Two argument against foreknowledge

[Bahman]

Free Will: newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm

Linus2nd

I will read that shortly but I doubt that they address my question here. Could you please say what is right and wrong with my argument?

 

[Bahman]

But, if it is true for God that, 1000 years from now, X will happen, then it is not true that Y will happen. And that is the case for every single action that occurs, has occurred or will occurred. In other words, if this view of God as always present is correct, then every single act is determined. The only kind of free will that is possible in that case is *compatibilist *free will. Libertarian free will , however, is not possible

I believe that within Catholic doctrine God see all our actions hence he knows it because he is outside of time. That resolve the the tension between knowing and free will in simple manner meaning that if knowledge is acquired with observing then foreknowledge is possible without having any tension with free will.

My both arguments however address other points.

 

[Bahman]

I think another way of asking this question would be “Can God know and/or tell me what I will do in the future? And if he can, can I do something different than what he tells me?”

If the answer to the first question is no, then regardless of the answer to the second question God is not omniscient.

If the answer to the first question is yes and the answer to the second question is also yes, then God is not omniscient.

If the answer to the first question is yes and the answer to the second question is no, then I have no free will.

There is no way, that I can see, to answer this scenario where both God is omniscient and I have free will.

You get the first argument.

 

[Sparkythedog]

This falls in the category of the proverbial, “Have you stopped beating your wife?” question.

There is no instance in Scripture of a human being told by God ahead of time that in the future he would make some specific decision on a certain day in certain fully defined circumstances.
God did reveal some prophecies about the future through the prophets and Scripture writers,
but these left enough ambiguity about the specifics I just outlined to still leave people with decisions to make when the time came.

Therefore,
the situation in the question in the quote has never been realized, most likely never will be realized, and therefore is useless.

The beating your wife question is dishonest because it implicates the person being asked without recourse to deny it. It’s a word game.

How is my question a word game? I’m not talking about scriptural precidents here either. This is a hypothetical for the purpose of testing the logic of the claim.

 

[empther]

The beating your wife question is dishonest because it implicates the person being asked without recourse to deny it. It’s a word game.

How is my question a word game? I’m not talking about scriptural precidents here either. This is a hypothetical for the purpose of testing the logic of the claim.

A hypothetical must have some relationship to reality,
but the question you pose has never occurred with a complete set of specifics I described above.

Peter wasn’t told at exactly what time he would deny Christ, with whom he’d be talking, and where he’d be,
or he would have been somewhere else at the time to avoid it.
It’s like Joan of Arc. The “Voices” told her she’d be captured within three months, but not which day, by whom and where. Trial judges asked her if she’d known she’d be captured at Compeigne? She said, “No, or I wouldn’t have gone out that day.”

 

[Sparkythedog]

A hypothetical must have some relationship to reality,
but the question you pose has never occurred with a complete set of specifics I described above.

Peter wasn’t told at exactly what time he would deny Christ, with whom he’d be talking, and where he’d be,
or he would have been somewhere else at the time to avoid it.
It’s like Joan of Arc. The “Voices” told her she’d be captured within three months, but not which day, by whom and where. Trial judges asked her if she’d known she’d be captured at Compeigne? She said, “No, or I wouldn’t have gone out that day.”

A hypothetical question does have to pertain to reality but it does not have to do with events that have actually taken place. If the events took place I would just ask about and analyze the actual events. For example a hypothetical question could be “If T-rex was alive today how many people could he eat at once?” To answer that question we take what we know of T-rex and humans and synthesize that information to answer a question that does not correspond to any actual events.

So, what part of my questions don’t pertain to reality. Are you saying that God is unable to tell me what I will do in the future? Or are you saying that you don’t know if God can tell me my future because it has never happened?

 

[Bahman]

A hypothetical question does have to pertain to reality but it does not have to do with events that have actually taken place. If the events took place I would just ask about and analyze the actual events. For example a hypothetical question could be “If T-rex was alive today how many people could he eat at once?” To answer that question we take what we know of T-rex and humans and synthesize that information to answer a question that does not correspond to any actual events.

So, what part of my questions don’t pertain to reality. Are you saying that God is unable to tell me what I will do in the future? Or are you saying that you don’t know if God can tell me my future because it has never happened?

Very well said.

 

[Sparkythedog]

Very well said.

I still don’t hold out much hope for an answer, though.

