The Theory of God's [lack of] Omniscience

[Lucky]

B. A God who sovereignly chooses to take a risk by giving up some of His power to His creation in the form of leaving their future open to their freewill. He then works within that openness weaving His truth and plan to His satisfaction in the midst of billions and billions of freewill agents.

Originally posted by Mr. 5020

Amazing, isn't it?

You do realize that that statement conflicts with the your Baptist 'Faith & Message'?

 

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by ninjashadow

I still believe that it is. I guess the way that I look at it would be like time travel (no, I'm not saying that God time travels. I have no doubt that He can if he chooses). I go into the future, let's say 62 yrs to right after Skip's death, and find out all there is to know about him, then travel back to my time, I haven't influenced Skip's choices in any way, I merely know what he to do. He still made all the choices, still did everything that I found out he did after he died, but even if I am back in my time, before his birth, I did not cause him to make any particular choice. He chose what he chose.
I guess what this argument boils down to is: is there a future already or are we making it up as we go along?

Please answer the first question. If God exhaustively knows the future can we do anything other than what God knows we will do?

 

[jjjg]

Big Knight, how can God let things come to pass without setting the future so that the things in question will be able to come to pass?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by jjjg

Big Knight, how can God let things come to pass without setting the future so that the things in question will be able to come to pass?

Are you prepared to discuss this matter in a mature way?

 

[Ecumenicist]

The "watchmaker God" is a historically developed and documented
theological premise. Not sure how bringing it up can be
construed as immature or "idiotic."

Dave

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by Dave Miller

The "watchmaker God" is a historically developed and documented
theological premise. Not sure how bringing it up can be
construed as immature or "idiotic."

Dave

In no way did I indicate that I was even close to being a deist, in fact I indicated just the opposite. jjjg was not only being rude by mocking me and my pastor but he was recklessly missing vital parts of my statements to purposely misrepresent what I was saying and therefore he is an idiot. You Dave.... are also an idiot so you and jjjg should hit it off smashingly.

Frankly I am sick of both of you and I am considering banning the two of you so the rest of us can carry on a more sincere conversation.

 

[Ecumenicist]

Originally posted by Balder

Knight,



Yes, but honestly I'm not entirely clear about the beliefs of Open Theism. Based only on my limited familiarity with it, I'd say it seems to escape some of the problems of closed theism, but it also seems to "reduce" God in some ways and make him more like created beings -- better than the rest, but still somehow less transcendent and mysterious.

I agree with your statement in a later letter: basically anything you say about God will end up limiting Him in some way...revealing the limitations of human thought and language, if nothing else.

Peace,
Balder

Humanity, in the flesh, is constrained. We're constrained by the
physical laws of the universe. We are constrained by our need
for water and food and shelter. We are constrained by our basic
need for love and affection. We are constrained by our
vulnerability to disease, injury, and death.

These constraints place us in a situation where love, peace,
tolerance, cooperation are in our best interest for survival,
comfort, and for thriving as individuals and as a species.

So, while God may not dictate our every thought and action, the
over-riding constraints which are designed into our situation
move us into an overall path which conforms to God's Divine Will.

Dave

 

[1Way]

ninjashadow,

Opp's we've moved to a new page, so this is a repost as I am still looking forward to your response if you are up to it.

I find your discussion with Knight interesting.

I trust Knight's approach very much, and I don't want to detract from your discussion, but on the other hand, I already made this post and I think it might prove helpful. So I'll post it and I ask you to stick with Knight and simply consider my post if you have time to do so. I hope you find this helpful.

You said

Yes, but if he is all powerful couldn't he also have an exhaustive knowledge of the future and give people true free will? If he cannot do that then that limits him.

Two things.
1
No limits on God
First, does God's very character and ways limit God? Is God good and righteous and loving and just and holy? If so, then can God violate or contradict what He is? No, that is silly, yet at the same time, and thankfully God is faithful, we have good reason to trust our Lord and Savior because we know He cannot lie, He can not cease to be God as He is everlasting, and so on. So your idea that God must not have limits is frankly not particularly conforming to what God actually is.

I believe that God is unchanging in His character and ways...

Secondly, if God always has all knowledge of everything that will ever happen, then we have several problems to deal with.

2a
Exhaustive foreknowledge and man's free will
First is according to your question, can't man have free will and God have exhaustive foreknowledge. I suppose that depends on how you define free will. According to my view, free will entails the idea that man has true authentic options to choose from. The future might unfold in numerous authentic different ways because everyone might do different things because what they will do is truly to some extent "uncertain".

But, if all of time has absolutely no uncertainty, everything that will ever happen has "no choice" but to happen as it is locked into happening, then there truly are: no options, no uncertainty, no real choices, just one unalterable destiny, thus by my definition of free will, there is no free will if there is no uncertainty.

