Adam and Eve vs. Bob and Sue

[tonyrey]

I don’t think you quite understand what I’m putting forward in this example, but that’s ok.

But you do understand:

1. Scepticism is justified if anyone claims to have a revelation from God about our future behaviour
2. No genuine believer would contemplate the absurd possibility as trying to prove God is wrong

 

[Arandur]

I can see that people don’t have the patience for an in-depth examination of this topic and instead want short and partial responses. OK.

Which part is unrealistic? You first stated that if God tells you your future, it would be so convincing that you could not conceive of doing anything else. Then you state that if someone tells you what God said about your future, then you would not be convinced.

What is it about the way God would say something that makes it so convincing? Why would a human, repeating exactly what God said, not be convincing.

To make it a real world example let’s say that God tells me: You will be on the corner of J street and 10th next Wednesday at noon. What would make this statement more coercive if God said it?

How many stories have you read or seen on the screen about man dealing with the question of “fate?” Self-fulfilling prophecies and all that? People hearing about “their future” and trying to change it, only to do the very things that bring it about?

In these pretty universal (in time and culture) stories, mankind has long recognized that foreknowledge does not nullify free choice. And communicating foreknowledge doesn’t necessarily change anything, either.

 

[grannymh]

OK EVERYONE!

I think I know why God did not create Bob and Sue who would not sin.

God created the world to show forth His Mercy and Justice.

He did this best by creating Adam and Eve who would sin of their own free will.

By permitting the Fall God shows maximally His Mercy and Justice.

He can be merciful to every type even the worst scoundrel. And show justice to all kinds of people.

It is true that God continually shows forth His Mercy and Justice. We would be in deep trouble if He didn’t.

Humankind was created to freely share in God’s love in joy eternal. Freely is the operative word.
(Information source. CCC, 355-356; CCC, 1730-1732)

Links to Catholic teachings

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[atheistgirl]

God told Simon Peter that he would deny Him three times remember. This did not interfere with Simon Peter’s free will.

How?

Since Jesus predicted he would, he had to, or else Jesus/God would have been wrong

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

God told Simon Peter that he would deny Him three times remember. This did not interfere with Simon Peter’s free will.

That’s why I feel sorry for Judas.

I don’t believe he had a choice in the matter of being the bad guy.

God had ordained this to be his fate and there was nothing he could do about it.

Image he didn’t betray and the authorities never found him - no Crucifixion

No Resurrection

Poor Judas was set up

Sarah x

 

[Sparkythedog]

How many stories have you read or seen on the screen about man dealing with the question of “fate?” Self-fulfilling prophecies and all that? People hearing about “their future” and trying to change it, only to do the very things that bring it about?

In these pretty universal (in time and culture) stories, mankind has long recognized that foreknowledge does not nullify free choice. And communicating foreknowledge doesn’t necessarily change anything, either.

Communicating foreknowledge allows us to test the claim that free will and omniscience can coexist. In my previous post I set up a thought experiment paradox that shows the conflict between the two. But the responses I get are all ad hoc rationalizations like self fulfilling prophesy or a very persuasive God.

I’m not trying to be dismissive but I’m looking for a concrete resolution to that paradox that does not involve human error as a limiting factor.

 

[grannymh]

How?

Since Jesus predicted he would, he had to, or else Jesus/God would have been wrong

Sarah x

It could be the reverse.

God understands human nature. He understands the possibilities. I really cannot say for certain…but maybe it is possible that Jesus, having had many experiences with foot-in-the-mouth Peter, figured out where Peter was headed. In that scenario, it is Jesus Who had to predict what Peter, being Peter, would do.

 

[grannymh]

That’s why I feel sorry for Judas.

I don’t believe he had a choice in the matter of being the bad guy.

God had ordained this to be his fate and there was nothing he could do about it.

Image he didn’t betray and the authorities never found him - no Crucifixion

No Resurrection

Poor Judas was set up

Sarah x

Personally, I do not know Judas’ communication with God right before Judas died. God offers mercy to the last bit of life. I cannot underestimate the power of Judas to respond to God in sorrow and love.

 

[Thorns]

I can see that people don’t have the patience for an in-depth examination of this topic and instead want short and partial responses. OK.

How many stories have you read or seen on the screen about man dealing with the question of “fate?” Self-fulfilling prophecies and all that? People hearing about “their future” and trying to change it, only to do the very things that bring it about?

