God and Omniscience??

[Imperium]

Well lets assume God knows infallibly and unfailingly everything that was is and will be, including the choices were going to make.Yet gives us free will.Free will is the ability to make choices indpendently of all outside influence, including the preknowledge of God. And if thats not mutually exclusive i dont know what is.If he knows what were going to choose why give us free will in the first place?? Free choice would be nothing more than an Orwellian rubberstamping of Gods preknowledge,and by definition not free at all.

So even if God knows infallibly and unfailingly everything that was is and will be, it can still be the fact God's knowledge of what we will actually do is contingent upon our choices. For your argument to be sound, it needs to be shown that our free will is contingent upon God's knowing, but there is no reason to believe this is the case at all.

Furthermore, I would challenge the idea that there is even necessarily a relationship between someone having "complete knowledge" of a person's actions (i.e., such as God, or lets say a 100% accurate psychic) and such knowledge necessarily needing to be based upon the action itself. Such knowledge could rather just be known. In such a case the omniscient person (God or psychic) would just know what is, rather than needing the action or its reality thereof.

We here have two options out:
1) The contingency of knowing is on the persons actions (not the other way around); or
2) There is no correlation between knowledge of an action and the action itself (such knowledge just is)

The second is getting much deeper than is really needed here to fend off your challenge, but I offer it up to try show why I see that the burden of proof is clearly on those who claim that in "knowing something" there must necessarily exist a correlation between "knowing" and the "something". Why such knowledge just can't be innate needs to be logically ruled out before the argument you present can even be considered.

Could you try explain that a bit further??.I get what you mean and agree totally now ive had a thought about it but im having trouble understanding all the logic concepts and philosophical arguments.Ive never seen any of that before, all my experience is with Political science, Anthropology, Sociology and History

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

I liked Silvertusk's & Kurieuo's answers to you and hope you will give them some consideration. I offer this new installment, tweeked towards Predestination vs. Free Will...

I work as a truck driver. My employer has an agreement with Correctional Services to allow prisonners to work with me as helpers on my truck. Prisonners are cheap labor; they get to leave jail during the day and have proven to be hard workers...everybody is happy with the arrangement.

During my job, I drive by this evangelical church every day. They have a big sign out front that says:


PURPOSE.
what is yours?


After a guy has been with me for a while and is comfortable, he inevitably answers the sign out loud. I have heard all kinds of answers. Only one guy ever gave the «correct» answer from God's perspective:

Love the Lord with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
(Jesus in Mt 22:37 quoting Dt 6:5)

You see, man's «free» will is at enmity with God's, and in that sense alone it is free. Scripture says quite clearly in Jn 8:34, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. God will respect a person's «freedom» to sin, to turn away from Him. He'll even abandon people to their sin: ...[God] gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not be done.
(Ro 1:28)

Man is born into a state of spiritual slavery. The freedom of will we have is to choose between righteousness and evil, between submission to God and self-will.* You are a slave to whom you obey. (Ro 6:16) That is why Jesus says in Mt 11:29-30, Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.

You do have free will, Imperium. God has given you the opportunity to choose Him so that His purpose be fulfilled...not yours.

Be still and know that I am God;
I will be exalted among the nations,
I will be exalted in the earth!**



*see Dt 30:15-20 on this.
**Ps 46:10

[Imperium]

So our sole and only purpose on Earth is following the purpose of God?? Id really hate to think that.Because if you think about it then more than 60 percent of the worlds population is purposeless

[Canuckster1127]

So our sole and only purpose on Earth is following the purpose of God?? Id really hate to think that.Because if you think about it then more than 60 percent of the worlds population is purposeless

60% sounds pretty low to me .......

[Imperium]

60% sounds pretty low to me .......

I did say more than 60 Hmmmm okay il try work this one out.I think theres somethng along the lines of 1.7 billion Christians, and lets say .5 billion are liberal heretics like me (I may be wrong) and theres just over 6 billion people in this world

1.2 billion out of 6 billion is 20 percent so your right, its something more like 80 percent

hmmmm 80 percent of the worlds population doesnt subscribe to the Christian worldview... does that mean were right and only the select few will get to heaven or is God showing us we are wrong??

