Connection between free will and a known future?

[Peter_Plato]

He doesn’t look kindly on them

But that isn’t the point. If they are created with SSA, it was god who made them that way. So given a broken car, how are they to drive?

The “if” is a big one.

First of all, SSA has no genetic base, so it would be a stretch to say they were “created” that way.

Second, even if they were “created” that way, that does not show the proclivity cannot be overcome. There are a number of other “tendencies” that humans have, that are still subject to control by the person. Everyone is potentially a heroin addict, and so are born prone towards addiction to heroin, that does mean we should all simply take heroin and blame human “nature” because we have no choice in the matter.

SSA, if anything, is an emotional orientation, not a determined physical trait.

 

[oldcelt]

The “if” is a big one.

First of all, SSA has no genetic base, so it would be a stretch to say they were “created” that way.

Second, even if they were “created” that way, that does not show the proclivity cannot be overcome. There are a number of other “tendencies” that humans have, that are still subject to control by the person. Everyone is potentially a heroin addict, and so are born prone towards addiction to heroin, that does mean we should all simply take heroin and blame human “nature” because we have no choice in the matter.

SSA, if anything, is an emotional orientation, not a determined physical trait.

You are making some awfully broad statements that, to the best of my knowledge, have not been verified as accepted fact.

I know personally that we are not all born the same relative to drug use. In the days when cocaine was THE drug, I fortunately had no reaction to the same drug that had some friends flying. Obviously a very important difference.

 

[Peter_Plato]

You are making some awfully broad statements that, to the best of my knowledge, have not been verified as accepted fact.

I know personally that we are not all born the same relative to drug use. In the days when cocaine was THE drug, I fortunately had no reaction to the same drug that had some friends flying. Obviously a very important difference.

The human body builds tolerance to heroin as a natural response to its use. The more a person uses it, the higher the tolerance to its effects and the greater the body becomes dependent on it to sustain the emotional high. Attempting to stop creates withdrawal that is physical as well as psychological.

As far as I know, no human is immune to addiction. There may be differences in the amount and extent of use that creates the dependency, but heroin will affect every human being as an aspect of physiology.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

The “if” is a big one.

First of all, SSA has no genetic base, so it would be a stretch to say they were “created” that way.

Second, even if they were “created” that way, that does not show the proclivity cannot be overcome. There are a number of other “tendencies” that humans have, that are still subject to control by the person. Everyone is potentially a heroin addict, and so are born prone towards addiction to heroin, that does mean we should all simply take heroin and blame human “nature” because we have no choice in the matter.

SSA, if anything, is an emotional orientation, not a determined physical trait.

As Oldcelt pointed out you are making statements that aren’t factually established. I don’t think we can have a meaningful discussion about SSA as you see it as a choice, where I don’t. It’s a drifting away from the original topic.

My point is, if we are to believe that god is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, this is the best of possible worlds, from the fall to SSA. The world is how god wishes it to be.

 

[ShynnSup]

As Oldcelt pointed out you are making statements that aren’t factually established. I don’t think we can have a meaningful discussion about SSA as you see it as a choice, where I don’t. It’s a drifting away from the original topic.

My point is, if we are to believe that god is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, this is the best of possible worlds, from the fall to SSA. The world is how god wishes it to be.

What? You are talking about this world?

You are mistaken my dear.

We humans were created free, with free will, free of doing wrong or good, and this world is corrupted with evil, far away from what God would like or want. In the end, God is in control of everything, He is God. But that doesnt not mean he shapes the world as he wants, we do, because of our free will, and we are destroying it.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

What? You are talking about this world?

You are mistaken my dear.

We humans were created free, with free will, free of doing wrong or good, and this world is corrupted with evil, far away from what God would like or want. In the end, God is in control of everything, He is God. But that doesnt not mean he shapes the world as he wants, we do, because of our free will, and we are destroying it.

Earlier in the conversation we were speaking to god being “outside of time”. Being outside time he experiences all of time as “the present” and being omnipresent all places are “here.” Because of these he knows everything “omniscient”. The present, past, future, all things and places.

In the act of creation all things were created, we experience the unfolding of time but it’s not the case with god. When god created all things he declared “it’s good.” If he is outside of time so he was looking at all time, all places, not at one moment.

