What do we do about the fact that nobody has free will

[JerryZ]

I read the above.

Just off the top of my head: It goes against everything I know about God.

I don’t like the idea of the future being flexible. That would mean that God doesn’t know the future. That would mean that He’s not outside of time, but I’m not sure of this conclusion. Don’t understand the time thing enough. To me it’s like He’s standing outside looking in at something and it’s always NOW.

God has to be all-knowing, how could it be otherwise? Jesus wasn’t all knowing when He was on earth. His knowing was limited, but He was here so that can’t be considered. He didn’t have full knowledge.

Very interesting article. Will be following along.

Oh. And the chart had Calvanism at the end. I don’t agree with Calvinism, needless to say.

It does seem like we keep coming up with new ideas about God. We strive so hard to understand the un-understandable.

The search for God and the search for perfection means that both must exist. I think I read this in Mere Christianity, not sure - but it makes sense.

Fran

You are spot on about Calvinism that teaches double predestination living no space for free will.
It is a heresy,
As for the changing future well yes for us it is we shape it constantly by the choices we make, this is why we cannot predict it.

Now to GOD whom lives in the eternal now there is no future, HE already knows all our choices and outcomes. To HIM our future is now.

Hard for us to wrap our minds around that concept, but that is the nature of GOD. If we could totally understand HIM it would cease to be GOD

…

 

[frangiuliano115]

You are spot on about Calvinism that teaches double predestination living no space for free will.
It is a heresy,
As for the changing future well yes for us it is we shape it constantly by the choices we make, this is why we cannot predict it.

Now to GOD whom lives in the eternal now there is no future, HE already knows all our choices and outcomes. To HIM our future is now.

Hard for us to wrap our minds around that concept, but that is the nature of GOD. If we could totally understand HIM it would cease to be GOD

…

Yes. Of course I agree with you.

Also the Open Theism idea, if I understood, believes that God created everything and then left us to ourselves. That would kind of explain evil somewhat. It is difficult to explain it away in this Closed Theism idea.

However, the bible does make it be understood that God is a personal God. He intervened many times in the O.T. and how could He intervene more than sending Jesus in the N.T.?
Jesus said to pray. Who are we praying to if God left us to ourselves?

P.S. I used to have a great tract from about 30 years ago with the image of Jesus that you use in your avatar (?). I assume you know that it’s the image from the Shroud of Turin and is probably what Jesus looked like.

Fran

 

[Trevor_Dewey]

Consider the possibly that we have absolute free will with no interference from any deity. To me, as an observing and sentient being…that makes the most sense.
Take it for what it is worth.

John

We have some free will, at times we do what God wants us to do whether we want to or not (c.f. Jonah), and at times we do what we want to do but God may still use our actions to further his purpose (c.f. Cyrus the Great). He has, after all, an overall plan for this Universe.

Imagine a Medieval Battle between two large forces, but where the ending is known, one side will win, and is foreordained to win, however the many thousands of individual person-to-person combats that make up that battle can go either way, as, for the most part, the individual combats are not foreordained. Over the course of the day, as the battle flows, each side may see temporary advantage, or localized triumphs, but at the end of the day, the foreordained side will have won. That is free will in a Universe whose destiny is foreordained by God.

Oh, and if we had absolute free will, we’d never have made it past the stone age, God’s Touch is clear if you look back at history.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Consider the possibly that we have absolute free will with no interference from any deity. To me, as an observing and sentient being…that makes the most sense.
Take it for what it is worth.

John

Do you not agree with my comments in post no. 22?

That does not mean that we don’t have free will.

Fran

 

[Trevor_Dewey]

That would kind of explain evil somewhat. It is difficult to explain it away in this Closed Theism idea.

I always go with God did not make a kindergarten Universe.

 

[cornbread_r2]

We have some free will, at times we do what God wants us to do whether we want to or not (c.f. Jonah), and at times we do what we want to do but God may still use our actions to further his purpose (c.f. Cyrus the Great). He has, after all, an overall plan for this Universe.

