To anyone who had trouble understanding Craig's point, allow me to paint the logic in a different way. The attempt to prove that "God's foreknowledge and human free will cannot be reconciled" goes as such: 1. God foreknows we will do X 2. If God foreknows we will do X, we will do X 3. We will *necessarily* do X The thought is that by this logic, we will "necessarily" (or be forced to) do action X because of God's foreknowledge. The first two premises are correct. However, the conclusion in point 3 does not follow from the prior points because of the injection of the additional word "necessarily." In order for the logic to follow, we must remove "necessarily" since it does not appear in any of the original premises. We are left with this: 1. God foreknows we will do X 2. If God foreknows we will do X, we will do X 3. We will do X This is now logically coherent, but this argument no longer implies that God's foreknowledge forces action X, because action X is _not_ necessary. The logic here only proves that there is a _correlation_ between action X and God's foreknowledge. Correlation does not imply causation. Then why is there a correlation? Because our future action X dictates what God foreknows. It turns out that our action X causes God's foreknowledge, but not the other way around. This correct causation is the reason for the correlation. Feel free to comment if you have any comments/questions!
PixelSage This might be sort of valid in a B-theory of time, where our perceived notion of causes and effects are interchangelble. Which is fine and from a physics-perspective quite nice.* But then offcourse the term forknowledge is wrong. It relies on more complicated relations between time. So at least the 'for' and all time-defining words must go. And i don't think you can make the argument meaningfull without it. I also have the idea the argument somehow tries to wiggle its way around the real issue. Even if there is a way to make the argument internally sound.. which is important but says nothing about the truth of it. You still have to demonstrate the premise.. and there is no way of doing that. (* though i dont think the physics would be turning out nice for the godclaims... because it would normally place god inside of the same space-time as us...or leave you up with a big homework to show how existence outside this space-time, with a B-theory, interacts with something 'outside' it. Most B-theories are also based on relativity, and thus still strictly speaking deterministic ... )
Thank you for the insight If your a Christian what do you think is meant in the books Exodus and Romans when they speak of 'God hardening Pharaoh 's heart'?
***** Thanks. My understanding of free will is being able to choose according to ones wants and desires, for if you didn't want anything or desire anything you would not be able to choose anything. So free will is rooted in desires and wants. Do you believe that God can change a man's wants and desires? Like is mentioned In John chapter 3 " unless a man be born again..." and Ezekiel 36 " I will put my spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey all my rules? " If God forced Pharaoh to keep the Hebrews enslaved against Pharaoh's true desires that would mean that Pharaoh didn't freely choose, and thus his free will in that instance is terminated. However, We know this is not true because of the verses prior to which mentions Pharaoh choosing to keep the Hebrews enslaved because he hardened his heart, as you mentioned. So what is meant by " God hardened Pharaoh's heart?" Notice it doesn't say Moses hardened Pharaoh or the Hebrews hardened Pharaoh's heart. I think the verse is stated this ways to show that ultimately God had control over Pharaohs heart and God has control over every man's heart. proverbs 21 says that "the kings heart is a stream of water in the hands of the Lord; he turns it wherever he will." God can actively change a man's desires so that he wants good or God can in accordance with his attribute of patience endure a man's evil, without intervention, for His purpose. If you disagree what do you make of these verses in Romans 9? You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory PS: I don't mean to cause a quarrel. I simply want to grow in my understanding and possibly help a brother grow in his. I would love to hear what your thoughts about this. thanks.
***** You know how it says in Genesis of Joseph and his brother that Joseph brothers were "unable" to speak a kind word to him. What is meant? Does it mean that they were mute? or that they didn't know any kind words? Off course not. Joseph's brothers were unable to speak a kind word to Joseph because they didn't want to and they didn't want to speak a kind word to him because they hated him. Excuse me for this gross example. I'm sure you would be unable to eat a bowl of dog feces. Why? because you wouldn't want to, and you wouldn't want to because you hate it. That's what is meant when the scripture speaks of man's inability to see or even respond to the gospel. All men are enemies of the living God, and are unable to obey and worship him because they don't want to, and they don't want to because they hate Him. John 3;16 is true. God sent His Son to die so that whoever believe's in him would not perish but have eternal life. The only problem with this is that no one will come. That's what is mean't by the previous verses "you must be born again to even see the kingdom of God" and the Spirit of God can only make you born again. Thus Ephesians 2:8-9 makes since, and even Romans 9. It is absolutely by the grace of God we are saved through faith and absolutely not of ourself it is a gift of God not works so that no man may boast. So grace also precedes faith.
+Timothy Fish No, it does not cause the event, but the event will still happen. Omniscience necessarily means god can observe the future like we can observe the past, it is completely linear. We cannot change/alter the past any more than foreknowledge of the future can change the future. WLC is claiming that there is an option to refuse choice 'x' in the future, well sorry, no there isn't, it's the same as changing history when it's already happened, it cannot be done. If god is omniscient, then we have no free will, only the illusion of free will.
HughJaxident67 Suppose there is a child that we offer either strawberry or chocolate ice cream. It is possible that we know this child well enough to know that they will choose strawberry ice cream. Does having this knowledge beforehand make it any less of a choice? They still had the choice, whether we knew what they would choose or not. Suppose we have the ability to look into the future. Does that ability make it any less of a choice on their part? Our knowledge of what they will choose doesn't prevent them from making a choice or make the choice they make unimportant.
+Timothy Fish 'Suppose there is a child that we offer either strawberry or chocolate ice cream. It is possible that we know this child well enough to know that they will choose strawberry ice cream. Does having this knowledge beforehand make it any less of a choice?' Omniscience necessarily means that we know what the child will choose before it 'chooses' it, it cannot choose the other option as it is already predestined to make the ONLY choice open to it. In essence, there is NO choice at all in the identical way that there is no choice for any action ever taken in history as it's already happened, the same applies to the future because it has already happened if you are omniscient, it is simply the illusion of choice if we accept the idea of an omniscient god. 'They still had the choice, whether we knew what they would choose or not. Suppose we have the ability to look into the future. Does that ability make it any less of a choice on their part?' If you can look into the future then you will see every action taken, there is absolutely nothing that can change any of these actions, they must necessarily play out the way you experienced this foreknowledge. So where's the choice? There is no choice if you possess such knowledge, only the individuals illusion of having a choice. 'Our knowledge of what they will choose doesn't prevent them from making a choice or make the choice they make unimportant' There is no real choice, only the illusion of a choice. If you accept the concept of an omniscient god, then you have to accept there is no free will as everything is already predestined and the choices you think you are making are not choices at all as these actions are the only ones you can ever take.
HughJaxident67 What you are arguing for is the idea that omniscience is a form of determinism. You seem to see it as a type of maze which one person can see from above and another is walking through. At some point in time, someone drew a path through the maze that represents the knowledge of what the person walking through the maze will do and so there is no conflict with the knowledge, things are put in place that force the person walking the maze to make the turns that follow the drawn path. This view makes sense, if the person looking at the maze from above is confined to time. Causal events do not happen at a time after an event has occurred, so the drawn path cannot be caused by the choices of the person walking the maze. But what about a God who is not constrained by time? What about a God who exists throughout all time and outside of time, simultaneously? As a God like that sees time, the person who walks the maze hasn't entered the maze, is walking the maze, and is finished with the maze, all at once. Determinism isn't required, because God knows because he sees the choices that a person is making, has made, and is going to make, all at once, even though it is the same act of the person to make a decision.
+Timothy Fish Once again I will refer you to the comparison with history, when something has happened, can it be changed? The answer is no and the same applies to the future. If said being is outside of time or in it, it makes no difference, for this being can already see all of time to the end of time, so for this being, all of time is already history, it's only us temporal humans that perceive a past, present and future. I made the following point to another user on this thread too, the issue with a god with the alleged qualities of omniscience and omnipotence, once again, this provides an impossible contradiction; it is a contradiction to be both omniscient and omnipotent, infinite knowledge contradicts infinite power, and here's why; If God knows with infallible certainty that he is going to part the Red Sea before he does it, then it is impossible for God not to part the Red Sea, and so God is not omnipotent, there is something he cannot do. In fact, there would be an infinite amount of things he could not do. On the other hand, if God managed NOT to part the Red Sea, then he was previously mistaken in thinking he could do so and is therefore not omniscient. Therefore, God can only possibly be either omniscient or omnipotent, but not both simultaneously.
@@knyghtkrawlr don't strive to tell ppl how to beat slaves.. dont tell people germs dont exist so they should stop washing their hands and dishes.. do the exact opposite of christ n you'll be a great person
When I was twelve our teacher told us we needed to bring in a new spiral from home. Knowing my friend would forget, I brought an extra for him. The way I see it, God knows us infinitely better than I know my friend but that has no impact on the free will we have to make choices at our own discretion.
When God knows something, it is an absolute, in your instance, it was not a divine absolute. The way I see it, God's divine foreknowledge is not on the same level as human "foreknowledge". Therefore, I think He limits his foreknowledge into knowledge of all possibilities that can ever happen, and since His mind is infinite, the possibilities are infinite. Since the possibilities are infinite, we are allowed to have free will. It's not downgrading to God saying he doesn't foreknow everything. In fact it makes His hand of work even more impressive since He can take situations that were not foreknown or foreplanned, and still use them so well for what he wants to accomplish that it looks like it was all part of the script all along. It also gives God himself free will. If he knew that people were going to die in the flood, it was going to happen, which means that God himself had no choice but to send the flood in the exact place, magnitude, and time to fullfil His foreknowledge that cannot be wrong. It also takes away the guilt of creating humanity. If God knew he was going to curse the world because of something they were going to do, yet created them anyways, He's either evil for creating people that were foreknown to go to hell or He's powerless to disprove his foreknowledge.
Keep parroting that phrase and everything will be okay. Also, don’t think about it either, because that will lead to doubt, doubt is bad, and bad is the opposite of God.
@@digitalscale76 The only human sacrifice God “required” was when he himself became a man and sacrificed himself for your life. Please if you’re going to mention slavery from the old and temporal covenant Yahweh had with the Israelites then at least understand the context which most likely will keep you from using this poor argumentation against God. If you had an idea of what you’re saying here, than you’d stop saying it. You’re just reminding us ‘who know scripture’ how just God really is.
@@solo_boixx1642 i wasn't really about to mention slavery lol what are you some wannabe apologist advocating against something as trivial as evolution leading a war on common sense from your bedroom...there's so many passages in the bible about human sacrifice, i can't precisely cite them all but they're one search away. What about all the billions of children being born into the wrong religion? What a waste.
I find it interesting that “foreknowledge” is attributed to God. He is not bound by time. He doesn’t foreknow. He just knows. He’s there. He’s here. He’s not restrained by a timeline.
@@antonioguglielmetti2661 sure he does. He just doesn't experience it. When he incarnated he experienced time just fine, so he even has personal experience of it in the way you do.
In one of his podcasts, Dr. Craig uses the analogy of an infallible barometer for understanding God's foreknowledge. In the analogy, the barometer is always correct in tracking the barometric pressure, but it does not mean the weather is forced to be a particular way. In the same way, God can know what someone will freely choose, but that doesn't mean they have to do it. If the person would choose to do something different, then God would have known differently what the person was going to do.
Yes he points out a fallacy, but then makes one of his own. As you are doing here. Yes its correct, God knowing everything doesn't necessarily cause anything. However pls read the next demostration, Lets expand this a bit, you have Y, Y is an event, and you have A = {X1, X2, X3, ...} going to infinity, this set being all the individual events that aren't Y Since God knows everything, he knows whether or not given any subset of A, the assertion "If that subset of A happens at some point in time, then Y will happen in the future" is either true or false. What can we extract from that? That given any Y, God knows exactly what will cause it, which means reality is deterministic, Since for any event god knows exactly what will cause it. What do i conclude? That if an omniscient God exists then it follows that the Universe is deterministic. Which is the exactly the same as saying. If the Universe is not deterministic(AKA you have libertarian free will), then if follows that an Omniscient God does not exist.
@@kaizal3161 there is no means by which we can know for certain (no ironic joke intended) that the nature of true Omniscience and foreknowledge would entail a deterministic result because no one possesses these qualities. I have a choice, God knows the choice I will make. That's not an impossibility
The doctor is wrong. I have shifted the word “necessarily” in premise 1. 1. If God foreknows that I will do X, then necessarily I will do X 2. God foreknows that I will do X. 3. Therefore necessarily I will do X.
If you know 100% he is going to do it( quite impossible) and every reason why( impossible), he perceives he has a choice but actually doesn’t because his action were caused by past events
No. Your knowing that your friend is going to wear a blue shirt tomorrow in no way precludes your friends' ability to wear the blue shirt. God knowing what we're going to choose to do in no way precludes our ability to choose to do so (unless, of course, we actually know that the choice in question is considered by God to be a "sin" and will be answered for in that day that God calls "Judgment Day" which is really what the whole "free will (choice)" argument desperately tries to avoid like the plague.) Calling something "will" as opposed to "choice" does not mitigate our responsibility in such matters before God one iota. We're still going to face Him on that whether we like it or not, and we're going to face the music for our choices, again, whether we like it or not. I don't think God is going to be impressed by someone standing there before Him trying the "free will" argument. The result will be the same.
Not gonna pretend I understood his reply, even though I've studied formal logic, but I will say that this guy knows how to stay on topic, which is more than I can say for most people answering questions at a religious or even atheist event.
Craig is genius at creating distinctions without differences. He says God knows what we will do, but not what we will necessarily do. He deftly moves to presuppositional argument. If god knows what we will do, and if he created the universe knowing what we will do, and if he might have created the universe differently such that we would have done differently, then not only does god know what we will necessarily "choose", he actually CREATED us such that we will make that "choice."
ivjdivfjalekvvjp There's no "modal fallacy" in place. If God's foreknowledge is infallible, there's no way you can refrain yourself from doing anything you do, because that will prove God has no infallible foreknowledge. Claiming that given a alternative action you may take God will have an alternative foreknowledge is useless to escape the objection, since you will just reinitialize the problem: if God's alternative foreknowledge is infallible, then any correspondent alternative action you may take is unavoidable.
Zadratube how about the 'back to the future' analogy/thought experiment: if you recieved a sports results almanac from the future with the results of every major match/race for the next 10 years and you used it to gamble successfully, would your knowledge be causing the events to happen? Would the sportsmen no longer have free will just because you had the book? Clearly not. Prior knowledge of an action has no determining relationship with the occurence of an action. Marty McFly's knowledge of the future did not cause the horses'/jockies' behaviour. Just my thoughts. Is there something wrong with this line of thinking?
Mohammed Hanif Yes, there is something you left out. Supposedly, god created the sportsmen and had a "plan" for the outcomes. Are the winners of the fight determined by the "free will" of the fighters, or is the result determined by "god's plan"? If determined by the "free will" of the fighters, then god is not omnipotent. In that case, the course of history is determined by individual humans, and does not unfold according to "god's plan." Supposedly, god created everything and knew how it would come out, because he created it to come out that way. Being omnipotent, he might have "tweaked" is creation such as the winners in the sports almanac could have been different..... but he didn't. He chose to have everything come out the way it does, and might have chosen differently. If you have an omnipotent and omniscient "creator" then there can be no true free will.McFly was not supposedly "the creator." God supposedly is.
stan frymann but that would make God's foreknowledge deterministic whereas it is His Power that compels. There is no logical contradiction between having foreknowledge of an event and the occurence of that event exactly as foreknown. That would be a category mistake. If God actively willed an event to be a certain way then free will would be vitiated because His Will cannot be opposed. But human actions are not willed by God in such a deterministic manner. God's will in the human moral arena is passive in that He allows the freely chosen actions of moral agents to take effect - then His Power facillitates the enactment of our freely chosen actions that He had foreknowledge of. He knew what we would choose but His Knowledge, Will and Power did not compel that choice. Its the assumption that "supposedly God had a plan" that is erroneous: God's plan is for us to freely choose the right from the wrong - in as far as He compels a certain action, that action loses its moral nature. When we say that God willed something to happen, we mean that He arranges the circumstances of the world for His ends to be achieved but the human agent's will is given freedom to act within this realm of possibility. God knew from pre-eternity that I would be pressing these keys on my Samsung in this order but His Will is not forcing me to choose what the next key I will press will be - my choice in this is completely free and only determined in the sense of my material and mental situation (relaxing on a sofa with France 24 on in the background, with a slight headache from looking at this small screen for too long...). His Power effects the enactment of my will - it is only metaphorically attributed to Him because He has complete power over everything and could have willed otherwise. The outcome of the 'fight' is dependent on the free will of the fighters (when to punch, etc) and determined by their physical conditions (fitness etc). Omnipotence is the ability to actualise every logically coherent event; a compelled free choice is logically incoherent and therefore not an event God's omnipotence has relation to. It is like demanding God create a square circle - something which is merely a confusion of words. When a king delegates some aspect of his authority to a prime minister, his authority is not diminished. God has consented to allow freedom to the human will to choose to a limited extent (i can choose to stand up and God's Power effects that choice but if I choose to flap my arms and fly then He does not effect that choice). In that thought experiment, you sneekily brought in an external variable : ) With the facts of the situation as I described it, does Marty McFly's foreknowledge of the outcome of the boxing match constrain the wills of the fighters and thus vitiate their free will. Clearly, his knowlegde does not have any affect on their wills, actions or the outcome. The same can be said of God's omniscience and its objects.