If we accept that god is omnibenevolent, and omniscient, we have to accept that he knows what is best. He called it good. If we accept that he knows what is best, we are living in the best of possible worlds.

You can reject any or all of those premises; that god is outside of time, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, or omniscient. If you accept them, we have to be living in the best possible world. It might not always be to our liking but it’s the best possible world.

The second part of free will follows the same track. If all of creation is declared “good” from god who knows all and knows the “end” of the story. It all turns out “good” We each play our part in the story but it is according to god’s will. If we weren’t playing a part that benefited the “good” story, we wouldn’t be playing a part. As we meander through our lives we serve god’s “good”. Even Judas who was told it would have been better if he was never born, had a part to play. Without him how would we get to the crucifixion, to redemption? It may have played out a different way with a different player, but it didn’t. It was part of “it’s good”.

 

[ShynnSup]

Earlier in the conversation we were speaking to god being “outside of time”. Being outside time he experiences all of time as “the present” and being omnipresent all places are “here.” Because of these he knows everything “omniscient”. The present, past, future, all things and places.

In the act of creation all things were created, we experience the unfolding of time but it’s not the case with god. When god created all things he declared “it’s good.” If he is outside of time so he was looking at all time, all places, not at one moment.

If we accept that god is omnibenevolent, and omniscient, we have to accept that he knows what is best. He called it good. If we accept that he knows what is best, we are living in the best of possible worlds.

You can reject any or all of those premises; that god is outside of time, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, or omniscient. If you accept them, we have to be living in the best possible world. It might not always be to our liking but it’s the best possible world.

The second part of free will follows the same track. If all of creation is declared “good” from god who knows all and knows the “end” of the story. It all turns out “good” We each play our part in the story but it is according to god’s will. If we weren’t playing a part that benefited the “good” story, we wouldn’t be playing a part. As we meander through our lives we serve god’s “good”. Even Judas who was told it would have been better if he was never born, had a part to play. Without him how would we get to the crucifixion, to redemption? It may have played out a different way with a different player, but it didn’t. It was part of “it’s good”.

I understand, and while it may seem tricky, its actually quite simple.

God creates each man good, no man is born evil.

If this good man grows, and instead of sacrifices he prefers pleasures, so he becomes loving of the flesh. He then invests all his money to satisfy his desires, leaving him with none. As he must eat, he kills and steals to survive.

You got a bad man right there, originally created good.

---

You cant say that this is the best possible world, because satans final defeat has to comes, and looking how things are these times, we are not so far away from that.
Jesus will return again, in his second coming, and once he establishes his kingdom here on earth, that will be the best possible world.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

I understand, and while it may seem tricky, its actually quite simple.

God creates each man good, no man is born evil.

If this good man grows, and instead of sacrifices he prefers pleasures, so he becomes loving of the flesh. He then invests all his money to satisfy his desires, leaving him with none. As he must eat, he kills and steals to survive.

You got a bad man right there, originally created good.

---

You cant say that this is the best possible world, because satans final defeat has to comes, and looking how things are these times, we are not so far away from that.
Jesus will return again, in his second coming, and once he establishes his kingdom here on earth, that will be the best possible world.

I don’t think it’s tricky at all.

“God looked at everything he had made, and found it very good.”

 

[Peter_Plato]

Earlier in the conversation we were speaking to god being “outside of time”. Being outside time he experiences all of time as “the present” and being omnipresent all places are “here.” Because of these he knows everything “omniscient”. The present, past, future, all things and places.

In the act of creation all things were created, we experience the unfolding of time but it’s not the case with god. When god created all things he declared “it’s good.” If he is outside of time so he was looking at all time, all places, not at one moment.

If we accept that god is omnibenevolent, and omniscient, we have to accept that he knows what is best. He called it good. If we accept that he knows what is best, we are living in the best of possible worlds.

You can reject any or all of those premises; that god is outside of time, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, or omniscient. If you accept them, we have to be living in the best possible world. It might not always be to our liking but it’s the best possible world.

The second part of free will follows the same track. If all of creation is declared “good” from god who knows all and knows the “end” of the story. It all turns out “good” We each play our part in the story but it is according to god’s will. If we weren’t playing a part that benefited the “good” story, we wouldn’t be playing a part. As we meander through our lives we serve god’s “good”. Even Judas who was told it would have been better if he was never born, had a part to play. Without him how would we get to the crucifixion, to redemption? It may have played out a different way with a different player, but it didn’t. It was part of “it’s good”.