2b
Exhaustive foreknowledge and divine repentance
The second problem is that God does not lie, right? But in His word, God rationally explains and demonstrates that He sometimes relents/repents by not doing what He said and/or thought He was going to do. Whether you agree with that concept or not, that is what God's word says God does. So at least from my perspective, rational divine repentance is a bible truth that contradicts the view that God has exhaustive foreknowledge, ,,, because if God knows everything that will ever happen, then of course He would never truthfully change His mind and not do what He thought He was going to do, instead, He would always do what He always knew He was going to do.

 

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Knight

In no way did I indicate that I was even close to being a deist, in fact I indicated just the opposite. jjjg was not only being rude by mocking me and my pastor but he was recklessly missing vital parts of my statements to purposely misrepresent what I was saying and therefore he is an idiot. You Dave.... are also an idiot so you and jjjg should hit it off smashingly.

Frankly I am sick of both of you and I am considering banning the two of you so the rest of us can carry on a more sincere conversation.

:up:
:bannana:

 

[1Way]

ninjashadow,
You said

I guess the way that I look at it would be like time travel (no, I'm not saying that God time travels. I have no doubt that He can if he chooses). I go into the future, let's say 62 yrs to right after Skip's death, and find out all there is to know about him, then travel back to my time, I haven't influenced Skip's choices in any way, I merely know what he to do. He still made all the choices, still did everything that I found out he did after he died, but even if I am back in my time, before his birth, I did not cause him to make any particular choice. He chose what he chose.
I guess what this argument boils down to is: is there a future already or are we making it up as we go along?

Going forward in time
In your example, the information that you gained was only instructive or had any unusual implication until you went back into time. Put it this way, lets say that you learned about skip's death by your time travel into the future thing, but then you never went backwards into time, you stayed at least that far ahead in time. That so called foreknowledge would then be the same sort of knowledge as if you never traveled in time and simply lived out life and learned what you would end up learning about skips death and end of his life. So when you consider it that way, you might begin to see that the foreknowledge really only becomes significant when you go back sometime into the past with your future knowledge, it is only then that it might make any real difference as opposed to regular present knowledge.

Going backwards in time
And when you consider doing that, that is the exact same as being in the present and looking back into any event that has ever happened that you are familiar with in the past! So again, when you consider each part of that time travel concept, it does not bring new light into how exhaustive knowledge and free will work together or not.

Clarification
I believe the aspect that is not focused on from your example is held in the concepts "exhaustive" and "absolute certainty". When everything that will ever happen is according to one unalterable destiny, then there is literally no options to choose from, and there never was any options at all, there never could be if everything is always absolutely certain! You have to have some uncertainty and some optional outcomes to choose between for free will to become a factual reality. Consider the alternatives.

No uncertainty
Lets say we have no idea if the future is exhaustively foreknown or not, but the world is absolutely without uncertainty. If that is the case, then all outcomes of all events have no choice but to happen according to that one unalterable destiny.

Here's an illustration of such a world. The waitress comes up to you and asks you what you want, but she also absolutely knows what you will get. Because that knowledge is unalterable, you have no choice but to respond as she knows you will. So no matter how many choices you think are available for you to optionally choose between, you have absolutely no choice to deviate from the unalterable destiny. You have to have choices and alternate outcomes in order to have free will.

No options
Lets say we have no idea if the future is exhaustively foreknown or not, but the world is absolutely without choices or optional outcomes. If that is the case, then all outcomes of all events have no choice but to happen according to that one unalterable destiny.

Here's an illustration of such a world. The waitress comes up to you and asks what you would like to order. She says that you can either have the chef's special, cheeseburger and fries, or they have a new plate that comes with a cheeseburger and an order of fries, or there's the tried and true cheese burger and fries. Oh ya, she keeps forgetting the last choice, and for the young at heart, it's a delightful cheeseburger and fries.

One might try to say that you always have the choice to not choose, but not in this illustration. Remember, in a world without optional outcomes, you have no choice but to do according to one single unalterable destiny. No choices, no optional outcomes, no possible way to have free will.

Time travel
In Darwin's day, evolution was the latest thing, and even Christians got sucked into it's lure and buzz. But in more recent times, Darwinistic evolution has run into lean times. I find it to be a bankrupt theory other than the fact that some limited variations that are fully found without a kind's gene pool respond to selection factors. But that is hardly Darwin's evolution. I suggest it's the same with the whole Einsteinian time is relative in terms of it's a physical entity of some sort, it can be manipulated, time travel is possible, etc. I find that entire line of reasoning to be bankrupt. It is not possible to travel through time, that is more like a child's fairy tale than it is spiritual truth.

I agree with your final comment. Are we forging our own futures as we go along, or does the future already exist in a way that God completely foreknows it. I refer you to my previous post for my thoughts on that issue.

Peace

 

[jjjg]

Sure, knight.

 

[jjjg]

cannot a perfect being like God not gives us free will and at the same time be all knowing of the future?

 

[Ninjashadow]

Knight said:

What I am driving at is I would like to determine why you think the future is closed. In other words... I am trying to determine if you think the future is closed due to a overriding logical principle about God's attributes that requires a closed future OR if you just feel God created us with a closed future based on other evidence but could have created differently had He chose to.