Time is the critical component here...We experience time linearly, and god operates in dimensions outside of linear time. So yes free will is a function of what we will choose in a moment in time, however god is looking at it from another vantage point.
*Time is the critical component here...We experience time linearly, and god operates in dimensions outside of linear time* I find it intellectually numbing that you just assume there is a god and extend properties to a being you have no evidence exists, what's wrong with you?
@@unitewithch *No evidence?? That’s like saying you don’t believe in such things as wind or the internet because there’s “no evidence”* Wow, that's a truly awful opening remark! We KNOW the wind exists, we KNOW how it's produced and what the air consists of - All of this can be objectively tested and confirmed and no evidence for the internet? What are you smoking, you're using it to reply to my post FFS! So no, it's absolutely nothing like either of these things as there is zero objective evidence any deity exists. *You may not be able to see god but you can see the effects of God* Oh really? Like what exactly? And how do we test and verify these 'effects' are necessarily made by this god? I'll save you time, we can't. *Perhaps you can enlighten me in explaining spontaneous generation of all life forms?* Life forms do not spontaneously generate, where the hell did you go to school? *How do you explain the mathematical impossibility of such precision of laws that govern the universe?* Obviously it is mathematically possible because we are here, so how about engaging your brain before posting nonsense comments? The actual probability is 1 in 1. Like so many theists, you consider reality like a puddle looking at the hole its in and claiming 'This hole is precisely created for me!'. That is not how nature works, we are a result of the prevalent conditions, not the other way around. Of course, 99.9999% of our Universe is immediately lethal to life, so if it was designed, it wasn't designed for life! *How do you not believe in a creative power?* Because there's zero evidence anything in this Universe was created! *I cannot definitively say god exists in the same way you can point to a tree and say it exists* Which is more honest than many theists get.... *But I choose to believe in him as described in scripture* So you choose to believe the stories of iron age Hebrews who adopted their god Yahweh from Canaanite tradition where Yahweh was a war god in a pantheon of other gods headed by the deity El. These Hebrews then promoted this god to the 'one god' which conveniently picked them as his chosen tribe (rather conveniently self-serving wouldn't you say?). Of course, if Rome hadn't have adopted Christianity in the 4th century, you'd probably not even be aware of the religion, indeed, it would probably have succumbed to the same fate as Mithraism and fizzled out, one among many other similar saviour god religions in the middle east at the time. *We all have different beliefs and that’s ok. I have no desire to satisfy another’s intellectual standard* We do have different beliefs but have you no desire to want to believe what's actually true rather then engaging in wishful thinking?
@@HughJaxident67 Your thoughts while a bit on the deep side intelligent provoked me to question my beliefs and I think you won! Thanks for that enlightening discussion. If I didn’t know any better I’d say you teach at university?
@@HughJaxident67 He assumes God exists because the debate is on God's foreknowledge and not on God's existence. Treat it as a hypotetical. What's so "mentally numbing" about hypoteticals? We make hypoteticals all the time.
How could God's foreknowledge take away anyone's free will? It couldn’t, actually: Foreknowledge has no bearing on free will, and it does not imply determination. In fact, God foreknows everything that we will freely choose, and we are still free to choose one thing or another. Many people have asserted that foreknowledge equates to pre-determination, but nobody has ever offered any evidence for that assertion -- it is merely a baseless and false assertion. God truly does foreknow everything, and that includes his middle knowledge (meaning that he knows what we would freely choose to do in any and all circumstances). God has full foreknowledge, and that does not detract from our free will in the least bit.
The logical fallacy is “if you will do X you will not necessarily do X”. What is true is something a little bit different: “if it possible for you to do/choose X it doesn’t mean you will necessarily do X” For example I will pick a number from 1-10. I can pick 3 but it doesn’t necessarily mean I will pick 3. But he says I wil pick 3 but not necessarily I wil pick 3. If I will pick 3 it means the other numbers are not possible.
I have been thinking about this issue so I want to give some possible answers to the question. Keep in mind that I'm not saying that any of these options are true. They could all be false or one could be true. 1) What if we have free will and God's foreknowledge is that He knows all the possible actions we can make but since the bible says we can be perfect as He is perfect (talking about love), it's also not a bad thing that we have free will since He can never be caught off guard and the bible also talks about His understanding which is far beyond our own (Keep in mind the word "understanding") and that also enables Him to understand all situations so, God knows all things and we have free will but He is still superior to us.
I'm writing the next here because I don't want the first comment to be too long. 2) What if our actions are what determines God's foreknowledge like an infallible barometer that tells you if it's going to rain or not depending on the type of wether and is never wrong? also, adding His great understanding to the picture, He can accurately predict the future which would imply that there is no determined future for Him to know about but He can accurately predict the future and see things that we would not see coming. Also keep in mind that most of the prophesies in the bible were influenced by Him or could have possibly been influenced by Him. 3) What if He has a way to know our actions without determining them? What if it's a mystery that we cannot understand or understand yet? eg the bible says that it is God who gives the mysteries and its the glory of kings to uncover them; it also talks about some things been known to God and the Spirit alone-I mean we are talking about a Being that transcends time itself. These are just suggestions. What do you think? If you have any other suggestion, please post it.
I really hate to ask this because I feel like you have put some super deep thought into everything but do you think you could sorta simplify your points/ponderings? I'm very interested on the matter and your opinion and would love to discuss :) , I'm just a little lost on you stance/suggestions.
+TurtleJoy well right now, my position on the matter is that I don't know how it works. I'm that kind of person who likes to be able to answer questions when it comes to the bible but this one is a little bit difficult. The suggestion I'm pondering on right now, is the idea of "middle knowledge" which is that God knows how every possible world would look like including a free world so He knows how we would act in any situation also with His great wisdom and understanding in the picture. This harmonizes a little bit with the first and second suggestions but I'm still thinking about it. I still hold for now my position which is that I don't know since the bible even says in Isaiah 40:28 that His understanding no one can fathom.
Ok, just making sure I am understanding you clearly, are you suggesting/pondering if God sees different possible versions of reality and just waits to see which one will happen?
+TurtleJoy well He doesn't wait for the reality to happen or else He wouldn't be our creator, rather, He creates a world in which humans are free to make what ever choices they want but He is never caught off guard because of His understanding of the free world and the bible also talks about Him being able to know our thoughts. He doesn't necessarily create the situations we find ourselves in but just knows and understands them better than we do and He can see things that we would not see coming. I'll still need to do more research on the middle knowledge though, just to understand it better.
I see what he means... If, for the sake of example, the US had known that Japan would have bombed Pearl Harbour on December 7th 1941, that doesn't mean that Japan had no free will.
But in the case of God, He is the creator of all beings with "free will". Hence if he foreknows someone will do X and creates them, he/she will necessarily do X.
@@defaultuser9423 What do you mean by that? You didn't clearly explain how your premise became your conclusion. Premise 1: God created us Premise 2: God knows our free will Conclusion: God determined our free will Why? God simply gave the ability to choose. God knows what we will do with it, but that choice is not made by God but by us. If for the sake of example we had chosen differently God's foreknowledge simply would have been different. God's knowledge came before our choices chronologically, but our choices came before God's foreknowledge causally.
@@Anonymous-jo2no What I'm saying is if God knows what someone will freely do in a given situation and since He is their creator, how can He be not responsible for what they do ?
@@Anonymous-jo2no it's not that God determines our will if he knows it. It's that it's going to happen period. You never have any free will to chose something that God knows isn't going to happen if he knows everything because he can't be wrong and know something that is wrong and doesn't happen. Thus he refrains some of his foreknowledge to allow our free will. Ever heard of Jeremiah 19:5 ? "and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree, nor did it come into my mind" one if many instances of God's resisted state. He can know everything if he wants to, but He chooses not to to allow free will
Correct me if i'm wrong here - but I think you do indeed have to do what god foresees for you, because otherwise god would not have known what I was going to do, and would thus not be omniscient. So, if God would, through his knowledge of my future, determine my future, that would mean that I necessarily could not act different from what God predicted, which would mean that I do not have free will.
Knowledge does not possess any mechanism by which it could affect anyone's free will. God has perfect foreknowledge of all of our actions, and we also have free will.
We do have free will, just that GOD knows what we will do, if we will do Good or sin, he knows. That doesn not mean that GOD is in control of our freedom .
@SethRollinsTheGoat it is not, because knowing doesn't signfy intervention, do not get confused we have free will but God is omniscient, he does not decide for us, because i can commit suicide but God did not inted for that to happen.
@@giovanni540 yes it is you didn’t choose to be created god with his infinite power and wisdom creates and designs something it’s going to be and according to his will what he knows is also his will and thus you cannot freely act on how he foreknows you to act
@SethRollinsTheGoat that statement isn't logical at all , just because he created you doesn't mean he decides your actions, you chose, he knows. simple.
Okay, I acknowledge my layman position. Now... So, by Modal Logic, I can change what God knew I was going to do by refraining from doing something that he knew I would do. So, the future changes the past...I thought that was only in quantum mechanics!
Don't forget that the only way this works is that God is outside of time. Time is merely a physical restriction placed upon us, it doesn't exist in "higher dimensions". There's no problem here
@@richardwilliamjohnson8566 *if there is a possibility such a being as God exists, then he almost certainly does exist* Thanks for the tautology, if my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle right? How can anyone calculate how possible it is for a god to exist when we have no objective evidence one does exist?
so if i got in a time machine, and knew that you atheist was gonna try and refute this guy, does that mean i made you attempt the impossible? did i myself take away your freedom of choice by simply knowing what you would choose?
In case the following helps anyone conceptualize Dr. Craig's point, I figured this very simplified analogy would make it more practical: If you take a video recording of someone's day (your good friend John) whom you spend the day with and thereby have full knowledge of what John is doing and saying etc. as he does and says them throughout the day, and later that night you kick back with a bud to rewatch the recording of the events of the day unfold, you will know every decision John "will" make when watching the recording even "before" John himself "knows." And you get it right every time 😉. Does it follow that John didn't have any free will just because you "already knew" what he was going to do....? I know that was very simplistic but I think it might help some people bring it from a "philosophical" level to a more "tangible" and familiar occurrence.
As with many analogies i've seen about this, this one also misses the point that God created us while being omniscient. To bring it in a simpler but correct way: Imagen you have a windup-car with a 1000 adjustable buttons to make the car react different. With every possible setting you'll see a video showing how the car is going to run. At one point you'll have to chose a setting and a specific way that car is going to run. The question is, is that car moving freely or randomly eventhough you yourself chose that exact course? And secondly, can you be disapointed or angry at the car for running the course you've chosen?
i can see that we can have the choice to do something and God knowing what choice we will make, doesn't change the fact that we made the choice. But how then is prayer, and a divine plan supposed to fit in?
Nope. What you said applies to people, we are talking about the Christian Judaeo god here. Let's see you do mental gymnastics around this one. Before you were even born, and conscious to make a decisions, much less moral ones, God already know's you're going to heaven or hell. So How does one explain free will in that? One, you never chose to exist, and two, if you knew there was even a chance you'd end up in hell, eternal unspeakable suffering, you probably wouldn't even chose to be conceived in the first place. Oblivion is a lot better than even a small chance you would be tortured forever. Point is before you were conscious/existed god already knew the choices you would make, and you didn't choose to come to being in the first place. He's the designer the creator, everything is because he wills it so. You can't do anything contrary to his foreknowledge of his creation, hence you have no free will.
enemay, My statement still stands: Knowledge of an event does not cause an event. Yes, God knows who it going to Heaven and who's going to Hell. But, that doesn't strip us of our free will. In the garden of Eden when Adam and Eve both ate from the tree that God told them not to eat from, Eve blamed the serpent for causing her to eat the fruit and Adam blamed God for Eve being the cause of him eating the fruit. God knew it would happen, but he didn't make them eat from the tree that he commanded them not to eat from. I find it interesting that you believe that because God is supernatural, his knowledge can cause events. It seems like you are mixing determinism in this.
Andrew Petty I want to see if you can be consistent. If you will humor me, answer me these questions for clarification. 1 Is the universe/reality the will of god. 2 Before you came to being/born/conscious, did god know everything that you will do, where you will be, so on.. your whole life?
enemay If by your first question you mean it was God's will to create the universe/reality we live in, the answer is yes. I may be having some trouble with you question and will need clarification if I didn't answer your question. It may require you to ask the question again in a different way. To answer your second question: Yes. But, your question doesn't postulate God stripping us of free will based on his knowledge.
Andrew Petty I’m sorry I feel like you didn’t understand my argument in the first place. Instead of repeating, the Christian gods knowledge (which is all knowing) does not strip us of free will, elaborate further to support your statement or how about refuting with actual arguments. You don’t understand the implication of the Judeo Christian God, being infinite in power and knowledge. The alleged omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient supreme being. 1 “Yes, God knows who it going to Heaven and who's going to Hell.” Does the person that goes to hell, choose to be created? What conscious being, who knows 100% that hell is real, would even take the chances of being alive had they known it's possible to experience unspeakable eternal suffering. As it stands today, according to general Christian standards, at the least, half of human population would end up in eternal misery. Not even the most insane sadist would take that bet, being that it's guaranteed misery regardless of how masochistic they are. So How does one explain free will in that? A person never chose to exist in the first place, and two, if I knew I was destined to hell, I certainly wouldn't choose to be conceived. Yet here I am, a heathen. Before you even existed god already knows everything that’s going to happen to you, your fate was set in stone, and you had no say in it, you weren’t even conscious, you didn’t exist. Do I need to beat a dead horse? No amount of introspect, will and desire can contradict what the supreme, all knowing, all powerful god already knows about your life, before you were even a todd pole in your daddy’s loins. 2 “In the garden of Eden when Adam and Eve both ate from the tree that God told them not to eat from, Eve blamed the serpent for causing her to eat the fruit and Adam blamed God for Eve being the cause of him eating the fruit. God knew it would happen, but he didn't make them eat from the tree that he commanded them not to eat from” The point is, before Adam and Eve was even blinked into existence, your god already knew all their decisions. Beings that are designed and created by the supreme being that can do no wrong that is God, put in an environment with conditions designed and created by you guessed it..God. 3 “Knowledge of an event does not cause an event” I think you fail to recognize the original point, God not just knows the same way a very smart person knows and make accurate prediction. God with his infinite power and wisdom, creates and designs something, it’s going to be and act according to his will. He is, reality itself, our universe is his design and will, which came from him, his will is everything, the very insignificant dust that's floating around you, every particle and to the billionth part of it, he knows, where it was eternally into the past, where it is floating around in space, where it will be eons from now, and is there because he wills it so. What he knows is also his will. He is the designer and creator. And we cannot contradict his will. Hence you are not a free agent. I could only hope that you are willing to engage and refute my points with actual arguments
If ye love me, keep my commandments. John 14:15 KJV Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: Exodus 20:8-9 KJV Saturday is the day of the Lord The claim that Christ by his death abolished his Father’s law, is without foundation. Had it been possible for the law to be changed or set aside, then Christ need not have died to save man from the penalty of sin. The death of Christ, so far from abolishing the law, proves that it is immutable. The Son of God came to “magnify the law, and make it honorable.” [Isaiah 42:21.] He said, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law;” “till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law.” [Matthew 5:17, 18.] And concerning himself he declares, “I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart.” [Psalm 40:8.] GC88 466.3 Ecclesiastes 12:13 KJV Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
It sounds like Craig is avoiding the well-established idea that God knows things *before* they happen. God knows what I will do *before* I'm even born. If this is correct, then my choice to refrain from some action cannot, in any way, affect God's foreknowledge: God's foreknowledge, and his causal sovereignty over me, affects my choice to refrain from some action.
Indeed. Craig doesn't answer the question if God foreknows that someone will refrain from something. If God does know, free will is wrong. If God doesn't know, omniscience is wrong.
Everything that happens in history has been decreed/Predestined before the world was created see Eph 1:11, Proverbs 16:33 and Amos 3:6. And yes even when terrible things happen, I know it's hard for some people to accept but look what happened when David sinned against God and one of Davids punishments was that God told him that he was going to use Davids own son to shame his Father by Absalom Absalom doing something immoral to his Fathers concubines in front of all of Israel, see 2 Samuel 12:11-12 God said "Thus says the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes and give them to your companion, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. Indeed you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun." Notice how God said "I WILL DO THIS THING."That was fulfilled in 2 Samuel 16:21-22. Jesus did not die for every single person ever and Jesus didn't die to make people savable. He died to save his elect. In John 17:9 Jesus said that he does not pray for the world. The word world is used in different contexts, in that context he's talking about the non elect. In John 3:16 world means that he purchased people from every tribe, tongue and nation Rev 5:9 and for the children of God scattered abroad John 11:52. Some have been "long beforehand marked out for condemnation" Jude 4 and "appointed to doom." 1 Peter 2:8. About Pharaoh God said “For this VERY PURPOSE I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires." Rom 9:17-18. Jesus said "I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight. All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." Matthew 11:25-27. So, 2 Pet 3:9 the "not willing that any should perish" if you read that letter in context, 2 Pet 1:1 says "To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours." As far as salvation for all men verses, Paul was refuting the false notion of his time that God was only desiring to save just the Jews and 1 Tim 2:2 says to pray "for kings and all who are in authority" because as humans WE DON'T KNOW WHO THE ELECT ARE SO WE PRAY FOR EVERYONE! That's what it means in verse 4 by saying "all men." Amos 3:2 God said "of all the nations of the earth I have only known you." For centuries God passed over the majority of humankind because this verse isn't about knowledge it's about relationship. And it isn't because God foresaw Israel was more righteous then the other nations because sometimes Israel was more sinful then the pagan nations see 2 Kings 21:9. Only those who were predestined to be saved will be see Acts 13:48, Ephesians 1:4-5, Eph 1:11, Romans 9:11-23, John 6:37. 1 Samuel 3:14 God said “Therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever.” That's Limited atonement.
