Free will and God himself

[heybulldog]

In one sense you are correct, if God knows that you are going to die an atheist, there is nothing you can do to change that.

Thank you for acknowledging my point.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

ProdglArchitect:

In one sense you are correct, if God knows that you are going to die an atheist, there is nothing you can do to change that.

Thank you for acknowledging my point.

Well… yes, I acknowledge the point you think you’re making, but then gave a significant amount of information to clarify it… do you want to talk about any of that, or are you only here to soapbox, and not to actually learn anything?

 

[adamhovey1988]

In English, we capitalise God. I’d LOVE to talk to you about this, but put some respect on the word (which we Christians use as a proper noun), do the same if you want an honest discussion.

 

[heybulldog]

Ok, your argument is contradictory at best. You agree that if your god knows that I’m going to die an atheist, there is nothing I can do about it. Then you go on to say that his knowledge of that fact doesn’t mean that I can’t change that fact. The rest of your argument is a convoluted assertion.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Ok, your argument is contradictory at best. You agree that if your god knows that I’m going to die an atheist, there is nothing I can do about it. Then you go on to say that his knowledge of that fact doesn’t mean that I can’t change that fact. The rest of your argument is a convoluted assertion.

That is not even close to what I said… not even in the same country…

I said that God’s knowledge of your final outcome is the result of your choices. He knows you die an atheist because you chose to remain an atheist until you die. Or, he knows you die a theist because you chose to become a theist before you die. Only one of these two potentials will be actualized, and the one that actually occurs is the one God has eternally known.

The reason you can’t change it (from an eternal perspective) is because it is the result of the sum of your choices in life, and once you’re dead you can change what your state was when you died. God does not prevent you from becoming a theist throughout your life, therefore causing you to be an atheist when you die. He gives you every chance to change up until the moment of your death, at which point your theist/atheist status is solidified, and cannot be changed.

I don’t see what’s so difficult about this for you to understand. When you die, you are either going to be an atheist or a theist. Which you are is the result of your choices. God, having knowledge of all of our choices, knows that you chose at the moment of death, and has know that eternally. If you die as an atheist, then God has eternally known that that is your state at death. If, on the other hand, you die as a theist, then God has eternally known that that is your state at death. Whatever God knows is the result of your final choice.

You will be one or the other at death, but you can only be one of the two. Whichever one of the two you are, God has been witness to your choice from all eternity.

---

Maybe this will help.

You keep talking about the “fact” of you dying an atheist. Well, that is only a fact if you die an atheist. If you die a theist, then the fact that God knows is that you die a theist. God cannot know you die an atheist if you actually die a theist. The choice is up to you, and God knows how you chose. Once you’re dead you cannot change it, but every moment preceding that death gives you the opportunity to convert.

Since God’s knowledge encompasses all of time, He is eternally witness to your choice at death, which is the source of His “current” knowledge of your outcome.

 

[heybulldog]

Sorry, can’t do that. I’ll respect you, but I don’t have to respect your god.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

You really should capitalize it.

God is a the proper noun for what we’re discussing. What you’re doing would be equivalent to, instead of saying “I pledge allegiance to the flag, of The United States of America, and to the republic…”, you say “I pledge allegiance, to country, and to the republic…”

It’s not merely a matter of respect, it’s also a matter of proper grammatical structure.

 

[heybulldog]

I don’t believe your god is real, so…My grammar isn’t the greatest anyway.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

I don’t believe your god is real, so…My grammar isn’t the greatest anyway.

I don’t believe Zeus is real, but it is still proper to capitalize his name when I discuss him. Now, if I refer to him as a Greek god, it’s an improper noun, so lower case is appropriate. God is the equivalent to Zeus grammatically, acting as the proper name of the concept being discussed. Therefore, it is correct to capitalize.

No worries, we’re happy to help with all avenues of life, including grammar

 

[joeybaggz]

If god knows without a doubt that I will die an atheist, how can I change and become a theist? If I change and become a theist doesn’t that mean that your god doesn’t know everything?

God knows if you slit your wrist, you will bleed out and die. God knows if you don’t slit your wrist, you will not bleed out and die. You choose, God’s knowledge has nothing to do with your choice.
God holds no whip, and you wear no harness.
He is no puppet master pulling the strings; which is the way I believe you see (or don’t see) Him.

 

[SMHW]

If God knows today (“Today” being your reference point in time) that you will die as an atheist, there is still the possibility you might switch back and forth from being an atheist and a theist numerous times during your lifetime

God simply knows what your final state of belief will be.

