How can God be all knowing and we still have free will?

[Jacob_Gilliam]

If God is all knowing then he knows what were going to do. Therefore, free will doesn't exist. Or God isn't all knowing. How can it be both?

[spaminator101]

God lets us make decisions however he knows what we are going to do ahead of time. This does not however always happen.

Please note that this does not violate our free will. Because Humans are naturally inclined to sin we can not choose a Holy God on our own. God chose some,through His perfect and infalible will,to save. We then finish the process by choosing him.

[DougShrapnel]

This is a question that I always found interesting, but not compelling enough to disprove a all-knowing, all-powerful God. The reasoning in this proof is actually quite complex as it has more to do with quatum physics then general physics. The observation(all-knowing) effects the outcome(freewill in this case). However an all-powerful god can know the outcome without effecting it.

[Jacob_Gilliam]

True, God can know the outcome without affecting it, but if he does know what is going to happen, then it is predestined to happen, even if he does nothing to help or hinder the process.

[ QUOTE ]
The reasoning in this proof is actually quite complex as it has more to do with quatum physics then general physics.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have a degree in physics. Please explain this to me.

[David Sklansky]

It is not necessary to argue over whether someone's knowledge of the future means you have no free will.

It is only necessary to argue whether you could have free will if that prescient being TELLS YOU AHEAD OF TIME about the future, including yours. Clearly if he does, and you can't prove him wrong, then you have no free will.

Taking this further we can thus state that if YOU had perfect knowledge of the future then you don't have free will. Because you are perpetually telling yourself about the future and are unable to disobey it. This is a tautology.

This means that if there is a God that will interact with humans in any way, he can't know the future unless he gives up his OWN FREE WILL. See why? Suppose he knows that he will part the Red Sea? If he is infallible in this ability, he can't change his mind.

What we have here, at least as far as religious people are concerned, is a situation very much like the question of whether God can form the word "dog" from the letters in "cat" or whether he can come up with a cube that is the sum of two other cubes, or whether he can build a rock he can't lift. Just because God can't do those things does not detract from him and most religious scholars agree. Even Not Ready does. Thus there should not be a lot of effort in trying to refute my argument (which I have never seen before and I'm wondering if it is original with me) that God can't simultaneously interact with people, know the future of people, and have his own free will. Just like the rock he can't build. Since something has to give, I would assume that religious people would choose it to be his ability to see the future.

The fact is that from what I can see, most religious people should not resist the notion that God can't see the future. They seem to have held on to thinking he can merely to give his omniscience due. But if you take away this power from him( like Skalnskyanity does), with the realization that it is nothing more than taking away his power to make something like 3+3 = 7, it actually helps make many religious precepts acceptable. Many of the non believer's arguments now go away. Think about it.

I think you're complicating the issue immensely. The answer to the original question is obvious.

[ QUOTE ]
This means that if there is a God that will interact with humans in any way, he can't know the future unless he gives up his OWN FREE WILL. See why? Suppose he knows that he will part the Red Sea? If he is infallible in this ability, he can't change his mind.

[/ QUOTE ]
I dont' follow this logic. A perfect being can choose all of his possible actions beforehand, assuming the universe is deterministic and there are no other free will agents. In fact, this is exactly what I'd expect a perfect being to do.
If there are free will agents, you're just restating the original question. I fail to see how this point adds anything.

[ QUOTE ]
But if you take away this power from him...it actually helps make many religious precepts acceptable

[/ QUOTE ]Depends greatly on the religion. If you combine this idea with an acceptance of evolution and the historical record of the earth/universe , then the whole idea of God creating this universe for people (or people being somehow special to God) becomes utterly absurd. As does the concept of Jesus dying to save our sins. I hardly see how this is making religious precepts more acceptable, unless you're talking about Buddhism.

Also, if you remove God's omniscience, you come up with the nasty little idea that God doesn't fully know what the consequences of his actions are.