The scripture says that the Lord told hezekiah through prophet isaiah that he will die, then hezekiah pleaded the Lord for prolonged life and the Lord gave hezekiah 15 more years... I guess people really do have choices
really weak,if you know 2 world where one person reject God in another world and accept God in another one And God accept the one where he rejects him,thats obviously and DEFINITely NOT a "libertarian" free will,but only complementarian freewill (which is not free will),it imply my choice to agree or reject God is guided by God himself,even if i choose it myself,it doesnt change the fact he choose the scenario where i reject him and he burns me
Free will exists as an illusion derived from the fact that we don’t know what will happen, despite the fact that God does. It all comes down to asserting the right frame of reference. From ours, free will exists, from God’s, it doesn’t. Which is the best frame of reference? It depends...
I think people need to realise that god's foreknowledge is a power he chooses to exercise when an how he chooses an this does not effect your free will
I welcome responses to a better asked question where I believe this question comes from: "why was I inclined to make this particular choice; if God had foreknowledge of my conscious states, since he is the first mover of the universe and creator of souls, could he have not set a different trajectory of initial, or full through, determinate events that could have resulted in my free-will circumstances being other than is.. thus resulting in my conscious responsibilities being more inclined to commit to something else than is?" I personally call this the "being dealt a bad hand argument" I have my casual understandings that move us past the latter question, though responses are welcomed
Isn't it possible that God knows all possible outcomes of all possible decisions but chooses to limit Himself from knowing precisely which decision one will make? Wouldn't this fit within the definition of foreknowledge?
Sure, he could lobotomize his foreknowledge, but then he would just be under the same illusion of free will as us. The unlobotomized God would still have that foreknowledge, and would still exist in all times simultaneously and there would be two versions: God and retarded God. The tard having no foreknowledge might believe he and us could make choices, but God would still know those choices and be unable to exert any control over anything. The fact that the foreknowledge exists is what precludes the free will. Watchmen's Dr. Manhattan is a good example of how this would work.
Yes! That is Open Theism. Craig told it all wrong in this video... Open theism basically argues that God knows ”more” because God knows all the possible outcomes and He is working with those. He is respecting our free will. And do not get me wrong here He can do what He wants to. He is God. But as open theism sees this is that God is continuously working His will in the world based on the actions we do. He is all wise so He knows what He is doing. Open theists often gets accused of putting God in the box. But as they see it is that they are truly seeing Him free. Im not saying that I fall under this camp but atm it feels like pretty reasonable. What do you think about this?
In very few O.T. instances, the throwing of the die was for asking God for a decision on a particular issue. With prayer beforehand, the throwers of the die asked God and expected God to provide that answer with a result from the die. Kinda like our "Choose heads or tails", although it was taken that the result came from God. Reading Proverbs 16:33 in some more looser paraphrase modern translations gives a whole different interpretation which I firmly believe is not true about God and which I feel scripture does not teach. God does not decide the outcome of everything, nor does he desire to do so, nor does he need to. If God did decide the outcome of everything, as you believe, then we are just mindless puppets and God would be responsible for evil as a source. Again, throwing of the die is deciding the outcome of a question put to God about "what should we do?"
Your answer may be in Proverbs 16:1, "The preparations of the heart are man's, but the answer of the tongue is from the Lord." The way I understand 16:33 is similar to that, that "the lot is cast in his lap" refers to man's free decision-making ability, and "but all his judgement is from the Lord" refers to the consequences that come about as a result of a free choice.
His logic fails dramatically if one takes the time to read the book. His "elemental fallacy " fails at step 2 : 2..God foreknows that I would do X What he is trying to hide or ignore here is WHY god foreknows I would do X. Reading the book , we can find that : 1. God made a plan before the creation (well organised god). 2. God never changes so his plan doesn't change. 3. God himself works to fulfill his plan. So , god foreknows I am going to do X because he planned for me to do X , he created me for that purpose and he is taking care that his plan is fulfilled. Now the "elemental fallacy" doesn't look like a fallacy anymore , does it ? If anyone thinks that creating being for the sole purpose of destruction is unfair , the book has an answer to that too : you don't have the right to question god's plans and actions !
Yep. That's christian "logic" for ya. Spend 3 times longer than warranted needlessly over complicating things and dressing them up in what sound like formal sciency sounding terms. Set it out nice a carefully, making sure it gets convoluted in the process. Then when most have stopped actually following along throw in a bait n switch, along with logic right out the window. But maintain that smug, certain, quite obviously correct aire, nodding head as you've just comprehensively "put it too bed". And hope most folk either won't notice or don't want to notice.
You're mixing things up. God knowing what you're going to do is foreknowledge of your free will choices. Predestination is God determining what you are going to do, leaving us with the illusion of free will. There are the different doctrines. So I don't see your answer as logical and I don't get mister Craigs answer.
Deo Volente Unless you can really support that " free will " theory, you can't bring that argument as a fact. I'm not sure that we mean the same thing when we talk about free will. If the universe is governed by laws (cause and effect ) there's predestination. If the universe is random as many understand from quantum mechanics, then there's no predestination, no free will , only randomness. Where is the free will illusion ? You don't seem to understand my answer completely. Plan - creation - result doesn't leave room for free will but rather explains predestination . Predestination and your definition of foreknowledge are not mutually exclusive . Predestination excludes the free will illusion and so does the foreknowledge , since the only way to know the end result is to plan and execute the plan to ensure the desired end result. From my perspective , foreknowledge implies predestination. It isn't foreknowledge if there are billions of possible outcomes and one knows them all.
thrdel well first let me check if we're reasoning from the same world view. I'm reasoning from the presupposition that God exists. Foreknowledge for me means that God can tell the future because he exceeds space time and matter and one of his attributes is to be all knowing. So this means he knows everything I will ever do because he can see the future. Call him the universe's best fortune teller if you will. Knowing the future doesn't mean you have predestined this to come into existence yourself PER SE. Now another option as mentioned is that he does have foreknowledge BECAUSE he predestined it. But predestination includes foreknowledge automatically, unless you want to implement the possibility of amnesia.
Deo Volente OK. Got your point of view. I'm clearly not discussing from the same perspective. Here's a couple of things that seem to be counter intuitive at best : 1. A supernatural being that exceeds space time and matter. There's no reasonable logical indication, let alone proof that such a supernatural being's existence is possible or likely. There's only a few speculations that there is an outside of space time, like other universes and such . The creation myth , plans - work - result , implies the notion of time. If the notion of past - present - future lose their meaning , logic and reason lose their meaning as well and this discussion is pointless. --- "...So this means he knows everything I will ever do because he can see the future..." Assuming that there may be a way to see the future that didn't happened yet, you deliberately left out the part about the plan, the conception and the execution. There are quite a large number of well written books on the subject with all the quotes and explanations as well. Now, making a plan and executing the plan personally to ensure the end result isn't fortune telling. One doesn't have to be outside of space time to tell the end of an action before it begins if the action is planned and executed by the same very person. --- "...But predestination includes foreknowledge automatically..." Correct, predestination automatically implies foreknowledge. They go hand in hand. That's why the answer of the Christian Scriptures to the question " if god makes one ...for a higher purpose and another for a lower purpose(apparently he does that), why still blaming the creation?", the answer is "who are you to question god?. That's only one of many, many other examples that clearly suggest predestination. So , there you have a handful of reasons why I find logical and reasonable the conclusion that what you're trying to define as foreknowledge without predestination is neither reasonable or logical. Not to mention that the free will illusion has to be demonstrated as a fact if you want to take it into serious consideration . If ,on the other hand , you're dismissing the idea of god planning his creation and then executing his plan and only want to support the foreknowledge based on timeless attributes of god , that's a complete different story.
I can't possibly know this for certain, but I imagine there are instances were God simply chooses not to exercise his ability to know the future. This plays well with mans ability to choose either right or wrong and to exercise his own free will.
I think that what could be inconsistent here is using only modal logic to find a fallacy. If you use propositional logic there is no fallacy at all, because it's a correct formulated modus ponens: 1. If God foreknows that I will do X, then I will do X. 2. God foreknows that I will do X. 3. Therefore, I will do X. Here, the conclusion follows logically the premises, so what is necessary is to justify why modal logic is the only logic you should use to evaluate the validity of this argument.
3:00 I am an atheist, but Craig is firmly misrepresenting open theism here. The main tenent of open theism is that the future only exists of possibilities and not actualities. In open theism, God doesn't know the future because the future cannot be known to God. For anyone interested, check out Greg Boyd on this matter.
I think he did, because open theists aren't open theists because they think foreknowledge is incompatible with free will. They think the future only exists of possibilities and not actualities.
BecomingMike As far as I know, it's quite common for open theists to hold that there are some things about the future that can be known but it's non-deterministic events (such as free will decisions and random events if true randomness exists) which make the future partially open and consisting of possibilities. Some open theists even call their view "freewill theism" (David Basinger has a book called "The Case for Freewill Theism: A Philosophical Assessment") which is a bit misleading because obviously it's not the only kind of theism that accepts free will.
Like the host said; "Okaaaay....I am going to have to go home and think about that one" That was a very polite way of saying; "That didn't make any sense at all". So.....I am going to go home and think about that one.
Correction: it is a very polite way of saying, "That didn't make any sense at all TO ME." Failure to understand the connection between a premise and a conclusion does not negate the logical legitimacy of the concept.
It seems that WLC could not have ellaborated his point due to limmited time. I believe thinking about next argument will help understanding his point. 1. Necessarily, if john is bachelor then he is unmarried. 2. john is bachelor. 3. Therefore necessarily, john is unmarried. 1 is true because it is logically true. Definiion of bachelor is unmarried man. But conclusion is absurd. Just because you call someone bachelor, he is necessarily (without any option) unmarried? So the right conclusion is 3R. john is unmarried Which could mean that he just freely chooses to be unmarried.
Note how he inserts “Necessarily” into the premises…even then it fails. 1. Necessarily if God knows I will do X, then I will do X. 2. God foreknows I will do X. 3. Therefore, necessarily I will do X. then he says: “…all that it means is that you WILL do X, BUT not NECESSARILY do X.” “You could refrain, and if you were to refrain, then God’s foreknowledge would have been different.” - i.e.: he would have known that you were going to refrain…so we are back at square one again. Is this guy on drugs? So basically he’s saying what his opponents have been saying for ages: If god knows what you will do, then you will do it. If you refrain from doing it, then god already knows that too. Which means, there is no free will. End of story.
Apakah kehendak bebas manusia harus mengasumsikan ketidaktahuan Tuhan? di menit 1:46 WLC berkata bahwa pengetahuan Tuhan tidak serta-merta menghilangkan kehendak bebas manusia. Mungkinkah maksudnya "Tuhan memang tahu saya akan melakukan X, namun IA tidak membuat saya melakukan X"?
So then, question. Lets say you fall into a bad sin...you want to have godly sorrow and remorse...then, you think that God foreknew that you would do it, therefore you HAD to yield to the sin...it was utterly out of your hands or power to do anything else. Please comment.
"If god knows what you will do, then you will do it. If you refrain from doing it, then god already knows that too. Which means, there is no free will." You have made the gross correlation fallacy of sorts. Just because God knows you will do something does NOT mean that He /causes/ you to do that something. It also doesn't mean that you don't have free will. All it means is that God knows how you are going to use that free will. If you're going to argue that we don't have free will, you're going to have to make up something that is dictating our actions. "End of story." Don't be so ignorant and naive as to believe that you can just end a conversation/debate like this and pretend that you know everything so that there can't possibly be anything more to discuss.
amanda2324 And you made the error of assuming that I meant that God was controlling my will. I never assumed that God caused me to do anything. Obviously, something is causing me to do something that God already knows I will do and there is nothing I can do about it.
"Obviously, something is causing me to do something that God already knows I will do and there is nothing I can do about it." Well, what is that something? Or are you just making something up in a failed attempt to argue against the idea of free will? I know for some people, their free will is taken away by alcohol or nicotine. Perhaps you become a slave to whatever earthly forces you allow yourself to become enslaved by?
This is a very man-centered answer. God’s divine foreknowledge is essentially dependent upon man’s actions, not upon His own self-sufficient omniscience, plans, decrees, desires, etc.
I think of it like a decision tree in a video game. We make choices and they lead us onto different paths, God knows every path we can take and where it will lead because He is the designer of the tree, and perhaps there is a path He hopes we take, but he lets us choose the path we want because He loves us.
However if God is allknowing, then the future is deterministic, because he knows what will happen, he may not cause it, but it doesnt matter. You have either libertarian free will or an omnicient god, not both.
@@kaizal3161 how does foreknowledge necessarily make the future deterministic? Knowledge and causation are not necessarily intertwined in this case, that's just an inference. If God is timeless, he has a complete and linear perception of the past present and future, resulting in his Omniscience. Your action causes God's knowledge, not the other way around. If this is to be believed there are no contradictions
+Billy Gibbs And what happens when he doesn't? I've used the same logic that you apply here before (mine was something about my brother doing a good deed). Would you not agree that you are simply using chance as your determining factor? Something like: there is an extremely high chance that my son will take the ice cream, but he doesn't have to. If so, would you say this "foresight" is also what God has?
Yes, Tlu, it is by chance. As my son get's older, he may choose homework instead. Our choice is to sin or not to sin. As we study and strengthen our faith, we will sin less and less. However, I do believe God knows ultimately where we will end up, we don't know unless we are determined to go to heaven.
Ha, I would also say we know where we're going if we're determined to get to hell. You know as well as I God won't force people into Heaven. When it comes to this question for me, I simply have to say I don't know. There are convincing arguments on both sides of the "does God know everything?" question. I do always like to think about the implications that arise, for instance at the beginning of Job. If Satan knows God knows everything, why would he make a bet with him? I find these subjects much more fun than your typical church subjects.
If an omniscient and omnipotent God exist, He cannot have an imperfect plan. There is no amount of influence from the devil, human free will, or from whatsoever can mess-up His plan. Therefore, whatever happens yesterday, today, and tomorrow is in accordance to his will. Q: Do humans have free will? A: It doesn't matter. Everything still happens according to his plan. Q: If humans have free will, how can we not influence his plan? A: Because our humble capability cannot mess-up the plan of an omniscient and omnipotent God. Q: But how can it be possible that we have free will yet everything happens according to His will? A: I don't know. Who am I to understand His nature? He works in mysterious ways, right? Just accept it that way. Have faith. Q: You mean all the sufferings and confusions we have are part of His plan? A: What do you think?
Having foreknowledge of something doesnt take away free will...It just means that somebody knows the outcome of a persons decision.... Just because somebody knows what somebody else is going to do does not mean you are taking away their free will...Its kind of simple now for me to understand.
It isn't that simple Holy, don't give up on yourself, have faith that you are smarter than that. Factor in the fact that God is the very fabric of reality itself, everything comes from god. Every particle and to the billionth part, he knows, where it was eternally into the past, where it is at present, where it will be forever from now. Even before a person is born He knows. He already knows all the unborn people that will chill with him in heaven singing harp music and praising him forever, and knows all the unborn people that will burn in and be tortuted in hell for eternity. How do you reconcile freewill with that?
Not to mention you can't compare the phenomenon of God's foreknowledge with anything else we have experience with. She says "Just because somebody knows what somebody else is going to do ..." but the point is nobody has or ever can KNOW what someone else will do. You can have a very strong valid, rational, reason for believing what someone else will do and you may end up correct with your prediction. But when you are talking about divine, omniscient foreknowledge you are talking about an absolute certainty that is really only found in Mathematics and not any of the other sciences(if you even consider math a science). God's foreknowledge would have always existed. He would have know eternally in the past before EVERYTHING, including time and space were created, every single event, even at quantum level, and every thought every conscious agent would ever have. And God is the one who created and supplied everything that exists besides Himself. How then can you say that the creation was free? I see so many people trying to assert that prior knowledge does not imply cause but NOBODY has ever had ANY experience with genuine prior knowledge. No human has or will ever posses prior knowledge that is as certain as 1+1=2. God's foreknowledge would be necessarily a mathematical certainly. There is no other prior knowledge for which that could be claimed.
@@j-r-m7775 you're right. But there's still no contradiction. True foreknowledge is something no human possesses, thus we can't pretend to know how it works. However, if we infer that the nature of Omniscience is to simply inform God of what will occur IN TIME (keeping in mind God is said to exist outside of time) then there is no contradiction. God sees right through time, thus he has a linear perception of the existence of everything from the beginning of time until the end. But if one asserts that Omniscience is not a causal agent, then there is no contradiction. Omniscience doesn't necessarily have to be deterministic in nature, it can simply be informative.
