna.

As Maimonides put it ("borrowing" from Aristotle if I recall): God is the primary cause which must support all secondary causes.

A->B->C->D->E->F->etc.

Does "A" cause "F"? Not directly. Yet without A, no F, so F is a result of F(If "F" is man doing evil, God is A, Creating the line of succession)

Cross Examiner

Mr. Philosoft:
From God's eternal standpoint, His greater reality, the Cub's victory is "done" (though the word "done" is fully descriptive when actions are serial, temporal). From the Cub's finite, limited reality, the matter is yet to be decided--free will to go any which way. I suppose it's all about perspective.

Mr. HRG:
Which assertion exactly don't you like? Ironically, your claim that I have not supported some assertion is {unsupported} by any specific detail that would help me answer your objection. Keep in mind iidb.org is a bbs, not a thesis paper-exchange, so the support for assertions should be weighed accordingly.

I suppose you don't like the quote from Jeremiah? Yes, he speaks authoritatively and claims to be from God. If you don't like God, or the concept of Judeo-Christian God, you'll not like what Jeremiah has to say. If you don't trust the Word of God, you'll not trust Jeremiah. Have you concluded against God and Scripture already or are you waiting for more evidence?

I await your response

Philosoft

But it's not free. The Cubs cannot lose, lest God be wrong. There is no "greater reality." If God's perception of reality is different from ours, then ours is incomplete. QED.

Actually, it looks like it's all about trying to have it both ways.

Cross Examiner

Respected Moderator:
Perhaps it'll help to envision (or draw out a limited example) an individual's decision tree depicting every actionable variable, represented by branches, each possible choice colored black with a conspicuous red line demarking the actual paths chosen/enacted upon. Over the course of a normal lifespan, our tree is a hopelessly convoluted mess of potentiality and actuality that is near infinite in breadth, insurmountable for the human mind yet child's play to the omniscient. Standing apart from it, holding it in your hand, time does not exist, it is frozen with the beginning, end and all points in between, fully known yet open to exploration. Omnipotent and unbounded you are free to probe; replay, rewind, fast forward, and jump in and out at any crux and intervene as you see fit to bring about your sovereign plan. Resultantly, you experience time while existing outside of time in essence. This image of my eternal, omnipotent, omniscient God is a mere symbol of what it is to be infinite while interacting with the finite and retaining an immutable character. Indubitably, the reality will exceed the symbol but the analogy is not without descriptive merit. So, the Cubs will not lose in '03 from God's eternal standpoint though from the Cub's finite standpoint they may yet lose. It's all a matter of perspective.

demoninho

BGiC,
I just read your reply to my question in the omniscience, free will.... thread.

Well the way you view thing about the timeline there would be abn infinite numbers of frozen states of the universes, like frames of a film. And each one of those would be equally real. We just belong to a particular reel of frame, there would be an infinite number of other selfs that took other choices and not be saved. And we just expririence one universe but ít's just chance to which one we belong thus we have no free will loke this either.

Philosoft

Hey, I think I overlooked this before.
Wow, that's quite a mouthful. But, I'm not buying. There can be only one fundamental truth, God's or the Cubs'. If it is true for God that the Cubs will win the series, and if God's truths represent fundamental truths, then it is impossible for the Cubs to have a real option, in which the state-of-affairs 'Cubs lose the series' can be actualized. What the Cubs believe they can do is orthogonal to what they will do, if there is only one temporal path that can be actualized.

JCS

From page 1- How do you form a perception of dislike for something you cannot perceive or have any evidence for? I dislike the claims made by theists because I see no evidence for such. So the dislike you are most likely perceiving is the perception that the claims lack substance and in many cases deception or dishonesty are a part of such claims.

Cross Examiner

demonhiho...? What's the thinking behind that name?
you write:
No problem. Life is busy. Here I am answering your question two weeks later.

My aforementioned visualization is not really a timeline, it is a completely mapped out decision tree of actuality and potentiality for each individual that lived, against time on the "x-axis", if you can envision such a thing. The number of humans, while large, is finite. The number of potential and actual paths for free will is large, but is also finite due to the constraints of time. That is, we can only think of so many actionable ideas in a lifetime due to the serial nature of events in time--one thought/action follows another until we run out of time (die). So, while impossible for all the world's supercomputers to map a single individual's tree, even if all the thoughts and actions could be known, it is child's play for an omnipotent, omniscient, eternal God.

It is true though that each potentiality creates a mind-numbing amount of other potentialities, all multiplying geometrically that would be infinite if we ourselves were infinite, but we are born and we die. Again, due to time constraints, we do not have an infinite (never ending) amount of options. Caveat: this is the way I envision the reconciliation of omniscience and free will. The Bible does not speak about such a mechanism. If you actually read the Bible it will be apparent that such a thing is utterly beside the point, but I digress. Hope the above helps some.

Regards,
BGiC

Cross Examiner

Good morning Philo. You write:

I'm not selling. If you don't want it, you won't have it.

In this finite world, truth depends greatly upon time. That is, there is currently no truth regarding the winner of the '03 World Series. Such a thing does not exist, here, yet.

"...true for God that the Cubs will win?" Will win? As if it isn't manifest to an eternal God?

There is no fundamental, overarching reality/truth that both man and God are equally under. Remember, with our eternal/finite paradigm there are necessarily two realities. God's and man's. Eternal and finite.[list=1][*]Eternal: God[*]Finite: Man[/list=1]
Merging the two into one "fundamental truth" causes a contradiction between what God knows and what man may yet do. So, the outcome of the '03 World Series is dependent upon which domain's perspective (1, 2) you are speaking from. 1) God knows the Cubs win. 2) The Cubs may yet loose (probably even) the '03 World Series Championship since it is currently undecided.

We may have to take a new analogy soon, say the Raiders in the '04 Super Bowl.

Any (logical) temporal path can be actualized from the finite perspective, I can do whatever I will. My temporal path taken is...in the eternal domain but is yet to be in the finite. Similar in thought is the question; who is God? I AM that I AM. Difficult to comprehend, strange to even imagine, unprecedented to "make up"...especially from the mind of a Jewish shepherd who lived three millennia prior. If we could fully experience/know the eternal domain we'd not be finite.

Regards,
BGiC