**Imagine a Medieval Battle between two large forces, but where the ending is known, one side will win, and is foreordained to win, however the many thousands of individual person-to-person combats that make up that battle can go either way, as, for the most part, the individual combats are not foreordained. Over the course of the day, as the battle flows, each side may see temporary advantage, or localized triumphs, but at the end of the day, the foreordained side will have won. That is free will in a Universe whose destiny is foreordained by God. **

Oh, and if we had absolute free will, we’d never have made it past the stone age, God’s Touch is clear if you look back at history.

As I understand it, omniscience means that God knows everything – past, present and future. It seems then that God would not only know the eventual outcome of the battle, but would also know all of the outcomes of the individual person-to-person duels within the battle. If God doesn’t know the outcomes of the individual duels, then God doesn’t know everything and isn’t omniscient.

 

[fhansen]

The idea is that, in order for a choice to be free I need something like “Either A or B could happen” and because of God’s omniscience, we really have “Only A can happen.” It is not about God causing one or the other, it is about me needing the possibility of either A or B but not having that possibility because God isn’t in the dark about my breakfast tomorrow.

But either way, if God’s knowledge isn’t the cause of our act, then what is the cause if it? And isn’t that, the cause, what determines whether or not the act was free. How does Gods knowledge even enter the picture? If He knew a particular choice we’d make beforehand in one instance but not in the next, would the first choice somehow be rendered non-free while the second was free?

 

[You]

.
.
.
.
o

If I imagine the circles outside surface as our journey through time and imagine the space outside it as eternity, and at any point on our travel through time we will choose to change our minds or exercise our free will.
All the space outside the circle I imagine is eternity. It is always now in eternity. So no matter how far I travel in time, or in what direction, my choices are always now in that eternal now space.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I have some trouble with the idea of free will. It seems rather essential for explaining evil and yet, the more I think about it and discuss it the less robust the “we have free will” arguments seem. Here are three of the more compelling arguments against it from three different fields. I’d like to hear some replies.

Philosophy:
Here is a classic that is stronger than most people give it credit for

1. In order for an action to be free, there needs to be a choice of possible actions.
2. If God knows I will eat toast for breakfast tomorrow then I must eat toast tomorrow since God is never wrong.
3. If I must eat toast tomorrow, then I have no choice whether or not I will eat toast.

Therefore: the toast eating action isn’t free.

Nobody said you “must” eat toast tomorrow. You can choose what you want to eat, with the limitation that it must be an item you already have in your house, or that you can buy it on the way to work. It’s your choice, and even if God sees you eating toast tomorrow, He won’t make you do so.

Physics:
This one won’t have premises because I don’t know the math well enough, but I have it on good authority that if general relativity is actually the case, then all of our actions must already exist “out there” and someone could see my future given the right circumstances. The idea is that right now, what counts as the present for me exists as the past for someone if they were significantly far away from me. In the same way, what exists as my present would also be someone else future. All of the events that will ever happen already exist depending on where you are in the universe. I don’t think it matters much that no one, as far as we know, is over there. Mathematically it all exists already. Here is a youtube clip that explains it better than me.

Watching somebody’s past actions is hardly the same thing as making them act that way. You just happened to observe them doing so, but it was still their choice.

Biology:
Using functional MRI machines doctors can predict the choice a subject will make well prior to the subject being conscious of having made a choice. They hook you up to the machine and say “press either the left or right button” and before you are aware of having made a choice they know what you will choose. Now, one might easily say that subconscious decisions are still decisions, but morally and even legally I don’t think that we agree with that. I am not held responsible for things I have no control over. Presumably we have no control over our subconscious, which is why we dream weird things.

Assuming doctors can see you making a simple choice in response to a question, all they are doing is watching you make the choice, by watching your brain waves. Since the brain waves precede your choice, they’ve got a very small drop on you.

The question of free will versus predestination is an interesting one, and I think they both operate to some extent. I’ve got a personal reason for saying this, as I claim my father appeared in my room the night he died. He’d been very cruel, and the episode started with an apology from him, and a terriftying scream just before he disappeared again.