Don't forget about LOVE. The ability to choose Love means to also have to ability to NOT choose Love. We know that God is Love. And Love is freedom. Love is a CHOICE, not a feeling. That's why it means so much when a man and a woman get married, and when they say "I DO", they are also saying "I DONT DO ALL THE OTHER THINGS." Since God is Love, and since Love is not manipulative or forceful, God WILL NOT force you to love him. It violates His very nature. Bottom line, free will absolutely exists, otherwise there would be no such thing as Love. If everything was predetermined then we can conclude that every bad thing that we do would ultimately be God's fault. And would once again violate His perfect/sinless nature.
He does seem to stretch credibility to its breaking point. Read his thoughts on divine command theory or the "defeasibility of Christian belief". Craig debates a lot, either because he wants to reach people in that way, or because it's a paying gig, or both, or perhaps some other combination of reasons. But it doesn't seem that he debates in order for people to have the same religious awakening that he says he had as a teenager. Interestingly, in many of his debates he acknowledges that evidence and logic are not the real basis for his own belief. His faith is based upon the "witness of the holy spirit in my heart".
***** He isn't the powerful force for Christianity, lol, Jesus is. Craig peddles hell which is a false doctrine, and he believes in human freewill which is another false unscriptural doctrine and that alone simply shows that he is not submitted to God's will and sovereignty. And being a doctor means very little to me, especially when it's a doctor of theology or philosophy for that matter. I don't have to respect titles just because someone has sat in a chair in a Uni and chant learned academia's rote mantras. Get of your platform dude, such in your self-righteous attitude and grow a pair of balls and try thinking for yourself instead of licking false preachers and false pastors butt holes, as that won't get you into heaven,lol. Jeremiah 23:1-5 “Woe to the shepherds who are destroying and scattering the sheep of my pasture!” declares the Lord. 2 Therefore this is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says to the shepherds who tend my people: “Because you have scattered my flock and driven them away and have not bestowed care on them, I will bestow punishment on you for the evil you have done,” declares the Lord. 3 “I myself will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them and will bring them back to their pasture, where they will be fruitful and increase in number. 4 I will place shepherds over them who will tend them, and they will no longer be afraid or terrified, nor will any be missing,” declares the Lord. 5 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will raise up for David[a] a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land. Happy hunting. Sincerely in Christ, Jimi:-).
***** Is it!? What exactly do I need to grow up from? When I see apostasy as a human being, as a Christian, I have the right to speak my mind about it while there is still a smidgen of democratic autonomy left on this planet. You obviously don't like freedom of speech, and you have no idea whatsoever what my opinions are shallow or not, you are, just as, if not more so, hypocritical than you think I am. And I have lots of things to do in my life matey, lots, and one of them is to call out fake Christianity. Now how do you like them apples bro? If you do have something grown up to say to me that is even remotely intellectual and worth discussing then let me know... if not then I guess we both have something better to do. Sincerely, Jimi:-).
I have to say that it is hard to accept your completely ungracious criticism of another man's work and particular theology, whilst you simultaneously claim to be doing so in the name of Christ. You are certainly free to disagree with the man, but just because you do not agree with his brand of theology (which happens to be quite orthodox) does not mean that he is some how not a committed Christian. So aside from your ungracious attitude, it would seem that you are the one who does not hold to traditional Christian views, such as hell. It is all over the New Testament.
Shaydawg88 I continually ask assured Christians why they believe in hell (when it is clearly not in scripture)? So I will ask you bro, why do you believe that God is a torturing, vindictive, fiendish, bodge artist? I know why... but I'm just interested to hear you confess with your mouth why!? Sincerely, Jimi.
I would argue that it is simply a matter of perspective. From my own humble observations I have witnessed a great number of people in society emphasize the goodness of God, the mercy of God, the grace of God, but somehow they always seem to leave out the perfectly just character of God. I believe your characterization of God, "torturing, vindictive, fiendish, bodge artist," fails to account for this quality. Is God not justified in sending a rapist to hell? A murderer? If God is perfectly good and perfectly just, does it not follow that such men and women have rightfully earned punishment of some sort? I think this is also what makes God's merciful nature even more so amazing given that he does offer a pardon. In this way not only is God's just nature satisfied, but he is further glorified through this manifestation of mercy. And I am interested in your interpretation of the numerous passages that do refer to hell (hades, gehenna, or whatever you would like to call it). Here is just a select few passage, of which there are many more. (Matt. 5:29; 10:28; 11:23; 23:33; 25:41; Luke 12:5; Acts 2:27; 2 Pet. 2:4) As an aside, I believe C.S. Lewis offered an astute observation when he said, “There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened” (The Great Divorce). Does this seem reasonable to you?
***** Reason. Yeah, Martin Luther said Christians must rip the eyes out of reason. You guys are ridiculous. You use the terms "if" and "maybe" when referring to your god. I'm done with you.
Dr Craig very craftily waters down the second premise to suit his argument. This is how it ought to read. P1: If God, the Supreme, omnipotent, omniscient being necessarily foreknows that I will do X, then necessarily I will do X. P2: God foreknows, necessarily, that I will do X. Conclusion: It follows necessarily that I will do X. On those terms I cannot refrain and I am necessarily fated to do X.
The "necessarily" is unnecessary. It seems Craig only includes "necessarily" in the argument in order to create a modal fallacy. Unfortunately for him, the problem with omniscience can't be dispensed by sleight of hand. The argument is simply: 1. If God foreknows we will do X, we will do X 2. God foreknows we will do X 3. We will do X Craig's argument against this logic is to include an infinite loop of decisions contrary to foreknowledge which force the foreknowledge to retroactively change. From the perspective of an omniscient being, the future has already occurred. This does not allow for any ridiculous "but if we DID do something different, God's foreknowledge WOULD HAVE been different" nonsense.
From what I can evaluate, the word "necessary" is crucial in understanding the fallacious argument. Let's look at the logic with and without the injection of this word. First, with "necessary": 1. If God foreknows we will do X, we will necessarily do X 2. God foreknows we will do X 3. We will necessarily do X This is how most people assert this argument to prove that God's foreknowledge would dictate human action. The issue is that premise 1 is incorrect. God's foreknowledge does not force action X (the very question the argument is trying to prove). The conclusion cannot be assumed in the premise. This argument is therefore illogical. Now, let's look at the logic as you present it: 1. If God foreknows we will do X, we will do X 2. God foreknows we will do X 3. We will do X This is now logically coherent, but nowhere is it implied that God's foreknowledge forces action X. This only proves that action X is _correlated_ with God's foreknowledge, not _caused_ by it. Correlation does not imply causation. The only reason premise 1 is true is because action X is the reason for God's foreknowledge.
His argument basically boils down to, if god knows you'll do X, then you'll do X, but you don't necessarily have to do X, if you choose not to do X and choose to do Y instead, then god would have foreknown that you would do Y instead. What a stupid ridiculous argument that pretty much confirms the fact that an Omniscient deity = no free will. He knows what you'll do before you're born, how then can you have freewill to do something god had already foreknown you would do?
Because God's foreknowledge is based on you're actions. Your actions are free and not based on his knowledge. God does not determine your actions, he just knows them.
***** Nonsense. If he KNOWS your actions, then you are NOT free to do something contrary to what he knows. And if you do something contrary to what he knows, then his foreknowledge would have been different. In other words, God knows everything you'll ever do before you were even conceived in your mothers womb. Therefore there clearly is NO freewill.
Wilson Kayden Just listen to what even you're saying yourself. Again, God foreknows what you will do, he has not determined it. His eternal/timeless knowledge is based on your actions and your action are based on your freewill.
***** Lets cut to the chase and stop playing games. Please kindly answer the following: -Is god omniscient (knows everything)? -does god know the past, present and future? -does god know everything about you (even before you are born)? If the answers to all those questions is "Yes". Then that means god must know everything you are ever going to do in your life, he knows when you die etc. so you have no freewill. Because you'd have no choice but to do whatever it is that god already foreknows you would do. Even William Lane Craig tells you that whatever you do, god foreknows you are going to do it. Therefore it's IMPOSSIBLE to change your mind, because whatever you do, god already knew you would do. Ergo, no freewill.
Wilson Kayden Your conclusion simply doesn't follow. God's foreknowledge of your actions is not a determining factor, it is a result of the choices you are freely going to make. It is not impossible to change your mind, it just means God would know this change. Again, our actions are not dictated by God's foreknowledge, it is are actions that determine God's foreknowledge. You are trying to argue a totally illogical position where cause and effect are circular.
Regardless of whether or not "God's" foreknowledge conveniently changes based upon our actions. (Which wouldn't be foreknowledge). He gets angry in the Bible. Anyone who created the universe and has foreknowledge has no grounds for ever being angry and flooding the world. Mr. Craig, your logic remains clouded and disingenuous, as always.
04l882 You must have learned your apologetics from him. You imply I said things that are similar to what I said, but not quite. Go back and figure it out. When you respond to me, answer my questions. Don't pose trivial questions to me as "answers". I won't play that game, thank you. It reminds me of the loaded question... "When did you stop beating your wife?" The way the question is posed presumes a certain kind of answer, it is used as a tactic when someone doesn't have a good enough defense.
Maybe I'm missing something. Are you implying that _God should not get/feel/express anger if He knows everything_ or not? Also I don't see any question in the thread so I'm not sure what you're referring to. Please advise.
I am not saying anything about "should". I am saying that there is no reason behind someone being angry if said being... 1) Created the Universe 2) Created the People 3) possesses foresight God would have created people differently to adjust to foresight of their sins. Unless he gets satisfaction out of being an Angry, Jealous, Genocidal maniac. In which case, He doesn't sound very benevolent.
I don't understand his logic. He seems to not understand that foreknowledge has to occur before the event which was foreseen. You can't have a different choice occur and retroactively go back and change the foreknowledge.
I think it could be stated more simply than WLC stated it. Knowledge and will are two different things. God knowing the future decisions of humans does not mean he makes those decisions. For example: I can know that someone is about to commit a crime, but my knowledge doesn't mean I will have any influence on that person's will to do so. They are two very different things.
+SXS66 I believe that the church has become lazy and stagnate. All humans are lazy, even Christians. Christians are lazy because they are relying on the same things that have worked in the past and they don't want to put forth the work of learning the new and difficult things that Dr. Craig puts forth. I didn't hear about Dr. Craig until about the age of 30 or so. Like you, I have learned more about God in the past few years than all of my prior church life before. Dr. Craig has spoken about this before. A very large percentage of people who go to a University end up abandoning their faith because their parents and church didn't prepare them for the onslaught of secularism. He is pretty harsh of parents and churches for not teaching their children about rational faith.
Horrible logic skills of WLC. First, let's at least get the syllogism right: 1. If God foreknows I will choose X, then I must choose X. 2. God foreknows I will choose X. 3. Therefore, I must choose X. ----- And then, if we are so inclined, we can go on (though it's not really needed)... 1. If I must choose X, I cannot choose Y instead of X. 2. I must choose X. 3. Therefore, I cannot choose Y instead of X. 1. If I cannot choose Y instead of X, I don't have the free will to choose Y instead of X 2. I cannot choose Y instead of X 3. I don't have the free will to choose Y instead of X 1. Y represents anything other than X 2. I don't have the free will to choose Y instead of X 3. I don't have the free will to choose anything other than X instead of X 1. If I don't have the free will to choose anything other than X instead of X, my choice of X is not a free choice 2. I don't have the free will to choose anything other than X instead of X 3. My choice of X is not a free choice ----- And if god has foreknowledge, the word is "contingent" not "necessarily". In other words, the truth is contingent on gods foreknowledge. 1. If God foreknows I will choose X, then I must choose X ... is a contingent truth 2. God foreknows I will choose X. 3. Therefore, I must choose X... is a contingent truth.
My Transcription. When you watch a movie before someone else you know what happened. when you tell them what is going to happen does that mean you made the movie that way? God Has watched the movie of your life before you have finished it. He is not bound by time.
***** "You have no choice but to do x. You can’t not do x" what? lool. you are making no sense. God knows you will do x because he has seen you do it from eternity. how you cannot get this is amazing..
If God knows everything you will do even before you are born, you do not have freewill because if God is all knowing and all powerful he knows what you will do. Dr Craig says "God doesn't necciserly know what you will do" So God all knowing yet limited is some way??? So then if he doesn't know what you will do in the future then how is God all knowing???
There is no mechanism by which anyone's foreknowledge of an event could possibly cause that event to happen, and there is no mechanism by which anyone's foreknowledge could possibly curtail anyone's free will. Nobody has ever mentioned what the mechanism supposedly is: There simply isn't one. Therefore the conclusion is that God has perfect foreknowledge, and man has free will.
When you mess up theology like these guys it is. The Bible is clear in this subject and the view this man is bringing up is nothing but the popular traditional thought. That's why he has books to sell.
If God knows the future and if our environment and our physical predetermination at least partly defines our will ..God is essentially responsible for everything we do.
That doesn't provide evidence for your claim. In order for your argument to be true you'd need to show/explain: *(a.)* How knowing = doing *(b.)* How knowing has causal power. I'd be pretty interested if you had that. Would you let me know?
mam somal You're asking the wrong person as I don't believe in anything superstitious/supernatural/silly. Didn't Willy give you the answer (you wanted to hear) here? Or like the interviewer, did you "have to go home and think about it?"
Ian M The reason you don't believe in the supernatural, or an afterlife is merely don't to your lack of knowledge on that particular topic. There is not a single book ever written to debunk the existence of an afterlife. Look up the Scole Experiment.
Can't stop you believing any tosh you like - but I will give you all I own if there is ever any evidence that will stand up in a UK court of law (not your own silly mind) to prove the existence of God, Heaven, Hell, Satan, Allah, Ganesha, Thor, Zeus, angels, ghosts, devils, pixies, fairies. Are there any other supernatural things you would like to add to the list that you think exist? Like Pascal's Wager, you've got nothing to loose - except spending the only life you're going to get as a delusional idiot.
Ian M Who said anything about Satan, Allah, , etc? A court of law finds one witness suffice to find someone guilty of a criminal offence, but when I mention the Scole Experiment (where there was a substantial number of credible witnesses) you say it wouldn't stand in a court of law? Where is the logic in that?
God knows all the possibilities you can do, or what ever can happen. All the possibilities of all the things.... So, God knows everything.... So, God knows what you will do. Because He knows all the possibilities. In real world, God knows permutations and combinations of everything!
We have free will, God just knows what we gonna do ahead of time, we still free will do it, that's reasonable to say, after all he is our supernatural creator God 😇♥️♥️♥️🙌🙌🙌🙏🏽🙏🏿🙏🏼🙏🙏🏻
An awful explanation. I don't subscribe to fatalism but his justification is as usual pathetic! It's really quite easy. An omniscient power (which doesn't exist, but let's say god did exist) knows what CHOICE you will make. Therefore it knows the outcome of your own free will.
William Lane Craig is a proponent to Molinism. Molinists summarizes Luis de Molina's teaching as God has three types of omniscience. First, God's natural knowledge, he knows all the possibilities of what could happen. Second, God's middle knowledge, he knows all the possibilities which are feasible and would happen. Third, God's free knowledge, he determined the things that will surely happen. So in God's foreknowledge, he is sovereign, by having exhaustive knowledge over anything, that he has meticulous control over everything, that he is free from all things, and he is righteous in his holiness. I've got a book I'm reading right now called "Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach" by Kenneth Keathley. It's a good book, you can find some of the sample pages (I was quoting from the first chapter, you can find it on Google Books). I was a programmer, and to make our application structured and clear, we ought to make a blue print of workflow diagrams, full of if and thens, switch cases, conditionals, but there are also some things that are definite that I want this to happen every time the user press this button, or whatever. Years ago when I read about predestination and God's foreknowledge, that is how I understand it, that God's knowledge is like a big blue print full of conditionals diagram, full of things that could happen, would happen, and will happen. Years later, I found out about William Lane Craig and Molinism, then found out that my own personal thinking that I imagined myself wasn't new at all.
Jasonwins Ridiculous, if it knows the effect and it knows the mechanics then it knows the cause. Omniscience means knowing everything and that includes choices. But nowhere in that statement does it imply that the omniscient being is therefore forcing your choice.
Not if the creator made us that way.. See thats what you arent getting.. IF a creator that knows all makes something designed to have free will than he can. Period! Hes THE creator! He can pretty much do what he wants to! LOL
I don't understand his argument at 1:25 at all. If I act in a certain way, God has foreknowledge of it, does he not? And I can't change this foreknowledge with my actions, correct? So where exactly does the freedom come into play? If someone could explain Craig's argument here, I'd love to hear it.
the freedom comes into play when you choose to make the actions you do. you have been given the choice to make. God is all-knowing , all-seeing so he knows what decisions you're going to make but doesn't tie your hands behind your back and force you to make the choice
Emmanuel Akinfenwa I have to call BULLSHIT to your response. In all knowing god scenario if he (I call god a he because if the bible is true then god most certainly is a man. No woman ever would fuck things up like the biblical god does.) foreknows what you are going to do, you do not have the option of changing that. Ergo- no free will. However, since no apologist has ever come close to meeting the burden of proof for a god, personal or otherwise, the points William Lane Craig makes in his various cult meetings doesn't mean diddly squat.