You keep bringing this point up as if you have established it with certainty, but you haven’t. Certainly, the final end will be finally “good” because God’s will will “be done,” but in the meantime God permits a certain amount of “departure” from “it’s good” because of human free will.

God’s attributes do not entail that we must now be living in the best possible world, but rather that the final form of the temporal world will be the best possible one, which God’s omni characteristics guarantee it will be. It is the “story” in its entirety that will be, as a completed story, the best possible story - but only when it assumes its final form. From our perspective in chapter 13, the story may be in a dark and troubling, but necessary, time to get us to the denouement. The events in chapter 13 are not, positively speaking, good in themselves, but necessary for the story to turn out as it will, because of prior “permitted” events that resulted from the free agency of those in the story.

It is the best possible story because the characters in it have the great making characteristics of free agency, without those, the story would be dull and predictable. Those characteristic bring in the drama and adventure that make the story “good” but that does not entail the particular episodes or events are “good” in themselves, only in terms of how they will be resolved to the good end.

Let’s not create ambiguity more than necessary by making everything “good” just because it is part of the good and best possible story.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

You keep bringing this point up as if you have established it with certainty, but you haven’t. Certainly, the final end will be finally “good” because God’s will will “be done,” but in the meantime God permits a certain amount of “departure” from “it’s good” because of human free will.

God’s attributes do not entail that we must now be living in the best possible world, but rather that the final form of the temporal world will be the best possible one, which God’s omni characteristics guarantee it will be. It is the “story” in its entirety that will be, as a completed story, the best possible story - but only when it assumes its final form. From our perspective in chapter 13, the story may be in a dark and troubling, but necessary, time to get us to the denouement. The events in chapter 13 are not, positively speaking, good in themselves, but necessary for the story to turn out as it will, because of prior “permitted” events that resulted from the free agency of those in the story.

It is the best possible story because the characters in it have the great making characteristics of free agency, without those, the story would be dull and predictable. Those characteristic bring in the drama and adventure that make the story “good” but that does not entail the particular episodes or events are “good” in themselves, only in terms of how they will be resolved to the good end.

Let’s not create ambiguity more than necessary by making everything “good” just because it is part of the good and best possible story.

I don’t think it adds ambiguity, it’s the story of our lives. Any low moment gets to the next high moment. Are you ready to scrap your life because you have a bad day?

Because the story is good we need the drama, we need villains and heroes. All serve their part. Take any part away and the story unravels. It’s no longer “good.” Just because it’s dramatic doesn’t mean it’s not “scripted.” We are told the ending. It all works out. There isn’t enough free will in the world to change it.

Or… you can reject that god can’t loose and it’s all a **** shoot. But that puts god into time, makes him subject to outside forces, takes away his omniscience, etc.

 

[ShynnSup]

I don’t think it’s tricky at all.

“God looked at everything he had made, and found it very good.”

Yup, put it got corrupted.

Lucifer was good also, but he turned evil. Free will enables this.
With the original sin, the creation stopped being good. To become sinful.

Its not tricky? Well, then they are many inconsistencies with your theory, this is obviously not the best world possible.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

Yup, put it got corrupted.

Lucifer was good also, but he turned evil. Free will enables this.
With the original sin, the creation stopped being good. To become sinful.

Its not tricky? Well, then they are many inconsistencies with your theory, this is obviously not the best world possible.

No, it is the way god wants it. God knew before he created Satan that he would fall, yet he created him anyway. Satan serves God’s purpose just as any saint does.

 

[ShynnSup]

No, it is the way god wants it. God knew before he created Satan that he would fall, yet he created him anyway. Satan serves God’s purpose just as any saint does.

No you are mistaken, God did not create Lucifer to be evil.

That was hes own decision, because he has free will.

You are right, God did knew it, God knows everything, but this does not imply that it has to be predestined.

If I go and kill a man, Its not me serving my purpose, its me going against Gods will, against him, choosing my own decisions, because i am free.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

No you are mistaken, God did not create Lucifer to be evil.

That was hes own decision, because he has free will.

You are right, God did knew it, God knows everything, but this does not imply that it has to be predestined.

If I go and kill a man, Its not me serving my purpose, its me going against Gods will, against him, choosing my own decisions, because i am free.