 

[Gorgias]

The construct you use here is unhelpful. There is no set of possible universes from which God chooses, so there is no ‘universe’ in which you are the pope, such that God could choose that one in order that you might go to heaven. (Even if there were, are you really so self-centered to think that God should make his ‘decision’ based on one person, to the exclusion of all others?)

In any case, the definition of our universe isn’t “number 12 out of 74 in which @heybulldog is an atheist.”

You are free to do whatever you wish in this life, and God honors that choice, without forcing your hand. There is no ‘fatalism’ in the equation…

 

[PJM]

First dear friend, it’s GOD, not god

And because He does know what choices each of us will make and DOES OFFER sufficient grace for every SOUL to know Him, if in TRUTH & humility; one makes that effort.

May GOD guide your path. This FORUM is a GREAT place to start to seek TRUTH.

Blessings friend
Patrick

 

[JoeVig]

Well, i understand the part about God not living in a time zone sort of speak, i know us creatures have a limited dimensional comprehension level; but i get all knotted up trying to explain to myself that our life, our future rests wuth free will and how God gets all this organized I guess.
I always kind of assumed that as our free will decisions changed the course of our futures and God then turned everything around ti make it work for good. Do I sound confused? Because I sure feel that way

 

[MysticMonist]

So what do Catholics think of Luther’s bondage of the will (which is based on a certain reading of Paul)? Is the unregenerate man free to choose or is he bound to sin/the devil and can only choose sin or Christ (and the enters in slavery to Christ)? Slavery to Christ being preferable to slavery to sin.

I tend to like the Buddhist idea of dependent origination that would say that any person being an independent, free acting agent is a delusion and ignores the vast multitude of factors that made the person who they are make the choice they do.

I’m not necessarily a determinist (though I do love Spinoza) but we are clearly not fully independent actors. If we were then we would simply need to be informed that being righteous is in our self interest (because it is) and we would all be perfectly good. Plato rightly says even a tyrant doing what is best for him would cease his tyranny and become just.

 

[Thom18]

If “God knows you will die an atheist”, then you will die an atheist. There’s no “God knows you’ll do this” and “you will do something else instead”. If God knows something, it’s because it has or will happen.

Free will remains intact. God doesn’t force you to do anything, but knows what you will choose to do.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Well, i understand the part about God not living in a time zone sort of speak, i know us creatures have a limited dimensional comprehension level; but i get all knotted up trying to explain to myself that our life, our future rests wuth free will and how God gets all this organized I guess.
I always kind of assumed that as our free will decisions changed the course of our futures and God then turned everything around ti make it work for good. Do I sound confused? Because I sure feel that way

We can’t really know how God organizes and synthesizes all the information into a comprehensible form. His nature as an infinite being allows it, but it’s not something we will ever be able to fully comprehend.

Our choices do effect our future, and they effect God’s knowledge; but they do no change God’s knowledge. From His position outside of time, He has always seen the choices we will make, eternally. He cannot change because those moments have been present to Him from eternity.

It is a confusing thing to grasp, and an even more confusing concept to try to explain in a coherent manner. Essentially, you could think about the timeline as a road, and God is set so far away from the road that He can see the entire road, start to finish. He can see every individual part of the road, see the cars on it, see which cars are going where, etc. This is not an adequate analogy, and it has its flaws, but it’s a decent starting point for considering the way in which God knows things. He is set so far “back” from time that He can see all of it at once. (Again, a bad analogy, but then, every analogy falls short of expressing the reality of God’s existence.)

I hope this helps.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

So what do Catholics think of Luther’s bondage of the will (which is based on a certain reading of Paul)? Is the unregenerate man free to choose or is he bound to sin/the devil and can only choose sin or Christ (and the enters in slavery to Christ)? Slavery to Christ being preferable to slavery to sin.

I tend to like the Buddhist idea of dependent origination that would say that any person being an independent, free acting agent is a delusion and ignores the vast multitude of factors that made the person who they are make the choice they do.

I’m not necessarily a determinist (though I do love Spinoza) but we are clearly not fully independent actors. If we were then we would simply need to be informed that being righteous is in our self interest (because it is) and we would all be perfectly good. Plato rightly says even a tyrant doing what is best for him would cease his tyranny and become just.