I don't mind the bullshit call.I am speaking from a Christian's perspective. God knowing what your going to do does not mean he makes you do it. Either way you CANNOT prove there is no God. There is no truthful evidence in your support. Why?, because just as Psalm 14:1 " A fool says in his heart there is no God". Your mere existence is enough evidence.
Emmanuel Akinfenwa "God knowing what your going to do does not mean he makes you do it."I don't think anyone argues that god is forcing anyone. His for-knowledge however does imply that there is at least one framework in which the future is either set (causaly deterministic to predict). So our 'free choice' becomes the same deterministic 'appereance of free will'.
P.G. Burgess Two questions. *1.* How did you move from _"imply...framework"_ to _"becomes... deterministic"_ without justification? If you posit a framework, then you use that comment as support for your conclusion, that seems suspect, don't you think? *2.* Can you present a fully formed argument that demonstrates *(a.)* why this framework is true and *(b.)* why/how one entity's (uncommunicated) knowledge negates another entity's free will? Thanks.
I wonder how he explains the biblical flood. God creates people, having complete foreknowledge of what those people will do, then he watches them doing it, gets angry and destroys them.
As interesting as this is, the Bible reveals that God stored the waters of the flood - preparing/ holding back In fact, the Bible declares that the all knowing God reveals all things for the right moment PS. the emotions expressed by God in creation are through agency - as in; those carrying out the interventions
If God really wanted me to have free will, so I could make my own decisions, then He should have asked me, before I was born, if I wanted to be created in a world where I'd go to hell if I didn't obey the rules that are not clear enough in my opinion.
maxavail So couldn't God have created my soul before I was born? Does my soul need a body to exist? Come on. You and Craig put limits in God and take it out when it's convenient.
Gaudio Wind but you are alive, you are a thinking person. You can choose right now if you want to live a life with or without god. Its entirely up to you really.
Adding "necessarily" after 7 years of working on this philosophical problem doesn't make it go away. He is an idiot. Just because there are legions of idiots admiring and supporting him because he takes a view that they agree with, it does not change the fact that his reasoning is sophomoric at best. He basically says, if god knows you will do something you will do it, but not "necessarily" (WTF?). Because you can choose to do something else, in which case it would simply change his foreknowledge of what you will do. So basically, you supersede god's knowledge and you get to decide what he will foreknow by your own will. Which makes you even more powerful than god...which is not what the bible teaches. ------- Colossians 1:16 “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:” Proverbs 16:9 “The heart of man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps.” Psalms 103:19 "The LORD has made the heavens his throne; from there he rules over everything." Lamentations 3:37"Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not?" Mark 14:36 "And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt." - Jesus And so on..ad nausea... You will excuse me if I call bullshit on this apologetic shoehorning of personal views of WLC against the bible's words.
I don't think Dr. Craig is insane. He's simply Human, and Humans hold contradictory belief systems quite naturally. Like all theists, his beliefs can be represented as a series of interlocking Penrose triangles. He can focus on a corner at a time, but can never view the entirety as each corner contradicts the overall shape.
Drigger95 what's the truth maker of "you will do x"? If time has already played out as a real series events and God sees it then God knowing you will do X is dependant on you having actually done x, which means that God knowing isn't merely a trick of modal logic, it's passively dependant on you having already done it, past tense, from him perspective. It being past tense fact means him knowing it NECESSARILY depends on you already doing it. If your future act being certain is the truth maker for the statement that you will do X then you doing X is indeed necessarily true. You "may do y" is an absurd fantasy at that point. This is based in a timelessness foreknowledge model. In a sort of predictive model of moralistic middle knowledge alone, the truth maker isn't the action or you since at that point in a Molinist system, no reality of universes yet exists, God is planning then at this phase and is logically using middle knowledge to "know" what you or I might do in any given situation, should we actually exist. Such a conception of middle knowledge either fails or is coherent entirely based on what you think of anthropology and how the parts of hypothetical universes interact with agents. That's to say: Billy always does X in situation y only work if Billy NECESSARILY can't do other than X on every situation y, and God 5hink makes the world with Billy and you in it in a manner so they absolutely will interact when planed so that X takes place. For this to be absolutely certain in all cases, and utterly precise in every moving part of every atom and every emotion and every "billy" to do X precisely when they must to make the next billy who then does X in the next year (basically all of human history), then each interaction MUST be totally fixed in a chain of mechanistically determined causality... with NO ROOM for deviations. With 0 play, 0 deviations, then once God says "let there be light" and the plan goes into action, then it's no longer a middle knowledge matter, all that ever will take place must necessarily take place from that moment on because there's never again a functional difference between what could happen, would happen should happen or must happen, at that point all of human history becomes a determined brute fact of design. And all free agents are designed to freely do X based on a larger scale flow that billy can't ever do otherwise in. Billy is designed to always do X in y, his freely choosing it is an illusion at that point. In timelessness it isn't "you will" it's "you did". It's already done, you're literally living out fixed events. Both of these models depend on an understanding of how objects, humans and events interact that is utterly newtonian, every action has precise interactions, and from each action, all of its causes and effects, if UNDERSTOOD FULLY, are utterly knowable due to their precise interrelationships, even psychological ones. All of these models totally fall apart if your anthropology incorporates contracausality. If Billy can do X or A in situation Y, then middle knowledge is predictive and complex, not certain and absolutely factual. The difference between "Billy WILL do x", "Billy might do x" and Billy necessarily did x" become meaningfully distinct then, because human action becomes a truth-maker in real time. This freaks people out because they think it's akin to saying "man is more powerful than God" or "then God can't know anything", but that's absurd. It simply posits that more interaction in real time is necessary for middle knowledge to be certain in all situations, but in any given situations, the number of free radicals that can upset the apple cart of any given plan are known, their variables and triggers all thoroughly weighed. Middle knowledge becomes a Web instead of a line, and God can easily turn that Web or branching tree into a line whenever he wants by simply cutting branches. The question is; how much variability does he allow (if there is any at all) and how many branches does he cut and when? It could be possible that middle knowledge is indeed perfect as Molinism suspects, and it's possible billy always does X in y... but taken to its logical ends, this just means that we vantage ever have done otherwise, and the universe is utterly determined and every part if it is fixed. If God sees the future actions if agents timelessly, then they're fixed as well, but for different reasons.
Craig's response is perfectly valid. Basically, god's foreknowledge is contingent on your decision. That's obvious, because there's nothing about his foreknowledge that would make you decide one thing over another.
Vic 2.0, no Craig's response is not valid at all because His premise isn't sound. Basically, God's foreknowledge is contingent on your decision isn't talking about the God of the Bible, therefore Craig's reasoning is invalid. God's foreknowledge isn't contingent on any finite person's decision because God is self-existent (Exodus 3:14), therefore all His knowledge is derived from Him. Before Genesis 1:1, God foreknows all things. It can't be contingent on the created because God knows it all before He created all things. In fact, God chose those that would be saved before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4-5), therefore those choices are set in stone in eternity past, just like those that don't choose is also set in stone. What Craig has done is elevated sinful, finite man above holy, infinite God to reconcile the problem of "free" will. Yet man's will isn't free in the respect that he can choose anything that he hates. He hates God, Christ, and Christians (John 15:18-23) and he can't come to the Son unless the Father draws them (John 6:44). Mankind is a slave to their sin nature and only Christ can set them free (John 8:34-36). Craig is embracing Molinism, a philosophical system invented by man to cling to the notion of free will and in effect, making God subservient to man's will, even before God ever created man. When you embrace man-made philosophy or lean on your own understanding, you violate Colossians 2:8 and Proverbs 3:5. This is the reason Craig must be philosophical with his answers and not quote a Bible verse that backs up his assertions. He may sound like a clever apologist, but even sinful atheists can spot the fallacy of his logic.
Those area a lot of extrapolations that don't follow. You've put the full range of theological speculation over millenia and squeezed out everything that isn't meticulous hard determinism.
Okay, Mr. Crag, I will rewrite the argument: 1. God is necessarily never wrong about anything. 2. Therefore, God necessarily knows which box I will choose: box a) or box b). 3. The ability to choose either box is a function of free will. 4. Therefore, free will does not exist. e.g., I chose box a). God knew this, therefore it was impossible to choose box b). For, if it were possible, then (1) is falsified. Since it was impossible for me to choose box b), it follows from (3) that we have no free will.
I see what you're saying. However, this idea is what Craig was trying to dispel. Allow me to point out the logical fallacy in your argument. While you will freely choose between box a) or box b), it does not negate the fact that you will eventually choose one of the boxes and not the other. This future choice of yours is the dictator of God's foreknowledge. This creates a correlation between God's foreknowledge and your future free choice, and people often misinterpret this correlation as God's foreknowledge being the cause of your actions.
God's foreknowledge is NOT, I repeat NOT the cause of our actions. This is the biggest problem in the other side trying to understand our arguments. What we're actually saying, rather, is that God's foreknowledge implies that actions are predetermined. My future choice does not dictate god's knowledge, because it was impossible for me to choose box b. Let me break this down simply: At 12pm god knows for 100% certainty that, at 1pm, I will make my choice, and decide to choose box A. So now it's 1pm. My question for you: can I choose box b? No, it's impossible, if God is never wrong. And surely being free to choose box b is in line with the doctrine of free will. Now, the typical way around this (Aquinas') is to say that at 12pm god doesn't know for 100% certainty that I will choose box a; he only has certain middle knowledge. And if this is the case, most would argue that god does not have total omniscience. Because to have all knowledge, he would have to know for 100% certainty that I will choose box a.
SteepDescent Thanks for the clarification. I assume that this is your argument: 1. If I *will* choose box B, my choice is predetermined 2. God knows I *will* choose box B. 3. I cannot contradict God's foreknowledge 4. I *will* choose box B (2&3) 5. Because I *will* choose box B, my choice is predetermined (1&4) With this logic, I suppose our choices are indeed predetermined (if we assume premise 1 is true). However, the question asked in the video still remains: _"Is free will possible if God knows all of our thoughts and actions beforehand?"_ Notice that predetermination does not negate free will: 6. If I *must* chose box B, I have no free will 7. Since I *mustn't necessarily* choose box B, I *mustn't necessarily* have no free will. It is key to note that *"will"* does not imply that I was forced into any action or given no other choice, while *"must"* does imply as such. The only reason that I cannot choose box A in the future is because I will _freely choose not to_ in the future. My future self freely predetermined my future action at the time of the future action. When my current self catches up to my future self, I will then be the current me that freely choses box B. It is fallacious to assume predetermination negates free will. Therefore, the answer to the question above is "Yes, free will is possible even if God knows all of our thoughts and actions beforehand."
_"If I must chose box B, I have no free will"_ This is my argument, and if God is never wrong, then yes, I must necessarily always choose this box. The reason you cannot do anything otherwise is because god's omniscience implies that time is a constant construct. This doesn't only apply to our choices, but to every event in the past, present and future. Those three states would be one in the same for God. It would be impossible for the axis powers to win ww2, for example. Everything that has ever happened and ever will happen is 100% set in stone, and could never have been different. If the past or future could be different, then God would not be endowed with total omniscience. If you asked him, in the year 1000, who would win ww2, and he said anything other than "the allied forces", then he wouldn't have total omniscience. And so that would mean that the allied forces must, necessarily have won ww2. And you have conceded that this negates the doctrine of free will.
SteepDescent Your argument is my point number 6, which is a point that I refuted in 7. Therefore, argument number 6 fails, because it cannot be proven. Let's look at why prophesy exists, and how it relates to our actions and God's foreknowledge. Let us first assume that we do have free will, meaning that our choices now and in the future are not forced (that we *mustn't necessarily* choose box B). At future time T, I will, out of my own free will, choose box B. My future self will freely choose box B, therefore creating a prophesy that at time T, I will choose box B. Since the prophesy is a result of my free will, it will never contradict my free will. Therefore, the existence of the prophesy does not force my future decision, nor will it ever contradict my future decision. It simply exists as a result of my future decision. God, being unbound by time, has access to all prophesies (which are dictated by our free will decisions). Therefore, God is never wrong, but His omnipotence does not, to any degree, mean that I *must* necessarily choose box B. It just means I will. To demand that free will requires me to be able to contradict a prophesy makes no sense, as the prophesy spawns from my future decision. Understanding the nature of prophesies beautifully reconciles free will and God's foreknowledge.
If you walked into Willie Clawhands car dealership and asked about the life expectancy of a particular vehicle he was selling and you got a response that he had just presented. Would you buy from Willie Clawhands dealership?
Craig ignores the fact that God created the universe and its initial conditions. It is this rather than foreknowledge that makes God the author of our actions. However, a consequence of God's omniscient foreknowledge is that the universe must necessarily be deterministic, and libertarian free will cannot exist in a deterministic universe. So God's foreknowledge isn't irrelevant to the question of whether or not we have free will.
So to sum up the impossibility of free will with an omniscient being: if an omniscient being already know every single action you will do in your lifespan then free will is truly an impossible feat. Although, we may have the placebo effect in which we believe what we do is of our own violation, that is not a sound argument against not having free will. Thus this being a strong deterrent (at least for me) in believing in the Christian depiction of god.
It would have been helpful if Craig had defined "freedom" and "free will." There are various definitions of these terms, and it is not clear (to me) which one (compatibilist? libertarian? something else?) he is using.
I though John Lennox answered this better. He poses it as a question. "if you were in a helicopter flying above a town and saw two cars on a collision course. you knew they were going to crash. does it follow that you caused it?"
+Just Curious i think you missed the point. because gi know its going to happen is not the same as me CAUSING It to happen. so its not at all illogical.
+Just Curious i still find your logic unsound. if you put broccoli and icecream infront of a child and asked him to pick you would know what he would pick. that doesnt make his choice meaningless nor does it make it an unfree act. similarly sin is to God. that is where grace comes into play. we can ask God for his grace to not do the bad he knew we would do. God Bless!
+Just Curious still unsound. and i do believe that God could know we would do something, but give us the grace not to do it. which would mean He is the reason we didnt do something He knew, on our own, we would have done. there is nothing illogical about anything that I have said. this can all take place and God can still maintain His omnipotence.
+calm critic No one said God 'forces' anyone's action... The fact that the future is foreseeable, by definition, means you cannot have a 'free choice' to do otherwise.
Logically that doesnt follow. You can still have free will, even if someone (God) knew what you are going to choose. Unless your actions are coerced you freely choose it whether or not it is forseen.
If god knows how everything is going to turn out, does he have the ability to change his own predestined outcome? If god knows everything in advance and can't change it, how is he omnipotent? If god cannot change outcomes or events, does god have free will? Can an entity without free will be considered a god?
If god knows how everything is going to turn out, does he have the ability to change his own predestined outcome? Your concept of god is limited by space/time constraints such as pre-destination. If god knows everything in advance and can't change it, how is he omnipotent? Your concept of God is not omnipotent. If god cannot change outcomes or events, does god have free will? Your concept of God has no free will. Can an entity without free will be considered a god? An entity lacking free will isn't even a human being, let alone god. I conclude your concept of god doesn't work . Try another or are you clinging to that particular limited concept .? I'm asking if you have free will to choose.
George Forsyth I wonder how long before Mr Christian here starts his display of cursing and swearing at you. He's right by saying that his god is perfect and you're right to say it is imaginary. Combine the two truths and you get the perfect imaginary god. Clearly the christian god cannot be omnipotent since according to their scripture, he cannot forgive. He needs to be paid to forgive people's transgressions and he wants the payment in blood. But not just any blood but his own son's blood (which in fact is himself !?!) 1 Corinthians 13 Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not want what belongs to others. It does not brag. It is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor other people. It does not look out for its own interests. It does not easily become angry. It does not keep track of other people’s wrongs. 6 Love is not happy with evil. But it is full of joy when the truth is spoken. 7 It always protects. It always trusts. It always hopes. It never gives up. So, is god in fact love? Love does not look out for its own interests - as in creating people for the sole purpose of worshiping you, or as in making a plan before the creation of the universe that includes torture and killing of your only son ! Love does not keep track of other people’s wrongs. Does god keep track ? Love It always protects. - tell that to those who were killed with the flood, the first born of Egypt (Egyptians or slaves) and the list can go on and on. Love does not want what belongs to others. See, when those shitheads christians say to give your life and money to god, it's bullshit. God doesn't want what is yours, doesn't want your life, your mind or your money. Unless he isn't love. Is he? Sure you can see more examples than that in just one chapter of their book.
I think Craig overcomplicated it. It's simple. Foreknowledge does not equal predestination , nor does it equal force. Predestination implies that we have no choice, but we obviously do, and we aren't possessed and controlled and forced to do anything. If either of those things were true, then we wouldn't be responsible for anything, good or bad, that we have done.
Let’s think of how free will makes you evil. For example we are on the motorway and have the choice to exceed or not the limit. What are factors contributing to your decision? General background and instincts, knowledge from the past, brain performance (intelligence) that leads to rational calculation. Then you evaluate instincts over logic and make a decision. But the decision is still based on those factors you don’t have control over so what makes you evil?