If god knew Lucifer would fall, and created him anyway, he willed it. God saw all of creation and it was very good. Satan serves his purpose in the “good” of creation. Without Satan there is no fall of man, without the fall of man no incarnation, without the incarnation no salvation. Satan serves his perpose.

 

[Peter_Plato]

I don’t think it adds ambiguity, it’s the story of our lives. Any low moment gets to the next high moment. Are you ready to scrap your life because you have a bad day?

Because the story is good we need the drama, we need villains and heroes. All serve their part. Take any part away and the story unravels. It’s no longer “good.” Just because it’s dramatic doesn’t mean it’s not “scripted.” **We are told the ending. It all works out. There isn’t enough free will in the world to change it.
**

Free will doesn’t change the end, but it does significantly impact the journey along the way. That is not an insignificant “detail” because the alterations to the journey do alter the story and make it what it is.

Think of Columbo episodes. Just because the end was known did not stop the story from unfolding and being engaging.

That God knows the end does not mean the power to influence the temporal present is taken away from us. He works “with” us not by completely ignoring us and overriding all our actions. The “end” is the end for us. If what we do doesn’t matter, the Incarnation would have been meaningless and inconsequential.

Or… you can reject that god can’t loose [lose?] and it’s all a **** shoot. But that puts god into time, makes him subject to outside forces, takes away his omniscience, etc.

I am not clear that God allowing “outside forces” to have efficacy takes away his omniscience. It seems to me that omniscience that cannot allow “outside forces” is merely a pseudo omniscience, a Wizard of Oz conceptualization of omniscience that we project into eternity. You picture God as a kind of divine dictator who cannot tolerate threats to power so must nullify all competition. That is precisely your error regarding free will. God’s omnipotence is sufficiently robust to deal with and resolve all the autonomous “goings on” of all the free agents he has created. We find ourselves in the midst of that resolution process in time - a kind of quarantined temporality that is itself the “working out” of autonomy in time.

The fact that we don’t understand how and why it works is quite simply a function of our limited perspective from “in time.” The characters in a story are caught “in the story” so they cannot see the story from the wider, all-encompassing, purview that would provide clear understanding of why questionable events were necessary aspects of the story when they seem, and are, so dire from a viewpoint inside the story. The resolution will be good even though the things that necessitated it (and broke apart the good beginning) were not.

 

[JamesCaruso]

I read a lot of posts where people think that when God knows their future, that somehow removes their free will. Why is this? Why do people think that because God knows a person’s future that it suddenly became God that designed it and not their own design? Why do people make that connection?

Where is it written that God knows one’s future free will decisions? I can see where God can know many future things, because they are products of cause and effect. And I have heard the arguments that God is outside of time, but they don’t convince me. To me God is in one point of time, the present. Without the created universe, in would not be called a point in time, just Beingness. But because there is time, we can call it the present, some say, the eternal present. I can also see that God can calculate with eerie accuracy what our free will decisions will be, but that is by educated guess, not absolute knowledge. I stand unconvinced that God, who knows all things, knows future free will decisions. God does know all things, but the future is not an existent thing. The future does not exist-- when it does exist, it is not called the future, it is called the present. God is only present to the present, the eternal present, since the future and the past do not exist except as ideas, not actualities.

 

[ShynnSup]

If god knew Lucifer would fall, and created him anyway, he willed it. God saw all of creation and it was very good. Satan serves his purpose in the “good” of creation. Without Satan there is no fall of man, without the fall of man no incarnation, without the incarnation no salvation. Satan serves his perpose.

God created Lucifer as he created all the other angels, he did want it that way.
He did not want him to become evil, to reveal against him, but in his free will, he is able to.
He still knows everything. What happened, whats happening and whats going to happen.
What God wants its not relevant. The whole concept of free will includes not doing what God wants.

With your concept, you are saying that some people are actually predestined to go to hell, because God wanted it that way? Huh?

Moreover, It will not surprise me if Satan uses this “way of thinking” of yours to destroy you.
Im going to sin: “God wanted it that way, if not he would not ve created me”

Wake up, dont be blinded by the devil. You are free to do whatever you want, and what God wants its not defendant.

I think whats confusing you is the main topic of this whole thread:

“How can God know all the sins I am going to commit?” There must be predestined.