[Canuckster1127]

60% sounds pretty low to me .......

I did say more than 60 Hmmmm okay il try work this one out.I think theres somethng along the lines of 1.7 billion Christians, and lets say .5 billion are liberal heretics like me (I may be wrong) and theres just over 6 billion people in this world

1.2 billion out of 6 billion is 20 percent so your right, its something more like 80 percent

hmmmm 80 percent of the worlds population doesnt subscribe to the Christian worldview... does that mean were right and only the select few will get to heaven or is God showing us we are wrong??

i don't know the percentages actually. Only God does and labels are pretty poor measures. Jesus said that narrow is the path and few there are who find it ......

[Imperium]

hmm i dont know if im sure if i wnna believe a faith that claims exclusivity... it seems so inhuman and unethical to me

[Kurieuo]

Well lets assume God knows infallibly and unfailingly everything that was is and will be, including the choices were going to make.Yet gives us free will.Free will is the ability to make choices indpendently of all outside influence, including the preknowledge of God. And if thats not mutually exclusive i dont know what is.If he knows what were going to choose why give us free will in the first place?? Free choice would be nothing more than an Orwellian rubberstamping of Gods preknowledge,and by definition not free at all.

So even if God knows infallibly and unfailingly everything that was is and will be, it can still be the fact God's knowledge of what we will actually do is contingent upon our choices. For your argument to be sound, it needs to be shown that our free will is contingent upon God's knowing, but there is no reason to believe this is the case at all.

Furthermore, I would challenge the idea that there is even necessarily a relationship between someone having "complete knowledge" of a person's actions (i.e., such as God, or lets say a 100% accurate psychic) and such knowledge necessarily needing to be based upon the action itself. Such knowledge could rather just be known. In such a case the omniscient person (God or psychic) would just know what is, rather than needing the action or its reality thereof.

We here have two options out:
1) The contingency of knowing is on the persons actions (not the other way around); or
2) There is no correlation between knowledge of an action and the action itself (such knowledge just is)

The second is getting much deeper than is really needed here to fend off your challenge, but I offer it up to try show why I see that the burden of proof is clearly on those who claim that in "knowing something" there must necessarily exist a correlation between "knowing" and the "something". Why such knowledge just can't be innate needs to be logically ruled out before the argument you present can even be considered.

Could you try explain that a bit further??.I get what you mean and agree totally now ive had a thought about it but im having trouble understanding all the logic concepts and philosophical arguments.Ive never seen any of that before, all my experience is with Political science, Anthropology, Sociology and History

Which arguments - your argument from God's omniscience and free will, or my defense against it?

Assuming it is the second (my defense), specifically option 2 above that there "is no correlation between knowledge of an action and the action itself (such knowledge just is)"... Consider the following argument:

1) Knowledge of someone performing an action is not necessarily contingent upon that action being performed.
2) Someone performing an action is not necessarily contingent upon knowledge that such an action will be performed.
3) Therefore, neither knowledge or someone performing an action necessarily have a bearing on the other.

Given 3) God's omniscience may not have a bearing upon a person's action being performed or vice-versa (a person's action has no bearing upon God's knowing they will perform such an action).

But if God's knows someone will perform an action, then how does God know? (might be a question posed) Just because God knows someone will do something, and God's knowledge is 100% accurate, does not mean this knowledge was gained through God's "seeing" the action. God's knowledge could simply be innate to His character, like say our innate knowledge of what is good and what is bad. This may not be the perfect example, but hopefully it serves enough to provide a vivid picture at least of what I mean.

[Kurieuo]

hmm i dont know if im sure if i wnna believe a faith that claims exclusivity... it seems so inhuman and unethical to me

What of the "evil" and "hateful" people who have lived in our world? Should they be included in a kingdom where people have love for each other?

[Canuckster1127]

hmm i dont know if im sure if i wnna believe a faith that claims exclusivity... it seems so inhuman and unethical to me

"Jesus stated, I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father, but by me."