The one Well supposedly god makes us each and decides where on the earth we are born. from this initial choice he can see the whole future of our lives not just one choice but all the choices we will make so essentially god could change the outcome of any of our lives depending on how he made us. If as hes making you he sees if he puts you in Detroit you he can know if you will become a gang member but if he puts you somewhere else you could be a cop or something, He could change your personality or physical traits to succeed or fail as you are being made the future should be changing until he decides what your fate is by how and where he puts you. He can see that maybe you almost got to heaven but you shaved your beard or wore clothes that aren't 100% cotton or satin, he could change this by making you more gullible to the religion. before you are made he should be seeing your future; if you go to heaven or hell...so essentially he chooses who gets to go as you are made because he can see past present and future. The christian gods own overpowered abilities makes him obviously fake or at least obviously evil.
If God foreknows that I will do X, then how could I ever chose otherwise? If I had opted for Y, God would have foreknown that. God's omniscience necessitates that his foreknowledge is objectively true. By foreknowing all actions, those actions must occur or else they were never truly foreknown which means God was never a maximally great being. Craig's argument seems to elevate human action over divine attributes.
this is the way I see free will as a common man. A. God is all powerful (omnipotent) B. God is omnipresent ( all places at all times) C. God is omniscience. ( meaning all knowing) People are over thinking this too much. God knows eternity past from eternity future. Just take it by faith. otherwise you will go bonkers in the head. God knows I will sin tomorrow for how long and to the exact detail. this is why he is God and I am no. I am limited as a sinner saved by grace. I could die tomorrow but hope I do not sin and am found abiding in him. I don't try to change fate or to change God's timeless character. I simply take the measure of faith God had given me and try to trust in his provision to lead a simple godly life. I am given a choice. I do not have foreknowledge but I can exercise foresight and attempt to exercise faith and self control not to sin. This is my sanctification. God gave me the ability to have and make choices ( free will) this is common sense, Most of us will not go after Phds in philosophy. Read 1 Coritnthians 1:18-31 what does this mean to people? this destroys man;s atempts to understadn God fully.
He proposes some kind of backwards causality - our actions causing God's foreknowledge. The problem with this is that God created reality in the first place, so in the end "everything in creation" must be fully causally dependent on God. He could have created reality in which I choose X, or reality in which I choose Y. He chose to create one and not the other for his own reasons. Thus stopping me from choosing the other option. Modal logic has its problems anyway.
Yeah right, thats like saying that my free choice of doing X is causing god to create reality where I will do X. That's nonsense because my free choice actually required the reality to exist before I choose X
@@levimark548 With Craig's argument, you are already making God's foreknowledge contingent on things that didn't happen yet or don't even exist yet, pre-creation. If God is a truly non-contingent being and everything else is contingent on him, then our natures, choices that are available to us and the circumstances in which these play out are all contingent on God. God is not just supposed to be the Knowing One, he's also the Creating/Decreeing One. If there are any circumstances in which I could have been saved, apparently he chose to create circumstances under which I'm not (and if there are no such possible worlds, then it's just bad design). What you could claim though is that all those specific, individual human natures are not contingent on God - that they are somehow mathematically necessary and somehow outside of God's ability to mend once created. But all of that is implausible to say the least. That doesn't really make our choices free either. Some contingencies simply would exist outside of God.
I kind of think that maybe God doesnt "know" stuff the way we think. It's just that his mind has such computational power, it can assign a probability to every possible outcome, so it's not like a Psychic thing, it's a Math thing.
![[William Lane Craig] Q&A - What is hell? Can a good God be compatible with the reality of hell?](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/B7MzHYBBPis/mqdefault.jpg)
To anyone who had trouble understanding Craig's point, allow me to paint the logic in a different way. The attempt to prove that "God's foreknowledge and human free will cannot be reconciled" goes as such:
1. God foreknows we will do X
2. If God foreknows we will do X, we will do X
3. We will *necessarily* do X
The thought is that by this logic, we will "necessarily" (or be forced to) do action X because of God's foreknowledge.
The first two premises are correct. However, the conclusion in point 3 does not follow from the prior points because of the injection of the additional word "necessarily." In order for the logic to follow, we must remove "necessarily" since it does not appear in any of the original premises. We are left with this:
1. God foreknows we will do X
2. If God foreknows we will do X, we will do X
3. We will do X
This is now logically coherent, but this argument no longer implies that God's foreknowledge forces action X, because action X is _not_ necessary. The logic here only proves that there is a _correlation_ between action X and God's foreknowledge. Correlation does not imply causation.
Then why is there a correlation? Because our future action X dictates what God foreknows. It turns out that our action X causes God's foreknowledge, but not the other way around. This correct causation is the reason for the correlation.
Feel free to comment if you have any comments/questions!
PixelSage This might be sort of valid in a B-theory of time, where our perceived notion of causes and effects are interchangelble. Which is fine and from a physics-perspective quite nice.*
But then offcourse the term forknowledge is wrong. It relies on more complicated relations between time. So at least the 'for' and all time-defining words must go. And i don't think you can make the argument meaningfull without it.
I also have the idea the argument somehow tries to wiggle its way around the real issue. Even if there is a way to make the argument internally sound.. which is important but says nothing about the truth of it. You still have to demonstrate the premise.. and there is no way of doing that.
(* though i dont think the physics would be turning out nice for the godclaims... because it would normally place god inside of the same space-time as us...or leave you up with a big homework to show how existence outside this space-time, with a B-theory, interacts with something 'outside' it.
Most B-theories are also based on relativity, and thus still strictly speaking deterministic ... )
Thank you very much for that explanation. The use of the terms causation and correlation made it click. Seriously, thank you!
Thank you for the insight
If your a Christian what do you think is meant in the books Exodus and Romans when they speak of 'God hardening Pharaoh 's heart'?
***** Thanks.
My understanding of free will is being able to choose according to ones wants and desires, for if you didn't want anything or desire anything you would not be able to choose anything. So free will is rooted in desires and wants.
Do you believe that God can change a man's wants and desires? Like is mentioned In John chapter 3 " unless a man be born again..." and Ezekiel 36 " I will put my spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey all my rules? "
If God forced Pharaoh to keep the Hebrews enslaved against Pharaoh's true desires that would mean that Pharaoh didn't freely choose, and thus his free will in that instance is terminated. However, We know this is not true because of the verses prior to which mentions Pharaoh choosing to keep the Hebrews enslaved because he hardened his heart, as you mentioned.
So what is meant by " God hardened Pharaoh's heart?" Notice it doesn't say Moses hardened Pharaoh or the Hebrews hardened Pharaoh's heart. I think the verse is stated this ways to show that ultimately God had control over Pharaohs heart and God has control over every man's heart. proverbs 21 says that "the kings heart is a stream of water in the hands of the Lord; he turns it wherever he will." God can actively change a man's desires so that he wants good or God can in accordance with his attribute of patience endure a man's evil, without intervention, for His purpose.
If you disagree what do you make of these verses in Romans 9?
You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory
PS: I don't mean to cause a quarrel. I simply want to grow in my understanding and possibly help a brother grow in his. I would love to hear what your thoughts about this. thanks.
***** You know how it says in Genesis of Joseph and his brother that Joseph brothers were "unable" to speak a kind word to him. What is meant? Does it mean that they were mute? or that they didn't know any kind words? Off course not. Joseph's brothers were unable to speak a kind word to Joseph because they didn't want to and they didn't want to speak a kind word to him because they hated him.
Excuse me for this gross example. I'm sure you would be unable to eat a bowl of dog feces. Why? because you wouldn't want to, and you wouldn't want to because you hate it.
That's what is meant when the scripture speaks of man's inability to see or even respond to the gospel. All men are enemies of the living God, and are unable to obey and worship him because they don't want to, and they don't want to because they hate Him.
John 3;16 is true. God sent His Son to die so that whoever believe's in him would not perish but have eternal life. The only problem with this is that no one will come. That's what is mean't by the previous verses "you must be born again to even see the kingdom of God" and the Spirit of God can only make you born again. Thus Ephesians 2:8-9 makes since, and even Romans 9. It is absolutely by the grace of God we are saved through faith and absolutely not of ourself it is a gift of God not works so that no man may boast. So grace also precedes faith.
Seem obvious to me. Knowledge of an event doesn't cause an event.
+Timothy Fish No, it does not cause the event, but the event will still happen. Omniscience necessarily means god can observe the future like we can observe the past, it is completely linear. We cannot change/alter the past any more than foreknowledge of the future can change the future. WLC is claiming that there is an option to refuse choice 'x' in the future, well sorry, no there isn't, it's the same as changing history when it's already happened, it cannot be done. If god is omniscient, then we have no free will, only the illusion of free will.
HughJaxident67 Suppose there is a child that we offer either strawberry or chocolate ice cream. It is possible that we know this child well enough to know that they will choose strawberry ice cream. Does having this knowledge beforehand make it any less of a choice? They still had the choice, whether we knew what they would choose or not. Suppose we have the ability to look into the future. Does that ability make it any less of a choice on their part? Our knowledge of what they will choose doesn't prevent them from making a choice or make the choice they make unimportant.
+Timothy Fish 'Suppose there is a child that we offer either strawberry or chocolate ice cream. It is possible that we know this child well enough to know that they will choose strawberry ice cream. Does having this knowledge beforehand make it any less of a choice?'
Omniscience necessarily means that we know what the child will choose before it 'chooses' it, it cannot choose the other option as it is already predestined to make the ONLY choice open to it. In essence, there is NO choice at all in the identical way that there is no choice for any action ever taken in history as it's already happened, the same applies to the future because it has already happened if you are omniscient, it is simply the illusion of choice if we accept the idea of an omniscient god.
'They still had the choice, whether we knew what they would choose or not. Suppose we have the ability to look into the future. Does that ability make it any less of a choice on their part?'
If you can look into the future then you will see every action taken, there is absolutely nothing that can change any of these actions, they must necessarily play out the way you experienced this foreknowledge. So where's the choice? There is no choice if you possess such knowledge, only the individuals illusion of having a choice.
'Our knowledge of what they will choose doesn't prevent them from making a choice or make the choice they make unimportant'
There is no real choice, only the illusion of a choice. If you accept the concept of an omniscient god, then you have to accept there is no free will as everything is already predestined and the choices you think you are making are not choices at all as these actions are the only ones you can ever take.
HughJaxident67 What you are arguing for is the idea that omniscience is a form of determinism. You seem to see it as a type of maze which one person can see from above and another is walking through. At some point in time, someone drew a path through the maze that represents the knowledge of what the person walking through the maze will do and so there is no conflict with the knowledge, things are put in place that force the person walking the maze to make the turns that follow the drawn path.
This view makes sense, if the person looking at the maze from above is confined to time. Causal events do not happen at a time after an event has occurred, so the drawn path cannot be caused by the choices of the person walking the maze.
But what about a God who is not constrained by time? What about a God who exists throughout all time and outside of time, simultaneously? As a God like that sees time, the person who walks the maze hasn't entered the maze, is walking the maze, and is finished with the maze, all at once. Determinism isn't required, because God knows because he sees the choices that a person is making, has made, and is going to make, all at once, even though it is the same act of the person to make a decision.
+Timothy Fish Once again I will refer you to the comparison with history, when something has happened, can it be changed? The answer is no and the same applies to the future. If said being is outside of time or in it, it makes no difference, for this being can already see all of time to the end of time, so for this being, all of time is already history, it's only us temporal humans that perceive a past, present and future.
I made the following point to another user on this thread too, the issue with a god with the alleged qualities of omniscience and omnipotence, once again, this provides an impossible contradiction;
it is a contradiction to be both omniscient and omnipotent, infinite knowledge contradicts infinite power, and here's why; If God knows with infallible certainty that he is going to part the Red Sea before he does it, then it is impossible for God not to part the Red Sea, and so God is not omnipotent, there is something he cannot do. In fact, there would be an infinite amount of things he could not do. On the other hand, if God managed NOT to part the Red Sea, then he was previously mistaken in thinking he could do so and is therefore not omniscient. Therefore, God can only possibly be either omniscient or omnipotent, but not both simultaneously.
Dr. Craig is really an inspirational man. The way he carries himself is an example that, I fail at, and strive to be more like.
Strive to be like Christ, my brother
Dont strive to become a liar.
@@knyghtkrawlr don't strive to tell ppl how to beat slaves.. dont tell people germs dont exist so they should stop washing their hands and dishes.. do the exact opposite of christ n you'll be a great person
When I was twelve our teacher told us we needed to bring in a new spiral from home. Knowing my friend would forget, I brought an extra for him. The way I see it, God knows us infinitely better than I know my friend but that has no impact on the free will we have to make choices at our own discretion.
When God knows something, it is an absolute, in your instance, it was not a divine absolute. The way I see it, God's divine foreknowledge is not on the same level as human "foreknowledge". Therefore, I think He limits his foreknowledge into knowledge of all possibilities that can ever happen, and since His mind is infinite, the possibilities are infinite. Since the possibilities are infinite, we are allowed to have free will. It's not downgrading to God saying he doesn't foreknow everything. In fact it makes His hand of work even more impressive since He can take situations that were not foreknown or foreplanned, and still use them so well for what he wants to accomplish that it looks like it was all part of the script all along.
It also gives God himself free will. If he knew that people were going to die in the flood, it was going to happen, which means that God himself had no choice but to send the flood in the exact place, magnitude, and time to fullfil His foreknowledge that cannot be wrong. It also takes away the guilt of creating humanity. If God knew he was going to curse the world because of something they were going to do, yet created them anyways, He's either evil for creating people that were foreknown to go to hell or He's powerless to disprove his foreknowledge.
Wow. William Craig. Thank you for making this so clear for me. I totally get it. You are amazing.
God doesn’t make mistakes, He’s perfect!!!
Keep parroting that phrase and everything will be okay. Also, don’t think about it either, because that will lead to doubt, doubt is bad, and bad is the opposite of God.
@@loganleatherman7647 the god who requires human sacrifice and promote slavery
@@digitalscale76 The only human sacrifice God “required” was when he himself became a man and sacrificed himself for your
life.
Please if you’re going to mention slavery from the old and temporal covenant Yahweh had with the Israelites then at least understand the context which most likely will keep you from using this poor argumentation against God.
If you had an idea of what you’re saying here, than you’d stop saying it. You’re just reminding us ‘who know scripture’ how just God really is.
@@solo_boixx1642 i wasn't really about to mention slavery lol what are you some wannabe apologist advocating against something as trivial as evolution leading a war on common sense from your bedroom...there's so many passages in the bible about human sacrifice, i can't precisely cite them all but they're one search away. What about all the billions of children being born into the wrong religion? What a waste.
He made you, so apparently he does.
I find it interesting that “foreknowledge” is attributed to God. He is not bound by time. He doesn’t foreknow. He just knows. He’s there. He’s here. He’s not restrained by a timeline.
So he doesn't know how to experience time?
Craig would say that God actually is “in time”. It’s his chosen mode of being.
@@antonioguglielmetti2661 sure he does. He just doesn't experience it. When he incarnated he experienced time just fine, so he even has personal experience of it in the way you do.
@@apeture_explorer4810it sounded like his point was saying that God knows things but isn't capable of foreknowing things while He is in time
In one of his podcasts, Dr. Craig uses the analogy of an infallible barometer for understanding God's foreknowledge. In the analogy, the barometer is always correct in tracking the barometric pressure, but it does not mean the weather is forced to be a particular way. In the same way, God can know what someone will freely choose, but that doesn't mean they have to do it. If the person would choose to do something different, then God would have known differently what the person was going to do.
Yes he points out a fallacy, but then makes one of his own. As you are doing here. Yes its correct, God knowing everything doesn't necessarily cause anything.
However pls read the next demostration,
Lets expand this a bit, you have Y, Y is an event, and you have A = {X1, X2, X3, ...} going to infinity, this set being all the individual events that aren't Y
Since God knows everything, he knows whether or not given any subset of A, the assertion "If that subset of A happens at some point in time, then Y will happen in the future" is either true or false.
What can we extract from that? That given any Y, God knows exactly what will cause it, which means reality is deterministic, Since for any event god knows exactly what will cause it.
What do i conclude?
That if an omniscient God exists then it follows that the Universe is deterministic. Which is the exactly the same as saying. If the Universe is not deterministic(AKA you have libertarian free will), then if follows that an Omniscient God does not exist.
@@kaizal3161 there is no means by which we can know for certain (no ironic joke intended) that the nature of true Omniscience and foreknowledge would entail a deterministic result because no one possesses these qualities. I have a choice, God knows the choice I will make. That's not an impossibility
The doctor is wrong. I have shifted the word “necessarily” in premise 1.
1. If God foreknows that I will do X, then necessarily I will do X
2. God foreknows that I will do X.
3. Therefore necessarily I will do X.
If I know that my friend is going to wear a blue shirt tomorrow, does that mean I am forcing him to wear that blue shirt?
If you know 100% he is going to do it( quite impossible) and every reason why( impossible), he perceives he has a choice but actually doesn’t because his action were caused by past events
You’re not forcing him, you just can’t change it. Just like God knows something is guaranteed to happen so it is predetermined
@@danidani5309 Actually, yes he does have a choice. There is no mechanism by which foreknowledge could possibly curtail anyone's free will.