But during the proceedings, he exclaimed at one point, “I always was doomed! I didn’t really have any choice!” I argued back (even though I was an atheist at the time, plus I was wondering just what the hell was going on here at the same time), saying “That can’t be right!”

He replied, “Oh, it’s right all right! You can see that from here!”

But later in the same exchange he admitted “I was WILLING!” (to act in the cruel, bad tempered, stupid, vindictive way that condemned him, and to keep it up for twenty five years non-stop). My old pastor remarked, “It’s almost as though he wrote a policy statement, that his mission in life was to wreck your life!”. He may have been foreseen doing it, but he was quite willing to do so.

So predestination may be correct in the sense God can see what’s going to happen, and what we’ll do. But you can bet your bottom dollar we’ll make the choices that lead us to heaven or hell. We’ll be “willing” to quote my father.

 

[GEddie]

Free will is overhyped and overstated in any case.

There is no perfect freedom, just as there is no perfect body or mind.

Get used to it.

ICXC NIKA

 

[frangiuliano115]

We have some free will, at times we do what God wants us to do whether we want to or not (c.f. Jonah), and at times we do what we want to do but God may still use our actions to further his purpose (c.f. Cyrus the Great). He has, after all, an overall plan for this Universe.

Imagine a Medieval Battle between two large forces, but where the ending is known, one side will win, and is foreordained to win, however the many thousands of individual person-to-person combats that make up that battle can go either way, as, for the most part, the individual combats are not foreordained. Over the course of the day, as the battle flows, each side may see temporary advantage, or localized triumphs, but at the end of the day, the foreordained side will have won. That is free will in a Universe whose destiny is foreordained by God.

Oh, and if we had absolute free will, we’d never have made it past the stone age, God’s Touch is clear if you look back at history.

In the end, didn’t Jonah decide to go preach to Ninevah? He could have still said no. Moses could have said no. This reminds me instead of the needlework idea; it looks terrible on the back but beautiful on the right side. That’s the whole problem with understadning free will in conjunction with God’s providence. If you take away my free will at times, how am I to know when I’m exercising my free will?

I agree with your second point. Re God using our actions to further His point. Do you understand this to be the same as: God works all things for the good to them that love the Lord, or do you mean this in a different way?

I see it as being different but it reminded me of Romans.

Fran

 

[Trevor_Dewey]

In the end, didn’t Jonah decide to go preach to Ninevah? He could have still said no. Moses could have said no.

I disagree, at the end of the day Jonah was going to do what God wanted him to do, however Jonah is the exception. Most of us aren’t specifically called to preach (for example) or have an Adjustment Bureau type plan for our lives, just exceptional folk like the Prophets, Mary, the Apostles. I think a good comparison is Jonah and Mary, both were always going to act according to God’s plan for them, but Jonah was unwilling for the most part, while Mary freely and humbly accepted her part.

I see it as being different but it reminded me of Romans.

Fran

It’s certainly related, God can use Cyrus to assist the Jews. He can use an atheist to help you clarify and strengthen your own beliefs.

With respect to understanding: per one of the posters above we’re in a bad position. We’re within Time trying to understand something that is outside of Time (God’s Providence) and it’s never going to happen. We can come up with some “hand-waving” reasons, but nothing that can be proven or shown to be true. So I don’t worry to much about it. The Bible and Church tell me that with the knowledge of good and evil I inherited from Adam I have the choice to do good things or bad things, and I try my best to do good things though I sometimes fall short and sin.

 

[frangiuliano115]

I disagree, at the end of the day Jonah was going to do what God wanted him to do, however Jonah is the exception. Most of us aren’t specifically called to preach (for example) or have an Adjustment Bureau type plan for our lives, just exceptional folk like the Prophets, Mary, the Apostles. I think a good comparison is Jonah and Mary, both were always going to act according to God’s plan for them, but Jonah was unwilling for the most part, while Mary freely and humbly accepted her part.

It’s certainly related, God can use Cyrus to assist the Jews. He can use an atheist to help you clarify and strengthen your own beliefs.