Thats what your logical and limited mind tells you. But God actually knows the future in a way we do not understand, and its not predestined.

Understood?

God bless you.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Lucifer is perhaps the most intelligent creature in the universe. If he thought for a minute that God already knew each and every person who would be saved, I don’t think he would continue to try to capture as many souls as possible. What would be the use? No matter what he does, the same souls would be saved and the same souls would be damned. The fact is, one’s final free will choice for God or Satan is not known until it happens. God may have a few tricks unknown to Satan to lure souls that would otherwise be damned, but that only means that he can do things to alter the outcome, and by so doing, the end result is partly due to His Beneficent design. But to know a free will decision before it is made renders freedom null and void. I do not even know my own free will decisions before I make them, only what I hope they will be.

 

[Roscoe_Turner]

God created Lucifer as he created all the other angels, he did want it that way.
He did not want him to become evil, to reveal against him, but in his free will, he is able to.
He still knows everything. What happened, whats happening and whats going to happen.
What God wants its not relevant. The whole concept of free will includes not doing what God wants.

With your concept, you are saying that some people are actually predestined to go to hell, because God wanted it that way? Huh?

Moreover, It will not surprise me if Satan uses this “way of thinking” of yours to destroy you.
Im going to sin: “God wanted it that way, if not he would not ve created me”

Wake up, dont be blinded by the devil. You are free to do whatever you want, and what God wants its not defendant.

I think whats confusing you is the main topic of this whole thread:

“How can God know all the sins I am going to commit?” There must be predestined.

Thats what your logical and limited mind tells you. But God actually knows the future in a way we do not understand, and its not predestined.

Understood?

God bless you.

He’s perfect and all powerful how could things other the way he wanted them. We all serve just not in the way we expect. That’s what keeps it interesting. Even Satan who says “I will not serve” does, just not in the way he expected. Want to hear God laugh? Tell him your plans.

 

[Peter_Plato]

Where is it written that God knows one’s future free will decisions? I can see where God can know many future things, because they are products of cause and effect. And I have heard the arguments that God is outside of time, but they don’t convince me. **To me God is in one point of time, the present. ** Without the created universe, in would not be called a point in time, just Beingness. But because there is time, we can call it the present, some say, the eternal present. I can also see that God can calculate with eerie accuracy what our free will decisions will be, but that is by educated guess, not absolute knowledge. I stand unconvinced that God, who knows all things, knows future free will decisions. God does know all things, but the future is not an existent thing. The future does not exist-- when it does exist, it is not called the future, it is called the present. God is only present to the present, the eternal present, since the future and the past do not exist except as ideas, not actualities.

Actually, I would argue that your bolded statement above is the problem. You are reducing eternity to “the present moment.” That is not what most classical theists, and, in particular, not Thomists, would claim. It is not that only the present moment is “eternal,” but that from the perspective of eternity all temporal moments (past, present and future) simply are.

The only reason things seem to go out of existence (past) or potentially come into existence (future) is because we, in the present, have a limited temporal view or “scope” of the entire process. An eternal view would give access to all past, present and future events as a malleable “whole.” God’s eternal (not constrained by time) existence would allow him to alter past events with reference to future events, which is why there appears to be, to us, a “dynamic” aspect to the present. The present is our own dynamic “point of contact” with the eternal which will “blend into” the eternal as a final outcome.

Thus, the sacrifice of lambs in the OT makes sense only with reference to the sacrifice of the Lamb, Christ, and that only makes sense with reference to the final end or “purpose” for which it had to occur which will only be clear at the end of the narrative. The reason things are not clear and not understood at this moment is because they can only gain full clarity when the end for which they are occurring has reached finality.

We operate under a kind of false, pseudo scientific, notion that the past explains the future. That the key to understanding what will happen is to replicate and control what is happening or will happen by looking serially back at patterns of events that have happened and using that knowledge to create the future.

This is not the way God works, however. He alters the past, present and future with regard to the teleological end and can effect anywhere along the timeline to make adjustments as necessary. In other words, he can account for our “free willed choices” because the entire story is open to him. It is being written in “eternity,” not in “the present” in ways we cannot even begin to comprehend.

The “danger” for us (but not for God) is in reducing God’s power to our views about that power. The reason that is a danger is because we succumb to the notion that our choices make no difference when, in fact, they are the very fabric of what God works with in “writing” the story.