No. Your knowing that your friend is going to wear a blue shirt tomorrow in no way precludes your friends' ability to wear the blue shirt. God knowing what we're going to choose to do in no way precludes our ability to choose to do so (unless, of course, we actually know that the choice in question is considered by God to be a "sin" and will be answered for in that day that God calls "Judgment Day" which is really what the whole "free will (choice)" argument desperately tries to avoid like the plague.) Calling something "will" as opposed to "choice" does not mitigate our responsibility in such matters before God one iota. We're still going to face Him on that whether we like it or not, and we're going to face the music for our choices, again, whether we like it or not. I don't think God is going to be impressed by someone standing there before Him trying the "free will" argument. The result will be the same.
@@danidani5309 If it is impossible to know a future event with 100% certainty then that event is in no way predetermined by any earlier conditions.
Not gonna pretend I understood his reply, even though I've studied formal logic, but I will say that this guy knows how to stay on topic, which is more than I can say for most people answering questions at a religious or even atheist event.
You don’t understand because it’s complete bullshit. Made me laugh out loud
Craig is genius at creating distinctions without differences. He says God knows what we will do, but not what we will necessarily do. He deftly moves to presuppositional argument. If god knows what we will do, and if he created the universe knowing what we will do, and if he might have created the universe differently such that we would have done differently, then not only does god know what we will necessarily "choose", he actually CREATED us such that we will make that "choice."
Sir, unfortunately, you are falling victim to the modal fallacy which he outlines in this video.
ivjdivfjalekvvjp
There's no "modal fallacy" in place. If God's foreknowledge is infallible, there's no way you can refrain yourself from doing anything you do, because that will prove God has no infallible foreknowledge. Claiming that given a alternative action you may take God will have an alternative foreknowledge is useless to escape the objection, since you will just reinitialize the problem: if God's alternative foreknowledge is infallible, then any correspondent alternative action you may take is unavoidable.
Zadratube how about the 'back to the future' analogy/thought experiment: if you recieved a sports results almanac from the future with the results of every major match/race for the next 10 years and you used it to gamble successfully, would your knowledge be causing the events to happen? Would the sportsmen no longer have free will just because you had the book? Clearly not. Prior knowledge of an action has no determining relationship with the occurence of an action. Marty McFly's knowledge of the future did not cause the horses'/jockies' behaviour.
Just my thoughts. Is there something wrong with this line of thinking?
Mohammed Hanif Yes, there is something you left out. Supposedly, god created the sportsmen and had a "plan" for the outcomes. Are the winners of the fight determined by the "free will" of the fighters, or is the result determined by "god's plan"? If determined by the "free will" of the fighters, then god is not omnipotent. In that case, the course of history is determined by individual humans, and does not unfold according to "god's plan."
Supposedly, god created everything and knew how it would come out, because he created it to come out that way. Being omnipotent, he might have "tweaked" is creation such as the winners in the sports almanac could have been different..... but he didn't. He chose to have everything come out the way it does, and might have chosen differently. If you have an omnipotent and omniscient "creator" then there can be no true free will.McFly was not supposedly "the creator." God supposedly is.
stan frymann but that would make God's foreknowledge deterministic whereas it is His Power that compels. There is no logical contradiction between having foreknowledge of an event and the occurence of that event exactly as foreknown.
That would be a category mistake.
If God actively willed an event to be a certain way then free will would be vitiated because His Will cannot be opposed.
But human actions are not willed by God in such a deterministic manner. God's will in the human moral arena is passive in that He allows the freely chosen actions of moral agents to take effect - then His Power facillitates the enactment of our freely chosen actions that He had foreknowledge of. He knew what we would choose but His Knowledge, Will and Power did not compel that choice.
Its the assumption that "supposedly God had a plan" that is erroneous: God's plan is for us to freely choose the right from the wrong - in as far as He compels a certain action, that action loses its moral nature.
When we say that God willed something to happen, we mean that He arranges the circumstances of the world for His ends to be achieved but the human agent's will is given freedom to act within this realm of possibility.
God knew from pre-eternity that I would be pressing these keys on my Samsung in this order but His Will is not forcing me to choose what the next key I will press will be - my choice in this is completely free and only determined in the sense of my material and mental situation (relaxing on a sofa with France 24 on in the background, with a slight headache from looking at this small screen for too long...). His Power effects the enactment of my will - it is only metaphorically attributed to Him because He has complete power over everything and could have willed otherwise.
The outcome of the 'fight' is dependent on the free will of the fighters (when to punch, etc) and determined by their physical conditions (fitness etc).
Omnipotence is the ability to actualise every logically coherent event; a compelled free choice is logically incoherent and therefore not an event God's omnipotence has relation to. It is like demanding God create a square circle - something which is merely a confusion of words.
When a king delegates some aspect of his authority to a prime minister, his authority is not diminished. God has consented to allow freedom to the human will to choose to a limited extent (i can choose to stand up and God's Power effects that choice but if I choose to flap my arms and fly then He does not effect that choice).
In that thought experiment, you sneekily brought in an external variable : )
With the facts of the situation as I described it, does Marty McFly's foreknowledge of the outcome of the boxing match constrain the wills of the fighters and thus vitiate their free will.
Clearly, his knowlegde does not have any affect on their wills, actions or the outcome.
The same can be said of God's omniscience and its objects.
Time is the critical component here...We experience time linearly, and god operates in dimensions outside of linear time. So yes free will is a function of what we will choose in a moment in time, however god is looking at it from another vantage point.
*Time is the critical component here...We experience time linearly, and god operates in dimensions outside of linear time*
I find it intellectually numbing that you just assume there is a god and extend properties to a being you have no evidence exists, what's wrong with you?
Perhaps you can explain how an omniscient agent has free will?
@@unitewithch
*No evidence?? That’s like saying you don’t believe in such things as wind or the internet because there’s “no evidence”*
Wow, that's a truly awful opening remark! We KNOW the wind exists, we KNOW how it's produced and what the air consists of - All of this can be objectively tested and confirmed and no evidence for the internet? What are you smoking, you're using it to reply to my post FFS! So no, it's absolutely nothing like either of these things as there is zero objective evidence any deity exists.
*You may not be able to see god but you can see the effects of God*
Oh really? Like what exactly? And how do we test and verify these 'effects' are necessarily made by this god? I'll save you time, we can't.
*Perhaps you can enlighten me in explaining spontaneous generation of all life forms?*
Life forms do not spontaneously generate, where the hell did you go to school?
*How do you explain the mathematical impossibility of such precision of laws that govern the universe?*
Obviously it is mathematically possible because we are here, so how about engaging your brain before posting nonsense comments? The actual probability is 1 in 1. Like so many theists, you consider reality like a puddle looking at the hole its in and claiming 'This hole is precisely created for me!'. That is not how nature works, we are a result of the prevalent conditions, not the other way around. Of course, 99.9999% of our Universe is immediately lethal to life, so if it was designed, it wasn't designed for life!
*How do you not believe in a creative power?*
Because there's zero evidence anything in this Universe was created!
*I cannot definitively say god exists in the same way you can point to a tree and say it exists*
Which is more honest than many theists get....
*But I choose to believe in him as described in scripture*
So you choose to believe the stories of iron age Hebrews who adopted their god Yahweh from Canaanite tradition where Yahweh was a war god in a pantheon of other gods headed by the deity El. These Hebrews then promoted this god to the 'one god' which conveniently picked them as his chosen tribe (rather conveniently self-serving wouldn't you say?). Of course, if Rome hadn't have adopted Christianity in the 4th century, you'd probably not even be aware of the religion, indeed, it would probably have succumbed to the same fate as Mithraism and fizzled out, one among many other similar saviour god religions in the middle east at the time.
*We all have different beliefs and that’s ok. I have no desire to satisfy another’s intellectual standard*
We do have different beliefs but have you no desire to want to believe what's actually true rather then engaging in wishful thinking?
@@HughJaxident67 Your thoughts while a bit on the deep side intelligent provoked me to question my beliefs and I think you won! Thanks for that enlightening discussion. If I didn’t know any better I’d say you teach at university?
@@HughJaxident67 He assumes God exists because the debate is on God's foreknowledge and not on God's existence. Treat it as a hypotetical. What's so "mentally numbing" about hypoteticals? We make hypoteticals all the time.
How could God's foreknowledge take away anyone's free will?
It couldn’t, actually: Foreknowledge has no bearing on free will, and it does not imply determination.
In fact, God foreknows everything that we will freely choose, and we are still free to choose one thing or another. Many people have asserted that foreknowledge equates to pre-determination, but nobody has ever offered any evidence for that assertion -- it is merely a baseless and false assertion.
God truly does foreknow everything, and that includes his middle knowledge (meaning that he knows what we would freely choose to do in any and all circumstances). God has full foreknowledge, and that does not detract from our free will in the least bit.
The logical fallacy is “if you will do X you will not necessarily do X”. What is true is something a little bit different: “if it possible for you to do/choose X it doesn’t mean you will necessarily do X”
For example I will pick a number from 1-10. I can pick 3 but it doesn’t necessarily mean I will pick 3. But he says I wil pick 3 but not necessarily I wil pick 3. If I will pick 3 it means the other numbers are not possible.
legit dont understand through all of these comment examples lol
@RotorBlade so did God know u would pick 3? before u were asked to pick between 1-10?
I have been thinking about this issue so I want to give some possible answers to the question. Keep in mind that I'm not saying that any of these options are true. They could all be false or one could be true.
1) What if we have free will and God's foreknowledge is that He knows all the possible actions we can make but since the bible says we can be perfect as He is perfect (talking about love), it's also not a bad thing that we have free will since He can never be caught off guard and the bible also talks about His understanding which is far beyond our own
(Keep in mind the word "understanding") and that also enables Him to understand all situations so, God knows all things and we have free will but He is still superior to us.
I'm writing the next here because I don't want the first comment to be too long.
2) What if our actions are what determines God's foreknowledge like an infallible barometer that tells you if it's going to rain or not depending on the type of wether and is never wrong? also, adding His great understanding to the picture, He can accurately predict the future which would imply that there is no determined future for Him to know about but He can accurately predict the future and see things that we would not see coming. Also keep in mind that most of the prophesies in the bible were influenced by Him or could have possibly been influenced by Him.
3) What if He has a way to know our actions without determining them? What if it's a mystery that we cannot understand or understand yet? eg the bible says that it is God who gives the mysteries and its the glory of kings to uncover them; it also talks about some things been known to God and the Spirit alone-I mean we are talking about a Being that transcends time itself.
These are just suggestions. What do you think?
If you have any other suggestion, please post it.
I really hate to ask this because I feel like you have put some super deep thought into everything but do you think you could sorta simplify your points/ponderings? I'm very interested on the matter and your opinion and would love to discuss :) , I'm just a little lost on you stance/suggestions.
+TurtleJoy well right now, my position on the matter is that I don't know how it works. I'm that kind of person who likes to be able to answer questions when it comes to the bible but this one is a little bit difficult.
The suggestion I'm pondering on right now, is the idea of "middle knowledge" which is that God knows how every possible world would look like including a free world so He knows how we would act in any situation also with His great wisdom and understanding in the picture. This harmonizes a little bit with the first and second suggestions but I'm still thinking about it.
I still hold for now my position which is that I don't know since the bible even says in Isaiah 40:28 that His understanding no one can fathom.
Ok, just making sure I am understanding you clearly, are you suggesting/pondering if God sees different possible versions of reality and just waits to see which one will happen?
+TurtleJoy well He doesn't wait for the reality to happen or else He wouldn't be our creator, rather, He creates a world in which humans are free to make what ever choices they want but He is never caught off guard because of His understanding of the free world and the bible also talks about Him being able to know our thoughts. He doesn't necessarily create the situations we find ourselves in but just knows and understands them better than we do and He can see things that we would not see coming.
I'll still need to do more research on the middle knowledge though, just to understand it better.
This is hard to wrap my mind around it but truly interesting.
I see what he means...
If, for the sake of example, the US had known that Japan would have bombed Pearl Harbour on December 7th 1941, that doesn't mean that Japan had no free will.
But in the case of God, He is the creator of all beings with "free will". Hence if he foreknows someone will do X and creates them, he/she will necessarily do X.
@@defaultuser9423 What do you mean by that? You didn't clearly explain how your premise became your conclusion.
Premise 1: God created us
Premise 2: God knows our free will
Conclusion: God determined our free will
Why?
God simply gave the ability to choose. God knows what we will do with it, but that choice is not made by God but by us. If for the sake of example we had chosen differently God's foreknowledge simply would have been different. God's knowledge came before our choices chronologically, but our choices came before God's foreknowledge causally.
@@Anonymous-jo2no What I'm saying is if God knows what someone will freely do in a given situation and since He is their creator, how can He be not responsible for what they do ?
@@Anonymous-jo2no it's not that God determines our will if he knows it. It's that it's going to happen period. You never have any free will to chose something that God knows isn't going to happen if he knows everything because he can't be wrong and know something that is wrong and doesn't happen.
Thus he refrains some of his foreknowledge to allow our free will. Ever heard of Jeremiah 19:5 ? "and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree, nor did it come into my mind" one if many instances of God's resisted state. He can know everything if he wants to, but He chooses not to to allow free will
Correct me if i'm wrong here - but I think you do indeed have to do what god foresees for you, because otherwise god would not have known what I was going to do, and would thus not be omniscient.
So, if God would, through his knowledge of my future, determine my future, that would mean that I necessarily could not act different from what God predicted, which would mean that I do not have free will.
Knowledge does not possess any mechanism by which it could affect anyone's free will.
God has perfect foreknowledge of all of our actions, and we also have free will.
We do have free will, just that GOD knows what we will do, if we will do Good or sin, he knows. That doesn not mean that GOD is in control of our freedom .
Knowing the outcome of an event thus creating you is creating the outcome of an event to happen
@SethRollinsTheGoat it is not, because knowing doesn't signfy intervention, do not get confused we have free will but God is omniscient, he does not decide for us, because i can commit suicide but God did not inted for that to happen.
@@giovanni540 yes it is you didn’t choose to be created god with his infinite power and wisdom creates and designs something it’s going to be and according to his will what he knows is also his will and thus you cannot freely act on how he foreknows you to act
@@giovanni540 creating you knowing that you would commit suicide is still god’s responsibility for his bad decision bc he decided to create you
@SethRollinsTheGoat that statement isn't logical at all , just because he created you doesn't mean he decides your actions, you chose, he knows. simple.
I like to think of it as Dr. Strange in the avengers, where he can view every outcome of every option and timeline.
That's different, Dr strange was viewing possible outcomes, God knows what will happen, only seeing one outcome
Okay, I acknowledge my layman position. Now...
So, by Modal Logic, I can change what God knew I was going to do by refraining from doing something that he knew I would do.
So, the future changes the past...I thought that was only in quantum mechanics!
Don't forget that the only way this works is that God is outside of time. Time is merely a physical restriction placed upon us, it doesn't exist in "higher dimensions".
There's no problem here
@@richardwilliamjohnson8566 and he knew that you are going to refrain from it
@@richardwilliamjohnson8566
*Don't forget that*
Don't forget that you've failed to present any evidence such a being exists
@@HughJaxident67 if there is a possibility such a being as God exists, then he almost certainly does exist
@@richardwilliamjohnson8566
*if there is a possibility such a being as God exists, then he almost certainly does exist*
Thanks for the tautology, if my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle right? How can anyone calculate how possible it is for a god to exist when we have no objective evidence one does exist?
Knowledge doesn't have any causal power. Therefore, knowledge cannot curtail anyone's free will. Therefore, God's foreknowledge cannot curtail anyone's free will.
so if i got in a time machine, and knew that you atheist was gonna try and refute this guy, does that mean i made you attempt the impossible? did i myself take away your freedom of choice by simply knowing what you would choose?
This is exactly what I've known all along.. Thanks for putting it in words for me. xD
me too man
Can atheists argue without using ad hominems? It's like they start or end their statements with insults.
Hi Shao Hollywood, yes they can... just as many atheïsts are able to react without any insults.
An ad hominem is not an insult
This is not an insult
Middle knowledge, future changes all the time depending if people pray how they pray.
Just LOL
In case the following helps anyone conceptualize Dr. Craig's point, I figured this very simplified analogy would make it more practical: If you take a video recording of someone's day (your good friend John) whom you spend the day with and thereby have full knowledge of what John is doing and saying etc. as he does and says them throughout the day, and later that night you kick back with a bud to rewatch the recording of the events of the day unfold, you will know every decision John "will" make when watching the recording even "before" John himself "knows." And you get it right every time 😉.
Does it follow that John didn't have any free will just because you "already knew" what he was going to do....?
I know that was very simplistic but I think it might help some people bring it from a "philosophical" level to a more "tangible" and familiar occurrence.
As with many analogies i've seen about this, this one also misses the point that God created us while being omniscient. To bring it in a simpler but correct way:
Imagen you have a windup-car with a 1000 adjustable buttons to make the car react different. With every possible setting you'll see a video showing how the car is going to run. At one point you'll have to chose a setting and a specific way that car is going to run.
The question is, is that car moving freely or randomly eventhough you yourself chose that exact course? And secondly, can you be disapointed or angry at the car for running the course you've chosen?