With respect to understanding: per one of the posters above we’re in a bad position. We’re within Time trying to understand something that is outside of Time (God’s Providence) and it’s never going to happen. We can come up with some “hand-waving” reasons, but nothing that can be proven or shown to be true. So I don’t worry to much about it. The Bible and Church tell me that with the knowledge of good and evil I inherited from Adam I have the choice to do good things or bad things, and I try my best to do good things though I sometimes fall short and sin.

Agree on your 2nd and 3rd pp’s. I’ve stopped trying many years ago. Some things just have to be accepted or you could spend your whole time with God trying to figure out concepts instead of just accepting what Jesus did for us and moving on.

Just yesterday I was speaking to the Deacon of my church about how dangerous it is to teach kids the Holy Trinity. I used to use the triangle idea, or the water idea. I also had 3 lessons on Who Is God? The Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Each has His own attributes and “jobs”. In the end you always run the risk of teaching about 3 Gods instead of one. Normal. Who could understand the H.T.??

Your first pp is interesting because this was discussed on another thread which lasted about 35 pages. It was about Mary saying Yes. Did she choose to say Yes? Of course she did. But some kept bringing up the idea that she could have said No. This is impossible since God wanted the New Covenant and it was necessary for her to say Yes.
So was she picked from the beginning of time because God knew she’d say Yes? Did He influence her to say Yes?

So it’s all very mysterious. I agree with you that, being inside time and being finite, we just can’t know everything. But thinking about it is good for the brain!

We do, though, get a bit carried away on these threads with discussing concepts to death when all the bible is trying to do is teach us a point or make us aware of something God wants us to know. It seems useless to me to try and tear apart every minute detail and try to explain it in our own terms when most of the bible is spiritual in nature.

Fran

 

[John_Martin]

…

Assuming doctors can see you making a simple choice in response to a question, all they are doing is watching you make the choice, by watching your brain waves. Since the brain waves precede your choice, they’ve got a very small drop on you.

…

Actually, the physical body, including the brain, is not the place where choice happens; free will, the choice of doing something difficult instead of following an appetite, happens in the soul.
The soul then animates the body to be the image of it’s self-understanding, to be the image of its “choice”.
Being thus animated, brain waves appear, which move thoughts to appear with the apprehension of “I choose…”; muscles move to expel air and form words through moved lips with words, “I choose…”.
Choice happens in the soul before an MRI would show related activity. Brain activity is not “moral” - it is the soul that is the place of moral decision.

 

[GEddie]

Actually, the physical body, including the brain, is not the place where choice happens; free will, the choice of doing something difficult instead of following an appetite, happens in the soul.
The soul then animates the body to be the image of it’s self-understanding, to be the image of its “choice”.
Being thus animated, brain waves appear, which move thoughts to appear with the apprehension of “I choose…”; muscles move to expel air and form words through moved lips with words, “I choose…”.
Choice happens in the soul before an MRI would show related activity. Brain activity is not “moral” - it is the soul that is the place of moral decision.

But no willing takes place if the brainwaves are not there, or if whatever abnormal condition causes them to be garbled; no amount of will can overcome a brain seizure or nerve spasm.

Free will, like everything else human, is dependent upon the brain. Trying to “tease” apart the factors in a unitary (human) being just doesn’t work very well.

ICXC NIKA

 

[frangiuliano115]

But no willing takes place if the brainwaves are not there, or if whatever abnormal condition causes them to be garbled; no amount of will can overcome a brain seizure or nerve spasm.

Free will, like everything else human, is dependent upon the brain. Trying to “tease” apart the factors in a unitary (human) being just doesn’t work very well.

ICXC NIKA

GEddie

All this talk of the body and the brain and the will, and taking it apart
is reminding me of something I can’t quite locate.

Fran

 

[JuanFlorencio]

I have some trouble with the idea of free will. It seems rather essential for explaining evil and yet, the more I think about it and discuss it the less robust the “we have free will” arguments seem. Here are three of the more compelling arguments against it from three different fields. I’d like to hear some replies.

