The following, more or less formal, argument seeks to prove that the doctrine of Exhaustive Divine Foreknowledge cannot be true. I say that it is a "more or less" formal argument only because there are points within it that have not been formally established for the sake of brevity. You can only make these posts so long and expect anyone to read them. If any of those particular points become challenged then the effort can be made to establish them at that time.
I should point out that I am not the originator of a large portion of this argument although I have taken the liberty of editing the wording slightly both for the sake of clarity and to help avoid distraction onto issues that are not directly relevant to the actual argument.
Lastly, there are some terms that need defining. Be sure you're familiar with these terms before even reading the argument. If you don't, the result will be confusion.
Necessary: A logical necessity is a proposition that cannot be false.
The easiest to see examples are mathematical expressions like 2+2=4. There is no way for that statement to be false. There can be no rationally coherent argument made to refute it. Another example is "All bachelors are single." This non mathematical statement is less intuitively "necessary" in that you probably tried to see if there was a way you could figure out how to find a counter example but there isn't one and any counter example anyone attempted to postulate would implicitly (or explicitly) change the definition of the terms used in the statement. In fact, it is the concept of logical necessity that all "by definition" arguments are based on.
Sufficient condition: A sufficient condition is any condition that guarantees the existence of some other condition. (If A then B.)
Put it other terms, a sufficient condition is any condition that makes some other condition a logical necessity.
If you get every answer on the test correct you will pass the text. Thus answering every answer correctly is a sufficient condition of passing the test. Note that answering every question correctly is not a necessary condition of passing the test. You may only answer 90% of the question correctly and still pass. The point here is that if a particular condition exists (answering every question correctly) then another condition (passing the test) is certain to be true.
Necessary condition: A necessary condition is any condition that must exist in order for some other condition to be possible. (If A then B is possible. If not A then not B.)
Light is a necessary condition of color. If there is no light, color cannot exist. An object that fully absorbs all light also has no color and so you could also say that reflected light is a necessary condition of color. Another example is that air is a necessary condition of human life. Remove a human being's ability to breath air and the human immediately begins to die. Note that air does not guarantee human life but that it merely make it possible. That's what makes it a necessary condition and not a sufficient condition.
Okay, so with that all firmly in mind let's get to it....
T = You turn on a lamp tomorrow at 9 am
I should point out that I am not the originator of a large portion of this argument although I have taken the liberty of editing the wording slightly both for the sake of clarity and to help avoid distraction onto issues that are not directly relevant to the actual argument.
Lastly, there are some terms that need defining. Be sure you're familiar with these terms before even reading the argument. If you don't, the result will be confusion.
Necessary: A logical necessity is a proposition that cannot be false.
The easiest to see examples are mathematical expressions like 2+2=4. There is no way for that statement to be false. There can be no rationally coherent argument made to refute it. Another example is "All bachelors are single." This non mathematical statement is less intuitively "necessary" in that you probably tried to see if there was a way you could figure out how to find a counter example but there isn't one and any counter example anyone attempted to postulate would implicitly (or explicitly) change the definition of the terms used in the statement. In fact, it is the concept of logical necessity that all "by definition" arguments are based on.
Sufficient condition: A sufficient condition is any condition that guarantees the existence of some other condition. (If A then B.)
Put it other terms, a sufficient condition is any condition that makes some other condition a logical necessity.
If you get every answer on the test correct you will pass the text. Thus answering every answer correctly is a sufficient condition of passing the test. Note that answering every question correctly is not a necessary condition of passing the test. You may only answer 90% of the question correctly and still pass. The point here is that if a particular condition exists (answering every question correctly) then another condition (passing the test) is certain to be true.
Necessary condition: A necessary condition is any condition that must exist in order for some other condition to be possible. (If A then B is possible. If not A then not B.)
Light is a necessary condition of color. If there is no light, color cannot exist. An object that fully absorbs all light also has no color and so you could also say that reflected light is a necessary condition of color. Another example is that air is a necessary condition of human life. Remove a human being's ability to breath air and the human immediately begins to die. Note that air does not guarantee human life but that it merely make it possible. That's what makes it a necessary condition and not a sufficient condition.
Okay, so with that all firmly in mind let's get to it....
T = You turn on a lamp tomorrow at 9 am
- Christianity is true. (i.e. God exists, God became a man and died on our behalf, etc) [Contextual presupposition]
- Yesterday God (or anyone else) infallibly believed T. [Supposition of infallible foreknowledge]
- If E occurred in the past, it is now-necessary that E occurred then. [Principle of the Necessity of the Past]
- It is now-necessary that yesterday God believed T. [1, 2]
- Necessarily, if yesterday God believed T, then T. [Definition of “infallibility”]
- If p is now-necessary, and necessarily (p → q), then q is now-necessary. [Transfer of Necessity Principle]
- So it is now-necessary that T. [2,3,4]
- If it is now-necessary that T, then you cannot do otherwise than answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am. [Definition of “necessary”]
- Therefore, you cannot do otherwise than turn on a lamp tomorrow at 9 am. [7, 8]
- If you cannot do otherwise when you do an act, you do not act freely. [Principle of Alternate Possibilities]
- Therefore, when you turn on a lamp tomorrow at 9 am, you will not do it freely. [9, 10]
- The Christian faith is based on the concept of love (i.e. Love is a "necessary condition" of the Christian faith).
- Love is volitional, by definition. (i.e. Volition (i.e. free will) is a necessary condition of love.)
- If love is a necessary condition of Christianity and free will is a necessary condition of love then free will is a necessary condition of Christianity. [Transfer of necessity principle] (If a then b and if b then c therefore if a then c).
- The doctrine of exhaustive divine foreknowledge and free will are mutually exclusive [2-10].
- Therefore, the doctrine of exhaustive divine foreknowledge is false. [1,15]