It would appear Jesus claimed exclusivity in that regard. While Jesus is fully human, He's also fully God. If you wish to believe such a claim to be inhuman and unethical, I would suggest that you may be creating a God or faith tailored to your own standards and not looking to see God as He has revealed Himself through Christ and the Bible. What is your standard of truth?

[YLTYLT]

hmm i dont know if im sure if i wnna believe a faith that claims exclusivity... it seems so inhuman and unethical to me

We should claim exclusivity in the things that are essential. But grace in the non essential.

The essential being the Gospel: how we get saved - Only by grace through faith in Christ.

But grace in the non essentials:
speaking in tongues, predestination, rapture, tribulation, rewards, etc...

Are these these things important? yes, I believe a correct view of these ideas can help us to grow in grace. Am I sure that I have the correct view? No. But I have verses that lead me to my conclusion about these nonessential doctrines? These things I hold with an open hand. (Some more open than others though )

But Jude 3 says:
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

But some churches will claim exclusivity in these non essential areas, saying that if you don't believe "this" or do "that" then you are not saved. So in that sense, exclusivity is bad, because that would be adding to and creating another gospel, of which would be false, because there is not another.

Galatians 1:6-7
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

The Gospel should be held with a closed hand.

Objective truth must be exclusive, regardless of what we believe about anything.

[Imperium]

"Jesus stated, I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father, but by me."

It would appear Jesus claimed exclusivity in that regard. While Jesus is fully human, He's also fully God. If you wish to believe such a claim to be inhuman and unethical, I would suggest that you may be creating a God or faith tailored to your own standards and not looking to see God as He has revealed Himself through Christ and the Bible. What is your standard of truth?

Now Canuckster how can we tell objectively which one of us is interpreting right here?? maybe you,me and everyone else on this forum is guilty of the same thing.Certainly the Jews in Jesus' time were guilty of doing so. And believe it or not this is how God has genuinely revealed himself to me. It may not be the same as yours, but it has every right to exist under God.

And my standard of truth is most definitely not the bible.As a politico-religious document it contains many truths about God but isnt 'true' at least not all the time. The truth is so mouch more complex than a simple book.Truth is Love

[Canuckster1127]

"Jesus stated, I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father, but by me."

It would appear Jesus claimed exclusivity in that regard. While Jesus is fully human, He's also fully God. If you wish to believe such a claim to be inhuman and unethical, I would suggest that you may be creating a God or faith tailored to your own standards and not looking to see God as He has revealed Himself through Christ and the Bible. What is your standard of truth?

Now Canuckster how can we tell objectively which one of us is interpreting right here?? maybe you,me and everyone else on this forum is guilty of the same thing.Certainly the Jews in Jesus' time were guilty of doing so. And believe it or not this is how God has genuinely revealed himself to me. It may not be the same as yours, but it has every right to exist under God.

And my standard of truth is most definitely not the bible.As a politico-religious document it contains many truths about God but isnt 'true' at least not all the time. The truth is so mouch more complex than a simple book.Truth is Love

The trouble with attempting to be so open minded that you attribute equal validity to every interpretation is that if you tilt your head just a little bit, your brain will slide out ......

There certainly is a subjective element to how we perceive and know truth. That's a valid point and one that I agree with. Taking it to the extreme to where objectivity becomes impossible actually denies objective truth and is just the post-modern point of view warmed over and attempting to serve it as a piping hot meal ........

[Imperium]

I dont think that all.To understand faith one must first question it.

And forgive me for being a flagrant 'post-modernist' but im a political scientist,Anthropologist and Linguist by training so we do nothing but be objective and open minded.Because bias will skew our research

[Canuckster1127]

I dont think that all.To understand faith one must first question it.

And forgive me for being a flagrant 'post-modernist' but im a political scientist,Anthropologist and Linguist by training so we do nothing but be objective and open minded.Because bias will skew our research

No offense was intended. I was using post-modern as descriptive of the philosophy I'm hearing, not to label you unfairly.

I'm not a Biblical hyper-literalist and I actually am pretty open about questioning most things, but there are some things in the Christian faith that I believe are pretty foundational.