In these pretty universal (in time and culture) stories, mankind has long recognized that foreknowledge does not nullify free choice. And communicating foreknowledge doesn’t necessarily change anything, either.

This only makes it seem like God has determined the outcome.

If a person tries to avoud it and it ends up happening anyway, that sounds like it was already predestined to happen. How then, can a person be culpable for their actions if they try to change their course and it ends up happening anyway?

Like the story of Jonah for example. He exercised his free will in running away from God and His request, yet God still chose for him to end up in Nineveh and it happened. Obviously against Jonah’s free will.

 

[Thorns]

Personally, I do not know Judas’ communication with God right before Judas died. God offers mercy to the last bit of life. I cannot underestimate the power of Judas to respond to God in sorrow and love.

We shouldn’t underestimate the words of Jesus regarding Judas either, however. He said “it would have been better if that man were never born.” This pretty much says where Judas ends up.

 

[Arandur]

Communicating foreknowledge allows us to test the claim that free will and omniscience can coexist. In my previous post I set up a thought experiment paradox that shows the conflict between the two. But the responses I get are all ad hoc rationalizations like self fulfilling prophesy or a very persuasive God.

I’m not trying to be dismissive but I’m looking for a concrete resolution to that paradox that does not involve human error as a limiting factor.

I gave pretty in-depth answers to these earlier on this thread.

Maybe a couple of questions will help get us there.

1. Do you think an accurate prediction would violate free will?
   Typically, accuracy in prediction requires knowing a lot of data. Omniscience demands knowledge of that data. So even if God is bound in time (i.e., cannot see all events in time as they are happening), omniscience would define perfect knowledge of all factors, thereby allowing perfect prediction.

Even on a human level, we can often pretty accurately predict what people we know well will say or do in certain circumstances. Are we violating their free will in doing so?

1. Do you think that watching an event as it is happening and knowing what is going on somehow means that we are forcing it to happen that way?
   If God is outside time and can see all things in time as if they are happening now (a common trait attributed to God, as Maker of time), then it would be like me watching you decide to buy a Coke. I did not make you buy a Coke, but I can tell someone that you’re buying a Coke because I’m seeing you buy a Coke. Heck, I can even tell you that you’re buying a Coke–and I’m not interfering with your choice to do so.

 

[tonyrey]

But you do understand:

1. Scepticism is justified if anyone claims to have a revelation from God about our future behaviour
2. No genuine believer would contemplate the absurd possibility as trying to prove God is wrong

Correction:

1. No genuine believer would contemplate the absurd attempt to prove God is wrong

 

[tonyrey]

We shouldn’t underestimate the words of Jesus regarding Judas either, however. He said “it would have been better if that man were never born.” This pretty much says where Judas ends up.

Even if Judas were supposed not to have repented we still wouldn’t be entitled to pass judgment. Jesus died for everyone.

 

[Arandur]

This only makes it seem like God has determined the outcome.

If a person tries to avoud it and it ends up happening anyway, that sounds like it was already predestined to happen. How then, can a person be culpable for their actions if they try to change their course and it ends up happening anyway?

I don’t see how you’re getting that at all. I referred generally to the wide prevalence of stories throughout history and cultures of people dealing with the idea of “fate.” One of the most common treatments of such themes is that, if a person learns of their “fate” through some prophecy, prediction, or foreknowledge, they often try to change it. However, in many tales, it is shown clearly that the very choices those people make to try to avoid their fate are what bring it about.

This does not negate the choices they make. Just that they had unintended consequences.

It sounds to me like some people are getting free choice confused with the consequences of those choices. Your desired outcome doesn’t matter one whit–you have absolutely no control over the consequences of your actions. No one has ever claimed that to be a part of free will; unintended consequences certainly do not negate free will.

Like the story of Jonah for example. He exercised his free will in running away from God and His request, yet God still chose for him to end up in Nineveh and it happened. Obviously against Jonah’s free will.

Um, Jonah ultimately chose freely to go to Nineveh. How is that a violation of his free will?

He first tried to run away. There were consequences to that action. In his case, God intervened to make clear what He wanted Jonah to do. It was a rare case of strong intervention to encourage Jonah to change his mind and make a different decision. And it worked.

Any person may try to persuade–even by force–someone else to do something. That’s not a violation of free will.