 

[empther]

So, what part of my questions don’t pertain to reality. Are you saying that God is unable to tell me what I will do in the future? Or are you saying that you don’t know if God can tell me my future because it has never happened?

It’s like a self-contradiction. God can’t do a self-contradiction.

God could not tell us exactly what we would do at a precise time, in exactly what circumstances, exactly where etc etc etc,
or we would do something to change things if we didn’t like the prediction that we would do something wrong,
in which case his prediction would be wrong.
This is ridiculous. It’s not reality.

======================

Ok. The T rex would eat twelve people. So what? What does that have to do with free will? :hypno:

 

[empther]

And while I’m writing my last post…

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahman View Post
Very well said.

I still don’t hold out much hope for an answer, though.

---

:extrahappy: :bounce:

I just did.
:bowdown: me!

 

[Sparkythedog]

It’s like a self-contradiction. God can’t do a self-contradiction.

God could not tell us exactly what we would do at a precise time, in exactly what circumstances, exactly where etc etc etc,
or we would do something to change things if we didn’t like the prediction that we would do something wrong,
in which case his prediction would be wrong.
This is ridiculous. It’s not reality.

Ok, thank you for answering my question.

Here is one more really simple question: Does God know, with precision, exactly what we will do in the future, even if he cannot communicate it to us.

 

[Sparkythedog]

Ok. The T rex would eat twelve people. So what? What does that have to do with free will? :hypno:

It has nothing to do with free will, it was an example of a hypothetical question.

 

[Bahman]

It’s like a self-contradiction. God can’t do a self-contradiction.

God could not tell us exactly what we would do at a precise time, in exactly what circumstances, exactly where etc etc etc,
or we would do something to change things if we didn’t like the prediction that we would do something wrong,
in which case his prediction would be wrong.
This is ridiculous. It’s not reality.

1. Jesus predicted future.
2. It is logically impossible that God can create a situation which he cannot handle, being omniscience and omnipotent, otherwise either he is not omniscient or omnipotent.

 

[empther]

Bahman again :hey_bud:

1. It is logically impossible that God can create a situation which he cannot handle, being omniscience and omnipotent, otherwise either he is not omniscient or omnipotent.

That kind of irrelevant mumbo-jumbo may score points with a fourteen year old who becomes an atheist because he masturbates,
but it won’t fool any experienced member of this forum.

 

[seagal]

Bahman again :hey_bud:

That kind of irrelevant mumbo-jumbo may score points with a fourteen year old who becomes an atheist because he masturbates,
but it won’t fool any experienced member of this forum.

Maybe you should re-read what he said, it makes sense to me.

 

[empther]

One unrelated side question: What is the significance of the painting of the airline pilot at the bottom of your posts. Most people on here just seem to put religious pictures there.

Just curious.

That’s Theresa wearing an Army uniform.
The Army recently changed its service uniform from green to dark blue.
It’s a painting I threw together in six weeks. It has some mistakes.
I’m currently painting an updated one and it’s magnificent!

 

[empther]

Maybe you should re-read what he said, it makes sense to me.

He was using a statement that had nothing to do with the subject being discussed in order to draw people’s attention away from the subject being discussed, a standard atheist stratagem.

It’s a shame this had to be explained to you.

 

[Sparkythedog]

That’s Theresa wearing an Army uniform.
The Army recently changed its service uniform from green to dark blue.
It’s a painting I threw together in six weeks. It has some mistakes.
I’m currently painting an updated one and it’s magnificent!

That’s cool. Is Theresa a friend of yours who’s in the army?

 

[seagal]

He was using a statement that had nothing to do with the subject being discussed in order to draw people’s attention away from the subject being discussed, a standard atheist stratagem.

It’s a shame this had to be explained to you.

And your standard MO is to denigrate and insult, which I don’t appreciate no matter who it’s directed to.

 

[Sparkythedog]

Bahman again :hey_bud:

That kind of irrelevant mumbo-jumbo may score points with a fourteen year old who becomes an atheist because he masturbates,
but it won’t fool any experienced member of this forum.

Hey bud, we’re trying to have a discussion here. You may not like what others are saying but the least you can do is keep your responses relevant to the conversation. If you don’t have anything useful to add then why don’t move on to another thread.

I’ve tried to be nice to you but you but you seem intent on being antagonistic. Any more of this type of stuff and you’ll be reported.