• jorndoe
    530
    You are subjecting God to the constructs of time, which is a mistake. The reality is that everything that ever has existed or happened, and everything that ever will exist or happen, can just be seen as being. A sort of singularity of things going on. We cannot help but view things through the lens of time because that's how our brains process information, but time is not something "out in the world", it only exists inside our minds.JustSomeGuy

    Well, something that's atemporal, "outside of time" cannot interact, cannot see or observe, which would require being subject to causation (an effect in part or whole).
    Would be inert, immutable, dead, absent of freedom, etc, unless you posit something like another temporal dimension (not exactly parsimonious).
    Check this post above.
  • tom
    1.5k
    You're still subjecting God to time, which doesn't make sense. God sees all of your decisions at once, your entire life as a point, a singularity. This is what the universe looks like outside of time.JustSomeGuy

    It's absolutely noting to do with time. It is everything to do with the in-principle indistinguishability of identical instances of you, or anyone else.

    Here's an equation to help:

    YOU -----> 1/sqrt(2)You1 - 1/sqrt(2)You2

    Now, how can God, or anyone else tell which instances of YOU (of which there is an uncountable infinity) become You1? It is fundamentally unknowable.

    Also, what has this got to do with time?
  • bahman
    530
    If indeed god did actually tell them the future then he told them what WOULD happen not what COULD happen. There was no way they were allowed to change the future.Sir2u

    Yes, that is one part of story. But what does happen for their free will?
  • bahman
    530
    Suppose x is defined as atemporal, “outside of time”. Well, then there can be no time at which x exists. And there can be no duration involved, x cannot change, or be subject to causation, cannot interact, and would be rather inert.jorndoe

    So you are saying that an atemporal God cannot communicate?
  • Sir2u
    1.1k
    But what does happen for their free will?bahman

    The existence of a god that knows everything that is going to happen means that there is no free will.
    if he knows your future from the day you are born then nothing can be changed, you have no decisions to take.
  • bahman
    530
    The existence of a god that knows everything that is going to happen means that there is no free will.
    if he knows your future from the day you are born then nothing can be changed, you have no decisions to take.
    Sir2u

    That is not correct. We always do what God knows and there is no conflict between God's knowledge and free will unless we are informed and wish to do opposite.
  • Sir2u
    1.1k
    We always do what God knows and there is no conflict between God's knowledge and free will unless we are informed and wish to do opposite.bahman

    So if we somehow find out what god knows we are going to do we are free to change the future? That would mean that god did not know the future.
  • bahman
    530
    So if we somehow find out what god knows we are going to do we are free to change the future? That would mean that god did not know the future.Sir2u

    Or perhaps the better conclusion is that there is no God with foreknowledge since otherwise we are dealing with a paradox.
  • Sir2u
    1.1k
    Maybe there is no god! End of paradox.
  • charleton
    1.2k

    I think the problem with God being omniscient is that he has to have known since the beginning of time what he was going to create when he created you; and what you were going to turn out like. He has to have known that he was creating a saint or a sinner.
    Where's redemption and salvation? It's meaningless!
    God has made me thus I cannot accept his existence. So he has made me just to burn in hell.
  • jorndoe
    530
    So you are saying that an atemporal God cannot communicate?bahman

    Well, cannot be communicated to, at least.
    (Which incidentally would make prayer futile.)

    More pertinently, cannot be a mind.
    Minds are not inert, inactive, quite the opposite.
  • jorndoe
    530
    That is not correct. We always do what God knows and there is no conflict between God's knowledge and free will unless we are informed and wish to do opposite.bahman

    The typical idea towards this, is a block universe "viewed from the outside" if you will.
    As per above, I don't think this can be coherent if it includes "outside of time" observed by a mind.
    Might not have to be atemporal, though, at least not necessarily, though the block universe usually includes all of time.

    Time and such (older parallel thread)
  • Abdul
    34


    Suppose x is defined as atemporal, “outside of time”. Well, then there can be no time at which x exists. And there can be no duration involved, x cannot change, or be subject to causation, cannot interact, and would be rather inert. — jorndoe

    What if the being can be both temporal and atemporal? Can there be such a thing? The temporal side of the being would be allowed to communicate with what the atemporal side knows and thus the knowledge is shared being both sides. This would give the atemporal (Jesus, for example) the same exact knowledge as a God that is not subject to time.
  • bahman
    530
    The typical idea towards this, is a block universe "viewed from the outside" if you will.
    As per above, I don't think this can be coherent if it includes "outside of time" observed by a mind.
    Might not have to be atemporal, though, at least not necessarily, though the block universe usually includes all of time.
    jorndoe

    Yes.
  • bahman
    530
    What if the being can be both temporal and atemporal? Can there be such a thing? The temporal side of the being would be allowed to communicate with what the atemporal side knows and thus the knowledge is shared being both sides. This would give the atemporal (Jesus, for example) the same exact knowledge as a God that is not subject to time.Abdul

    Please read this post.
  • Abdul
    34

    That’s the post I was referring to
  • bahman
    530
    That’s the post I was referring to.Abdul

    Atemporal thing cannot communicate.
  • TheMadFool
    2.3k
    Foreknowledge simply is the divine knowledge of our decisions/acts. One can ask God about this knowledge and decide opposite which is paradoxical.bahman

    True foreknowledge would encompass all our decisions and ''decide the opposite'' would then be meaningless.
  • bahman
    530
    True foreknowledge would encompass all our decisions and ''decide the opposite'' would then be meaningless.TheMadFool

    Therefore you don't have free will.
  • TheMadFool
    2.3k
    Therefore you don't have free will.bahman

    Free will. As I understand it it means we're in control of our thoughts and actions. And that there are no influences in our lives that we can't say no to.

    Notice that free will requires negation. Affirmation isn't an indicator of free will. If one accepts/affirms an influence then we can't differentiate free will from no free will. However, if one can negate an influence then it serves as evidence that we have free will.

    Let's use that then. Each person has likes and dislikes. Of course these are, apparently, not something we have a choice on. Does that mean we have no free will? If no, let's continue. If yes, then we need to dial down the notion of free will to something that matters only after our likes and dislikes are formed.

    We, all of us, have experienced situations where we've done things we actually dislike - negation. Therefore I think we do have free will.

    As for foreknowledge and free will, only realize that the former doesn't require determinism and while the absence of the latter is generally based on determinism.

    What if God could simply make 100% correct guesses. There is no determinism i.e. no laws by which we can unravel the thoughts and decisions of people. God simply makes correct guesses. That makes us free doesn't it?
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.