The martyrs are a great example. Torture and threat of death if you don’t choose to sacrifice to other gods, renounce your religion, etc. The martyrs are **still free to choose ** to do what they want despite extreme forceful coercion. The fact that they choose death over doing what others try to force them to do is proof of that.

So let’s combine a couple of things: strong predictive knowledge and coercion by force. I can tell you without any doubt in my mind that if you had put a gun to the head of Mother Teresa, St. John Paul II, or, even now, Pope Francis, and told them to renounce Jesus or die, I guarantee you they would choose death.

Now, I don’t know those people nearly as well as God, but I can certainly predict with a very high degree of accuracy what they would choose. Even in the face of extreme coercion.

They have free choice, despite my (our) prediction, and despite the use of force.

 

[BellsMom]

All things are in the present to God

I hear many people say this on these forums.

No offense intended, but how can anyone possibly know how god perceives the universe? In time, out of time, past, future, present, etc.?

 

[Thorns]

Even if Judas were supposed not to have repented we still wouldn’t be entitled to pass judgment. Jesus died for everyone.

Yes , but how do you get around the very words of Jesus Himself?Though we aee not entitled to pass judgement, Jesus certainly is.

 

[Aloysium]

This only makes it seem like God has determined the outcome.

If a person tries to avoud it and it ends up happening anyway, that sounds like it was already predestined to happen. How then, can a person be culpable for their actions if they try to change their course and it ends up happening anyway? . . .

:twocents:

Let’s imagine Satan’s predicament. Suppose one of the greatest, most beautiful of creatures was given the role of serving mankind by making the Light of the Word known.
In heaven, he who serves is greater than the person served. That’s not how things are in this world nor in hell as a result of pride running amok. So, Satan rebelled.
Whether he had chosen to do it on God’s terms or as he ended up doing on his own, he became a chief indispensable player in the revelation of God’s love for His children.
One chooses one’s role, good or evil, in this divine drama of existence.

 

[Thorns]

Um, Jonah ultimately chose freely to go to Nineveh. How is that a violation of his free will?

He first tried to run away. There were consequences to that action. In his case, God intervened to make clear what He wanted Jonah to do. It was a rare case of strong intervention to encourage Jonah to change his mind and make a different decision. And it worked.

Any person may try to persuade–even by force–someone else to do something. That’s not a violation of free will.

The martyrs are a great example. Torture and threat of death if you don’t choose to sacrifice to other gods, renounce your religion, etc. The martyrs are **still free to choose ** to do what they want despite extreme forceful coercion. The fact that they choose death over doing what others try to force them to do is proof of that.

So let’s combine a couple of things: strong predictive knowledge and coercion by force. I can tell you without any doubt in my mind that if you had put a gun to the head of Mother Teresa, St. John Paul II, or, even now, Pope Francis, and told them to renounce Jesus or die, I guarantee you they would choose death.

Now, I don’t know those people nearly as well as God, but I can certainly predict with a very high degree of accuracy what they would choose. Even in the face of extreme coercion.

They have free choice, despite my (our) prediction, and despite the use of force.

Youre contradicting your other post. So then strong intervention and coersion does change peoples’ will after all, like how Jonah changed his mind?

Doesnt that play exactly to the idea that God has determined the outcome, one way or another? If God strongly intervenes, isnt free will not exactly free will?

 

[grannymh]

We shouldn’t underestimate the words of Jesus regarding Judas either, however. He said “it would have been better if that man were never born.” This pretty much says where Judas ends up.

In Purgatory for a very long time?

Seriously, here is my personal guess – all of us would have been born in the State of Original Holiness if Adam had not freely chose to sin against his Maker. Then, obviously, there would have been no need for a person with the role of Judas. “It would have been better”

(Information source. CCC, 396-409)

 

[Thorns]

In Purgatory?

So Jesus is saying it would be better to not have been born than to go through Purgatory first? I was always under the impression that Purgatory was a good thing, because you’re on your way to Heaven. So Jesus is saying non existence is better than Heaven essentially? Not to mention that many people can undergo purgatory and suffering on earth, in which Jesus says to take up for His sake. Is He really saying it would be better to have not existed than to suffer for the Kingdom?

Is that how Jesus feels about the majority of souls that have ever existed, since most of them have to be cleansed through Purgatory? Is he really saying that it would have been better if more than half of mankind never existed?

I dont think Purgatory is the answer. Its pretty clear that Jesus is saying Judas is in hell.