Can God Give Free Will?

Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra · 05-30-2011, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty

Well we are gonna have to go over what really constitutes as 'free will.' There are always restraints on us, we can never truly make every decision completely freely.

Well, I think the point Coleman is trying to make is that if God can predict the future then everything is predestined. IE. There is no free will because everything will essentially play out as he already knows.

So, essentially, the real question is:

Is it really feasible to have an all knowing creator who knows all time from beginning to end infinitely yet still giving man the ability to make choices which impact the course of the future?

Freebase Dali · 05-30-2011, 01:46 AM

"playing out as he knows" and "the little ants still making their own choices" are two different things. I can give a rat free will to traverse a maze I built for him, knowing the only way out, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm making the rat's choices for it.
(But I have still built the cage...)

What should really be examined is that free will is, according to religion, only a two way street. In one hand, the choices you make will lead to damnation, and in the other, will lead to salvation. To me, the free will portion of this sort of choice is rigged. You can either obey the will of god, and go to heaven... or disobey, and spend eternity in hell. So in effect, what we (according to religion) have is simply the free will to decide whether we want to be rewarded, or punished. I suspect most folks would consider that a rigged game.
I suspect that most folks would consider that a scenario of "free to do what you want, but you'll suffer by not doing what I want you to do."

Freebase Dali · 05-30-2011, 02:03 AM

I really want to hear a theists argument against that. (not that I think I'm impenetrable... I'm actually curious)

dbpq90 · 05-30-2011, 02:36 AM

^^To me, it just kinda brings the question what is beyond heaven and hell that would require, or be the cause of such a black or white scenario.....Would it be simply the nearness(heaven) or distance(hell)^^ between one and a deity? The oneness of all or the isolation of many(souls or energies)?

RVCA · 05-30-2011, 04:01 AM

I think I've simply decided that people who believe in a deity that interferes with human life on a personal scale... aren't worth my time

djchameleon · 05-30-2011, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freebase Dali

"playing out as he knows" and "the little ants still making their own choices" are two different things. I can give a rat free will to traverse a maze I built for him, knowing the only way out, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm making the rat's choices for it.
(But I have still built the cage...)

What should really be examined is that free will is, according to religion, only a two way street. In one hand, the choices you make will lead to damnation, and in the other, will lead to salvation. To me, the free will portion of this sort of choice is rigged. You can either obey the will of god, and go to heaven... or disobey, and spend eternity in hell. So in effect, what we (according to religion) have is simply the free will to decide whether we want to be rewarded, or punished. I suspect most folks would consider that a rigged game.
I suspect that most folks would consider that a scenario of "free to do what you want, but you'll suffer by not doing what I want you to do."

You bring up a good point. The game is rigged. You have the free will to disobey god and go to hell but upon further examination. Christians also believe in "second chances" So you can go around doing whatever you want and sinning but as soon as you choose to accept him as your savoir then you are saved and this can occur on your death bed when you are about to die in like say the next five mins and technically you are supposed to be able to go to heaven.

You can be the most evil person and do whatever the hell you want but just make sure you repent a few mins before you die and you are gravy!

Neapolitan · 05-30-2011, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freebase Dali

What should really be examined is that free will is, according to religion, only a two way street. In one hand, the choices you make will lead to damnation, and in the other, will lead to salvation. To me, the free will portion of this sort of choice is rigged. You can either obey the will of god, and go to heaven... or disobey, and spend eternity in hell. So in effect, what we (according to religion) have is simply the free will to decide whether we want to be rewarded, or punished. I suspect most folks would consider that a rigged game.
I suspect that most folks would consider that a scenario of "free to do what you want, but you'll suffer by not doing what I want you to do."

Say on a hot summer day, you saw your friend pick up a hamburger that he found in a trash can and before he started to eat it you said "No don't, that's a bad idea." He say "Why?" And you said "Food poisoning - I don't want you to get sick, I don't want you to eat it." and he's like "no biggie," then you say "you'll suffer by not doing what I want you to do." So saying that doesn't mean you want him to suffer it's just that you know the consequences of eating bad food.