[Piers]

[ QUOTE ]
If God is all knowing then he knows what were going to do. Therefore, free will doesn't exist. Or God isn't all knowing. How can it be both?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no problme if logic breaks down when applied to God.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
True, God can know the outcome without affecting it then it is predestined to happen, even if he does nothing to help or hinder the process

[/ QUOTE ] Time is a consequence of our universe and should not be applied, hence predistination also does not apply in this situation. Unless, of cource His obsreravation effects the outcome.

[DougShrapnel]

I usually agree with the conclusions you reach, and I don't have a degree in physics, or any degree for that matter. I know the dumbed down version of quatum mechanics, from feymans geometrical proofs. So you will have to grant me slack where I am lacking. But basically the observation of a entangled photon will actually effect the other entangled photon. Thus His observation would effect the choice you will make in the future.

[David Sklansky]

"I dont' follow this logic. A perfect being can choose all of his possible actions beforehand,"

He can't "choose". Because he already knew what he could choose.

"Also, if you remove God's omniscience, you come up with the nasty little idea that God doesn't fully know what the consequences of his actions are."

I'm not removing his omniscience because even an omniscient being cannot do certain things. This is one of them. And the idea that God doesn't fully know what the consequences of his actions are is not "nasty" and in fact would make most religions make more sense.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

This means that if there is a God that will interact with humans in any way, he can't know the future unless he gives up his OWN FREE WILL.


[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't exactly correct. God created the universe, forseeing all that would happen. He did so freely, He was not constrained by any outside force or consideration. Presumably He could choose from an infinite (at least to us) number of possible worlds and chose this one, freely. He won't change what He already knows will happen or has Himself determined to do because He's honest. So He is bound by His character.

[ QUOTE ]

Suppose he knows that he will part the Red Sea?


[/ QUOTE ]

He doesn't just know it as a future event but He determines (freely) that it will happen.

[ QUOTE ]

The fact is that from what I can see, most religious people should not resist the notion that God can't see the future.


[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps open thesim (neotheism) is for you. Since what they worship isn't really God anyway.

[David Sklansky]

"The fact is that from what I can see, most religious people should not resist the notion that God can't see the future."

"Perhaps open thesim (neotheism) is for you. Since what they worship isn't really God anyway."

Just to make it clear, I did not include you as one of the religious people who would find benefits from asserting that even God can't perfectly see the future.

[KidPokerX]

You will thank me ahead of time for this.

[malorum]

[ QUOTE ]
There is no problme if logic breaks down when applied to God.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
This means that if there is a God that will interact with humans in any way, he can't know the future unless he gives up his OWN FREE WILL. See why? Suppose he knows that he will part the Red Sea? If he is infallible in this ability, he can't change his mind.


[/ QUOTE ]

bingo. this is the problem with a being supposedly possessing both omniscience and omnipotence.

have you read George H. Smith?

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
This means that if there is a God that will interact with humans in any way, he can't know the future unless he gives up his OWN FREE WILL. See why? Suppose he knows that he will part the Red Sea? If he is infallible in this ability, he can't change his mind.


[/ QUOTE ]

David, the will of God, unlike the will of man, is immutable and perfect. Therefore, there is no reason for God to ever change His mind. God, Himself being perfect, cannot deviate from perfection. A corolary to this is the Catholic Doctrine of the sinlessness of Jesus...we Catholics maintain the impossibility of Christ committing a sin because such a sin would represent a deviation from the Divine Will.

We could very well be saying the same thing here...God having a "Perfect Will" vs. a "Free Will"...let me know if this is what you're thinking.

[VarlosZ]

[ QUOTE ]
This means that if there is a God that will interact with humans in any way, he can't know the future unless he gives up his OWN FREE WILL. See why? Suppose he knows that he will part the Red Sea? If he is infallible in this ability, he can't change his mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was pointed out in another thread, but is relevant here, as well: You seem to be operating under the assumption that "god" is some sort of infallible fortune teller. This is an unsympathetic reading of spiritual belief. Rather, god supposedly exists independent of time. There's no 'seeing the future', as all moments are occurring simultaneously from his perspective. Do you see why this obviates your analysis above?