Philosophy:
Here is a classic that is stronger than most people give it credit for

1. In order for an action to be free, there needs to be a choice of possible actions.
2. If God knows I will eat toast for breakfast tomorrow then I must eat toast tomorrow since God is never wrong.
3. If I must eat toast tomorrow, then I have no choice whether or not I will eat toast.

Therefore: the toast eating action isn’t free.

Physics:
This one won’t have premises because I don’t know the math well enough, but I have it on good authority that if general relativity is actually the case, then all of our actions must already exist “out there” and someone could see my future given the right circumstances. The idea is that right now, what counts as the present for me exists as the past for someone if they were significantly far away from me. In the same way, what exists as my present would also be someone else future. All of the events that will ever happen already exist depending on where you are in the universe. I don’t think it matters much that no one, as far as we know, is over there. Mathematically it all exists already. Here is a youtube clip that explains it better than me.
youtu.be/MO_Q_f1WgQI

Biology:
Using functional MRI machines doctors can predict the choice a subject will make well prior to the subject being conscious of having made a choice. They hook you up to the machine and say “press either the left or right button” and before you are aware of having made a choice they know what you will choose. Now, one might easily say that subconscious decisions are still decisions, but morally and even legally I don’t think that we agree with that. I am not held responsible for things I have no control over. Presumably we have no control over our subconscious, which is why we dream weird things.

The “biology” argument called my attention most: if the subject is one of those doctors (looking at his own brain through the FMRI machine) and he receives an instruction to choose, will he be able to predict his own choice before he is aware of it? What does it mean?

 

[frangiuliano115]

The “biology” argument called my attention most: if the subject is one of those doctors (looking at his own brain through the FMRI machine) and he receives an instruction to choose, will he be able to predict his own choice before he is aware of it? What does it mean?

No. He only knows it after he chooses.

We don’t know the future, only God does.

 

[Marvin_parv]

I have some trouble with the idea of free will. It seems rather essential for explaining evil and yet, the more I think about it and discuss it the less robust the “we have free will” arguments seem. Here are three of the more compelling arguments against it from three different fields. I’d like to hear some replies.

Philosophy:
Here is a classic that is stronger than most people give it credit for

1. In order for an action to be free, there needs to be a choice of possible actions.
2. If God knows I will eat toast for breakfast tomorrow then I must eat toast tomorrow since God is never wrong.
3. If I must eat toast tomorrow, then I have no choice whether or not I will eat toast.

Therefore: the toast eating action isn’t free.

Physics:
This one won’t have premises because I don’t know the math well enough, but I have it on good authority that if general relativity is actually the case, then all of our actions must already exist “out there” and someone could see my future given the right circumstances. The idea is that right now, what counts as the present for me exists as the past for someone if they were significantly far away from me. In the same way, what exists as my present would also be someone else future. All of the events that will ever happen already exist depending on where you are in the universe. I don’t think it matters much that no one, as far as we know, is over there. Mathematically it all exists already. Here is a youtube clip that explains it better than me.
youtu.be/MO_Q_f1WgQI

Biology:
Using functional MRI machines doctors can predict the choice a subject will make well prior to the subject being conscious of having made a choice. They hook you up to the machine and say “press either the left or right button” and before you are aware of having made a choice they know what you will choose. Now, one might easily say that subconscious decisions are still decisions, but morally and even legally I don’t think that we agree with that. I am not held responsible for things I have no control over. Presumably we have no control over our subconscious, which is why we dream weird things.

There is only free will available when you are not able too hear Our Lo_rd, Read John, Jesus stipulates that there are others that also hear his voice , , : )

 

[fisherman_carl]

Now here’s a crazy thought that is probably wrong. If we take God’s immutability to the extreme it means that even God’s thoughts are immutable. But, how could thoughts be immutable? If God was outside of time and saw everything, past, present and future at once then he has all his thoughts at once, and are therefore unchanging. However, God exists by necessity. This would imply that God’s thoughts also exist by necessity. Which means that we also exist by necessity. Now that is your crazy thought of the day. Like I said its probably wrong.