Mr November · 05-30-2011, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

Say on a hot summer day, you saw your friend pick up a hamburger that he found in a trash can and before he started to eat it you said "No don't, that's a bad idea." He say "Why?" And you said "Food poisoning - I don't want you to get sick, I don't want you to eat it." and he's like "no biggie," then you say "you'll suffer by not doing what I want you to do." So saying that doesn't mean you want him to suffer it's just that you know the consequences of eating bad food.

Right but it's a different story if you put him in an empty white room with the hamburger, made him sit there starving, and also happened to be the one who ensured that the hamburger was food poisoned.

That's not a good analogy that I'm making, but just as an extension of the one you started let's say. And also add in the added bonus that you are psychic and you already knew whether he would eat the hamburger. So you created the situation knowing the result that would come of it. This more closely resembles the hypothetical situation of God.

Ska Lagos Jew Sun Ra · 05-30-2011, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

Say on a hot summer day, you saw your friend pick up a hamburger that he found in a trash can and before he started to eat it you said "No don't, that's a bad idea." He say "Why?" And you said "Food poisoning - I don't want you to get sick, I don't want you to eat it." and he's like "no biggie," then you say "you'll suffer by not doing what I want you to do." So saying that doesn't mean you want him to suffer it's just that you know the consequences of eating bad food.

So... having sex out of wedlock is the equivalent of eating a rotten hamburger?

Neapolitan · 05-30-2011, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian E Coleman

Right but it's a different story if you put him in an empty white room with the hamburger, made him sit there starving, and also happened to be the one who ensured that the hamburger was food poisoned.

That goes away from my example of between knowing something can happen and wanting/wishing for something to happen. I was trying to point out that just because God knows what can happen in the future because a result of people's immorality does not mean God wants people to be immoral.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian E Coleman

That's not a good analogy that I'm making, but just as an extension of the one you started let's say. And also add in the added bonus that you are psychic and you already knew whether he would eat the hamburger. So you created the situation knowing the result that would come of it. This more closely resembles the hypothetical situation of God.

A perfectly benevolent God would not act malevolent.

05-30-2011, 01:46 AM	#12 (permalink)
Freebase Dali Partying on the inside Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,584	"playing out as he knows" and "the little ants still making their own choices" are two different things. I can give a rat free will to traverse a maze I built for him, knowing the only way out, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I'm making the rat's choices for it. (But I have still built the cage...) What should really be examined is that free will is, according to religion, only a two way street. In one hand, the choices you make will lead to damnation, and in the other, will lead to salvation. To me, the free will portion of this sort of choice is rigged. You can either obey the will of god, and go to heaven... or disobey, and spend eternity in hell. So in effect, what we (according to religion) have is simply the free will to decide whether we want to be rewarded, or punished. I suspect most folks would consider that a rigged game. I suspect that most folks would consider that a scenario of "free to do what you want, but you'll suffer by not doing what I want you to do."

05-30-2011, 02:03 AM	#13 (permalink)
Freebase Dali Partying on the inside Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,584	I really want to hear a theists argument against that. (not that I think I'm impenetrable... I'm actually curious)

05-30-2011, 02:36 AM	#14 (permalink)
dbpq90 Groupie Join Date: May 2011 Location: USA Posts: 11	^^To me, it just kinda brings the question what is beyond heaven and hell that would require, or be the cause of such a black or white scenario.....Would it be simply the nearness(heaven) or distance(hell)^^ between one and a deity? The oneness of all or the isolation of many(souls or energies)?

05-30-2011, 04:01 AM	#15 (permalink)
RVCA （￣ー￣） Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 3,270	I think I've simply decided that people who believe in a deity that interferes with human life on a personal scale... aren't worth my time