A man who is without grace can not perform any supernaturally good works, but He can still do naturally good acts. All people have the natural law imprinted on their hearts, and this inclines them towards good. We also have concupiscence as a result of original sin, which causes our naturally good passions to be discorded and inclined towards sin. No man can come to Christ on his own, it take an infusion of supernatural grace given by God to come to know Him. God provides this to everyone, but not everyone is willing to accept it.

Martin Luther was a scrupulous priest who couldn’t come to terms with the fact that God was willing to forgive him for his sins.

The Buddhist concept does not square with Catholic thought. It attempts to reduce or even remove free will, which is in direct contradiction to the centrality of free will in Catholic theology. IT certainly makes it easier to rationalize away the bad things that people do, but it also reduces humanity to something less than it is. In reality, God gave us free will, and we can chose to exercise it however we see fit. Some of us, like Mother Theresa, use it to do amazing good in the world. Others of us use it to do astoundingly evil deeds.

As for your last argument, we are completely independent actors. The nature of free will means that we can chose against our own good, especially when we are not properly educated, or when our judgment is clouded by external influences. For instance, I can know that eating a bowl of ice cream every morning is bad for me, but my desire for the pleasure of the ice cream may overwhelm my rational faculties, and so I eat, despite having clear and absolute knowledge that is bad for me. Righteousness is, from a moral perspective, always in our best interest. However, desire for worldly gain may cause us to abandon righteousness and embrace injustice in order to further our own self-interest. Clouded by the inordinate desire for worldly gain, we may be incapable of seeing the good of righteousness, even if it is explained to us clearly and irrefutably. That is the nature of concupiscence.

 

[MysticMonist]

That was a great response. I hope I’m not hijajkng the thread, let me know and we can switch to PM or to my faith thread, since this where we are going.

I thought it was really interesting that you say God’s grace is available to all of us. Obviously, it is. Let’s reject double predestination. You seem to say, I think rightly, that if God makes grace available to us, then it’s available in the current moment. Faith And salvation (especially in an eastern sense of victory thru God over our baser/demonic natures and thoughts) are linked to grace and are available now, right? I’d like this to be true. But it seems that faith appears to be given to some and not others or that some people take a long time to “find” their faith and others grew up with it?
Perhaps it’s only a deception though and there is a lot more going on in receiving grace, faith and salvation that just having an emotional reaction? I’ve been thinking about this a lot and I think my previous expectation that you almost caught faith somehow, without willing it, isn’t true.

So I said it’s “clearly true” that we aren’t independent actors arguing from Plato. You’ve made me rethink my certainty here. I suppose it depends on who we’re really are and what parts of us counts as us. By Concupiscence we could say one’s baser or animal nature (if we are Platonists), correct? You describe very well how we are motivated by these animal desires and choose to give into them. I think a Buddhist would say those desires are external programming which are not the self. Of course there is no real self but this sort of programming to a Buddhist. But a Platonist would agree we do have reason and our higher soul that is apart from these desires.
So what really happens when we eat ice cream for a week? Is it the whole person that chooses gladly and freely to get sick? (That seems more like stupidity, but I’ve sure done it) Is it the lofty soul that falls prey to the animal desire to consume calories? (I rarely feel lofty or rational) Is it the devil or some inner shadow that wants to eat as much sweets as it can? (I’m a monist and don’t believe in an independent existence of evil)
So is sin just stupidity and blindness? Going down this road it seems like it.
This is more wondering out loud than arguing, you’ve given me something to ponder.

 

[Gorgias]

Faith And salvation (especially in an eastern sense of victory thru God over our baser/demonic natures and thoughts) are linked to grace and are available now, right?

No.

Salvation is at the end of the process, not ‘now’. Faith, on the other hand, is possible through grace. God’s grace is always there, waiting on us to accept it.

But it seems that faith appears to be given to some and not others

How so? In other words, what would demonstrate that it’s not ‘given to some’?

By Concupiscence we could say one’s baser or animal nature (if we are Platonists), correct?

No. Concupiscence is a result of the fall of man – it is the consequence of sin. It is not part of human nature, per se.

Animals don’t sin, so concupiscence (that is, the “tendency to sin”) isn’t part of an ‘animal nature’.

So what really happens when we eat ice cream for a week? Is it the whole person that chooses gladly and freely to get sick? (That seems more like stupidity, but I’ve sure done it) Is it the lofty soul that falls prey to the animal desire to consume calories?

We would say that humans, due to the effects of original sin, have ‘darkened intellects and weakened wills’, and therefore, sometimes choose that which does not lead to human flourishing.