I feel that God can pretty much do whatever He wants to, within His self set limits. The reason I think that the future is "closed" (I don't like using that term because it doesn't really descibe what I believe accurately) is because I think that God can still allow free will and know the future. I think that God's power can allow both without having either of them conflict. It's more of an "open/closed" belief.

 

[Lighthouse]

ninjashadow-
Could you please answer my question?

If God exhaustively knows the future, can we do anything other than what God knows we will do?

 

[jjjg]

Lighthouse. answer my post 72 and we might answer your question and finally stop this bickering.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by jjjg

cannot a perfect being like God not gives us free will and at the same time be all knowing of the future?

Perfect exhaustive foreknowldge and true freewill are incompatible.

For if God has perfect exhaustive foreknowledge there is only one version of the future. There are NO possibilities other than what is contained in God's foreknowledge. Without options and possibilities freewill is only an illusion.

Can I ask..... (setting aside foreknowledge for a moment) do you believe man has a true freewill? And if so, why?

 

[Ninjashadow]

Dave Miller said:

Going forward in time. In your example, the information that you gained was only instructive or had any unusual implication until you went back into time. Put it this way, lets say that you learned about skip's death by your time travel into the future thing, but then you never went backwards into time, you stayed at least that far ahead in time. That so called foreknowledge would then be the same sort of knowledge as if you never traveled in time and simply lived out life and learned what you would end up learning about skips death and end of his life. So when you consider it that way, you might begin to see that the foreknowledge really only becomes significant when you go back sometime into the past with your future knowledge, it is only then that it might make any real difference as opposed to regular present knowledge.

First of all, sorry I haven't responded sooner. It's hard to keep up with everyone. Secondly, my example was trying to show why it might be possible for God to know the future and still allow free will. God would be able to go back in time, so in my scenario, I would also have to go back to the time I was from.

Going backwards in time. And when you consider doing that, that is the exact same as being in the present and looking back into any event that has ever happened that you are familiar with in the past! So again, when you consider each part of that time travel concept, it does not bring new light into how exhaustive knowledge and free will work together or not.

This goes back to the fact that when I return to my own time, I'd still have knowledge of the future life of Skip. If I had gone back in time from my time, I'd still have knowledge of the future.

Clarification. I believe the aspect that is not focused on from your example is held in the concepts "exhaustive" and "absolute certainty". When everything that will ever happen is according to one unalterable destiny, then there is literally no options to choose from, and there never was any options at all, there never could be if everything is always absolutely certain! You have to have some uncertainty and some optional outcomes to choose between for free will to become a factual reality. Consider the alternatives.

Ok, I see your point, but do you think that God has an exhaustive knowledge of all the outcomes of all our choices, but limits himself to not knowing which choices we'll make. Do understand what I mean?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by ninjashadow

Knight said:


I feel that God can pretty much do whatever He wants to, within His self set limits.

Excellent! I agree! :up:

You continue...

The reason I think that the future is "closed" (I don't like using that term because it doesn't really descibe what I believe accurately) is because I think that God can still allow free will and know the future. I think that God's power can allow both without having either of them conflict. It's more of an "open/closed" belief.

OK.... so maybe you can explain to me how perfect exhaustive foreknowledge and freewill are compatible?

Let's assume that God has perfect exhaustive foreknowledge and part of that foreknowledge involves our friend Skip . Let's say God knows perfectly that on a hot July 17th evening in the year 2045 Skip will open up his refrigerator at 8:00pm and choose between vanilla and chocolate ice cream. After some deliberation Skip chooses the vanilla ice cream.

In the above example God's foreknowledge is PERFECT and exhaustive. God knows every detail about this evening just as He knows every detail about every evening.

Knowing that.....

Does Skip have the true freewill to choose chocolate ice cream instead of vanilla on July 17th 2045 at 8:00PM?

 

[Ninjashadow]

Originally posted by Knight

Excellent! I agree! :up:

You continue... OK.... so maybe you can explain to me how perfect exhaustive foreknowledge and freewill are compatible?

Let's assume that God has perfect exhaustive foreknowledge and part of that foreknowledge involves our friend Skip . Let's say God knows perfectly that on a hot July 17th evening in the year 2045 Skip will open up his refrigerator at 8:00pm and choose between vanilla and chocolate ice cream. After some deliberation Skip chooses the vanilla ice cream.

In the above example God's foreknowledge is PERFECT and exhaustive. God knows every detail about this evening just as He knows every detail about every evening.

Knowing that.....

Does Skip have the true freewill to choose chocolate ice cream instead of vanilla on July 17th 2045 at 8:00PM?

I think that Skip does have the free will to choose chocalate, however, God knows which choice Skip made. I seems like God can know the future like we know the past.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Originally posted by ninjashadow

I think that Skip does have the free will to choose chocalate, however, God knows which choice Skip made. I seems like God can know the future like we know the past.

God's foreknowledge happens before Skip makes His choice that's why we call it foreknowledge.

God KNOWS that Skip picks vanilla.

Can Skip pick chocolate?