You should have alot more thumbs up.
i can see that we can have the choice to do something and God knowing what choice we will make, doesn't change the fact that we made the choice. But how then is prayer, and a divine plan supposed to fit in?
A great question, especially concerning prayer.
Answer to the question presented in title of the video: Yes.
Knowledge of an event does not cause an event.
Nope. What you said applies to people, we are talking about the Christian Judaeo god here. Let's see you do mental gymnastics around this one.
Before you were even born, and conscious to make a decisions, much less moral ones, God already know's you're going to heaven or hell. So How does one explain free will in that? One, you never chose to exist, and two, if you knew there was even a chance you'd end up in hell, eternal unspeakable suffering, you probably wouldn't even chose to be conceived in the first place. Oblivion is a lot better than even a small chance you would be tortured forever.
Point is before you were conscious/existed god already knew the choices you would make, and you didn't choose to come to being in the first place. He's the designer the creator, everything is because he wills it so. You can't do anything contrary to his foreknowledge of his creation, hence you have no free will.
enemay, My statement still stands: Knowledge of an event does not cause an event. Yes, God knows who it going to Heaven and who's going to Hell. But, that doesn't strip us of our free will.
In the garden of Eden when Adam and Eve both ate from the tree that God told them not to eat from, Eve blamed the serpent for causing her to eat the fruit and Adam blamed God for Eve being the cause of him eating the fruit. God knew it would happen, but he didn't make them eat from the tree that he commanded them not to eat from.
I find it interesting that you believe that because God is supernatural, his knowledge can cause events. It seems like you are mixing determinism in this.
Andrew Petty I want to see if you can be consistent. If you will humor me, answer me these questions for clarification.
1 Is the universe/reality the will of god.
2 Before you came to being/born/conscious, did god know everything that you will do, where you will be, so on.. your whole life?
enemay
If by your first question you mean it was God's will to create the universe/reality we live in, the answer is yes. I may be having some trouble with you question and will need clarification if I didn't answer your question. It may require you to ask the question again in a different way.
To answer your second question:
Yes. But, your question doesn't postulate God stripping us of free will based on his knowledge.
Andrew Petty I’m sorry I feel like you didn’t understand my argument in the first place. Instead of repeating, the Christian gods knowledge (which is all knowing) does not strip us of free will, elaborate further to support your statement or how about refuting with actual arguments.
You don’t understand the implication of the Judeo Christian God, being infinite in power and knowledge. The alleged omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient supreme being.
1
“Yes, God knows who it going to Heaven and who's going to Hell.”
Does the person that goes to hell, choose to be created?
What conscious being, who knows 100% that hell is real, would even take the chances of being alive had they known it's possible to experience unspeakable eternal suffering. As it stands today, according to general Christian standards, at the least, half of human population would end up in eternal misery. Not even the most insane sadist would take that bet, being that it's guaranteed misery regardless of how masochistic they are.
So How does one explain free will in that? A person never chose to exist in the first place, and two, if I knew I was destined to hell, I certainly wouldn't choose to be conceived. Yet here I am, a heathen.
Before you even existed god already knows everything that’s going to happen to you, your fate was set in stone, and you had no say in it, you weren’t even conscious, you didn’t exist. Do I need to beat a dead horse? No amount of introspect, will and desire can contradict what the supreme, all knowing, all powerful god already knows about your life, before you were even a todd pole in your daddy’s loins.
2
“In the garden of Eden when Adam and Eve both ate from the tree that God told them not to eat from, Eve blamed the serpent for causing her to eat the fruit and Adam blamed God for Eve being the cause of him eating the fruit. God knew it would happen, but he didn't make them eat from the tree that he commanded them not to eat from”
The point is, before Adam and Eve was even blinked into existence, your god already knew all their decisions. Beings that are designed and created by the supreme being that can do no wrong that is God, put in an environment with conditions designed and created by you guessed it..God.
3
“Knowledge of an event does not cause an event”
I think you fail to recognize the original point, God not just knows the same way a very smart person knows and make accurate prediction.
God with his infinite power and wisdom, creates and designs something, it’s going to be and act according to his will. He is, reality itself, our universe is his design and will, which came from him, his will is everything, the very insignificant dust that's floating around you, every particle and to the billionth part of it, he knows, where it was eternally into the past, where it is floating around in space, where it will be eons from now, and is there because he wills it so. What he knows is also his will. He is the designer and creator. And we cannot contradict his will. Hence you are not a free agent.
I could only hope that you are willing to engage and refute my points with actual arguments
If God foreknows you will do X, you must necessarily do X. Here's the catch: What is X? You decide.
Collin Flynn Wow ......... deep brother
The point is that you can’t decide
@@danidani5309 no it's not lol
That was deep bro!!
@Taimoor Khan Explain prof
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
John 14:15 KJV
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
Exodus 20:8-9 KJV
Saturday is the day of the Lord
The claim that Christ by his death abolished his Father’s law, is without foundation. Had it been possible for the law to be changed or set aside, then Christ need not have died to save man from the penalty of sin. The death of Christ, so far from abolishing the law, proves that it is immutable. The Son of God came to “magnify the law, and make it honorable.” [Isaiah 42:21.] He said, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law;” “till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law.” [Matthew 5:17, 18.] And concerning himself he declares, “I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart.” [Psalm 40:8.] GC88 466.3
Ecclesiastes 12:13 KJV
Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
It sounds like Craig is avoiding the well-established idea that God knows things *before* they happen. God knows what I will do *before* I'm even born. If this is correct, then my choice to refrain from some action cannot, in any way, affect God's foreknowledge: God's foreknowledge, and his causal sovereignty over me, affects my choice to refrain from some action.
Indeed. Craig doesn't answer the question if God foreknows that someone will refrain from something. If God does know, free will is wrong. If God doesn't know, omniscience is wrong.
Everything that happens in history has been decreed/Predestined before the world was created see Eph 1:11, Proverbs 16:33 and Amos 3:6. And yes even when terrible things happen, I know it's hard for some people to accept but look what happened when David sinned against God and one of Davids punishments was that God told him that he was going to use Davids own son to shame his Father by Absalom Absalom doing something immoral to his Fathers concubines in front of all of Israel, see 2 Samuel 12:11-12 God said "Thus says the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes and give them to your companion, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. Indeed you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun." Notice how God said "I WILL DO THIS THING."That was fulfilled in 2 Samuel 16:21-22. Jesus did not die for every single person ever and Jesus didn't die to make people savable. He died to save his elect. In John 17:9 Jesus said that he does not pray for the world. The word world is used in different contexts, in that context he's talking about the non elect. In John 3:16 world means that he purchased people from every tribe, tongue and nation Rev 5:9 and for the children of God scattered abroad John 11:52. Some have been "long beforehand marked out for condemnation" Jude 4 and "appointed to doom." 1 Peter 2:8. About Pharaoh God said “For this VERY PURPOSE I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires." Rom 9:17-18. Jesus said "I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight. All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." Matthew 11:25-27. So, 2 Pet 3:9 the "not willing that any should perish" if you read that letter in context, 2 Pet 1:1 says "To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours." As far as salvation for all men verses, Paul was refuting the false notion of his time that God was only desiring to save just the Jews and 1 Tim 2:2 says to pray "for kings and all who are in authority" because as humans WE DON'T KNOW WHO THE ELECT ARE SO WE PRAY FOR EVERYONE! That's what it means in verse 4 by saying "all men." Amos 3:2 God said "of all the nations of the earth I have only known you." For centuries God passed over the majority of humankind because this verse isn't about knowledge it's about relationship. And it isn't because God foresaw Israel was more righteous then the other nations because sometimes Israel was more sinful then the pagan nations see 2 Kings 21:9. Only those who were predestined to be saved will be see Acts 13:48, Ephesians 1:4-5, Eph 1:11, Romans 9:11-23, John 6:37. 1 Samuel 3:14 God said “Therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever.” That's Limited atonement.
The scripture says that the Lord told hezekiah through prophet isaiah that he will die, then hezekiah pleaded the Lord for prolonged life and the Lord gave hezekiah 15 more years...
I guess people really do have choices
It also states the consequences of the decisions and put said decision in its right context. "Necessarily"
Not only that but it exists because His refrains some of His foreknowledge for the opening up of free will.
What a clean rebuttal of open theism!! Cheers Dr. Craig. 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
really weak,if you know 2 world where one person reject God in another world and accept God in another one And God accept the one where he rejects him,thats obviously and DEFINITely NOT a "libertarian" free will,but only complementarian freewill (which is not free will),it imply my choice to agree or reject God is guided by God himself,even if i choose it myself,it doesnt change the fact he choose the scenario where i reject him and he burns me
Free will exists as an illusion derived from the fact that we don’t know what will happen, despite the fact that God does.
It all comes down to asserting the right frame of reference. From ours, free will exists, from God’s, it doesn’t.
Which is the best frame of reference? It depends...
I don't understand why you don't have a friggin ton of thumbs up.
I think people need to realise that god's foreknowledge is a power he chooses to exercise when an how he chooses an this does not effect your free will
I welcome responses to a better asked question where I believe this question comes from:
"why was I inclined to make this particular choice; if God had foreknowledge of my conscious states, since he is the first mover of the universe and creator of souls, could he have not set a different trajectory of initial, or full through, determinate events that could have resulted in my free-will circumstances being other than is.. thus resulting in my conscious responsibilities being more inclined to commit to something else than is?" I personally call this the "being dealt a bad hand argument"
I have my casual understandings that move us past the latter question, though responses are welcomed
Isn't it possible that God knows all possible outcomes of all possible decisions but chooses to limit Himself from knowing precisely which decision one will make? Wouldn't this fit within the definition of foreknowledge?
Sure, he could lobotomize his foreknowledge, but then he would just be under the same illusion of free will as us. The unlobotomized God would still have that foreknowledge, and would still exist in all times simultaneously and there would be two versions: God and retarded God. The tard having no foreknowledge might believe he and us could make choices, but God would still know those choices and be unable to exert any control over anything. The fact that the foreknowledge exists is what precludes the free will. Watchmen's Dr. Manhattan is a good example of how this would work.
Yes! That is Open Theism. Craig told it all wrong in this video...
Open theism basically argues that God knows ”more” because God knows all the possible outcomes and He is working with those. He is respecting our free will.
And do not get me wrong here He can do what He wants to. He is God.
But as open theism sees this is that God is continuously working His will in the world based on the actions we do. He is all wise so He knows what He is doing.
Open theists often gets accused of putting God in the box. But as they see it is that they are truly seeing Him free.
Im not saying that I fall under this camp but atm it feels like pretty reasonable. What do you think about this?
I'm curious how this fits in with Proverbs 16:33 which, from my understanding, indicates God decides the outcome of everything.
In very few O.T. instances, the throwing of the die was for asking God for a decision on a particular issue. With prayer beforehand, the throwers of the die asked God and expected God to provide that answer with a result from the die. Kinda like our "Choose heads or tails", although it was taken that the result came from God. Reading Proverbs 16:33 in some more looser paraphrase modern translations gives a whole different interpretation which I firmly believe is not true about God and which I feel scripture does not teach. God does not decide the outcome of everything, nor does he desire to do so, nor does he need to. If God did decide the outcome of everything, as you believe, then we are just mindless puppets and God would be responsible for evil as a source.
Again, throwing of the die is deciding the outcome of a question put to God about "what should we do?"
Your answer may be in Proverbs 16:1, "The preparations of the heart are man's, but the answer of the tongue is from the Lord." The way I understand 16:33 is similar to that, that "the lot is cast in his lap" refers to man's free decision-making ability, and "but all his judgement is from the Lord" refers to the consequences that come about as a result of a free choice.
Proverbs 16:33 does not state that God decides the outcome of everything.
His logic fails dramatically if one takes the time to read the book.
His "elemental fallacy " fails at step 2 :
2..God foreknows that I would do X
What he is trying to hide or ignore here is WHY god foreknows I would do X.
Reading the book , we can find that :
1. God made a plan before the creation (well organised god).
2. God never changes so his plan doesn't change.
3. God himself works to fulfill his plan.
So , god foreknows I am going to do X because he planned for me to do X , he created me for that purpose and he is taking care that his plan is fulfilled.
Now the "elemental fallacy" doesn't look like a fallacy anymore , does it ?
If anyone thinks that creating being for the sole purpose of destruction is unfair , the book has an answer to that too : you don't have the right to question god's plans and actions !
Yep. That's christian "logic" for ya. Spend 3 times longer than warranted needlessly over complicating things and dressing them up in what sound like formal sciency sounding terms. Set it out nice a carefully, making sure it gets convoluted in the process. Then when most have stopped actually following along throw in a bait n switch, along with logic right out the window. But maintain that smug, certain, quite obviously correct aire, nodding head as you've just comprehensively "put it too bed". And hope most folk either won't notice or don't want to notice.
You're mixing things up. God knowing what you're going to do is foreknowledge of your free will choices. Predestination is God determining what you are going to do, leaving us with the illusion of free will. There are the different doctrines. So I don't see your answer as logical and I don't get mister Craigs answer.
Deo Volente Unless you can really support that " free will " theory, you can't bring that argument as a fact.
I'm not sure that we mean the same thing when we talk about free will.
If the universe is governed by laws (cause and effect ) there's predestination.
If the universe is random as many understand from quantum mechanics, then there's no predestination, no free will , only randomness.
Where is the free will illusion ?
You don't seem to understand my answer completely.
Plan - creation - result doesn't leave room for free will but rather explains predestination . Predestination and your definition of foreknowledge are not mutually exclusive . Predestination excludes the free will illusion and so does the foreknowledge , since the only way to know the end result is to plan and execute the plan to ensure the desired end result.
From my perspective , foreknowledge implies predestination.
It isn't foreknowledge if there are billions of possible outcomes and one knows them all.
thrdel well first let me check if we're reasoning from the same world view. I'm reasoning from the presupposition that God exists.
Foreknowledge for me means that God can tell the future because he exceeds space time and matter and one of his attributes is to be all knowing.
So this means he knows everything I will ever do because he can see the future. Call him the universe's best fortune teller if you will. Knowing the future doesn't mean you have predestined this to come into existence yourself PER SE.
Now another option as mentioned is that he does have foreknowledge BECAUSE he predestined it. But predestination includes foreknowledge automatically, unless you want to implement the possibility of amnesia.
Deo Volente OK. Got your point of view.
I'm clearly not discussing from the same perspective.
Here's a couple of things that seem to be counter intuitive at best :
1. A supernatural being that exceeds space time and matter.
There's no reasonable logical indication, let alone proof that such a supernatural being's existence is possible or likely.
There's only a few speculations that there is an outside of space time, like other universes and such .
The creation myth , plans - work - result , implies the notion of time. If the notion of past - present - future lose their meaning , logic and reason lose their meaning as well and this discussion is pointless.
---
"...So this means he knows everything I will ever do because he can see the future..."
Assuming that there may be a way to see the future that didn't happened yet, you deliberately left out the part about the plan, the conception and the execution.
There are quite a large number of well written books on the subject with all the quotes and explanations as well.
Now, making a plan and executing the plan personally to ensure the end result isn't fortune telling.
One doesn't have to be outside of space time to tell the end of an action before it begins if the action is planned and executed by the same very person.
---
"...But predestination includes foreknowledge automatically..."
Correct, predestination automatically implies foreknowledge. They go hand in hand.
That's why the answer of the Christian Scriptures to the question " if god makes one ...for a higher purpose and another for a lower purpose(apparently he does that), why still blaming the creation?", the answer is "who are you to question god?.
That's only one of many, many other examples that clearly suggest predestination.
So , there you have a handful of reasons why I find logical and reasonable the conclusion that what you're trying to define as foreknowledge without predestination is neither reasonable or logical.
Not to mention that the free will illusion has to be demonstrated as a fact if you want to take it into serious consideration .
If ,on the other hand , you're dismissing the idea of god planning his creation and then executing his plan and only want to support the foreknowledge based on timeless attributes of god , that's a complete different story.
I can't possibly know this for certain, but I imagine there are instances were God simply chooses not to exercise his ability to know the future. This plays well with mans ability to choose either right or wrong and to exercise his own free will.
I think that what could be inconsistent here is using only modal logic to find a fallacy. If you use propositional logic there is no fallacy at all, because it's a correct formulated modus ponens:
1. If God foreknows that I will do X, then I will do X.
2. God foreknows that I will do X.
3. Therefore, I will do X.
Here, the conclusion follows logically the premises, so what is necessary is to justify why modal logic is the only logic you should use to evaluate the validity of this argument.
3:00 I am an atheist, but Craig is firmly misrepresenting open theism here. The main tenent of open theism is that the future only exists of possibilities and not actualities. In open theism, God doesn't know the future because the future cannot be known to God. For anyone interested, check out Greg Boyd on this matter.
I don't think he misrepresented open theism. In fact, nothing in your correction seems to contradict what Craig said.
I think he did, because open theists aren't open theists because they think foreknowledge is incompatible with free will. They think the future only exists of possibilities and not actualities.
BecomingMike
As far as I know, it's quite common for open theists to hold that there are some things about the future that can be known but it's non-deterministic events (such as free will decisions and random events if true randomness exists) which make the future partially open and consisting of possibilities. Some open theists even call their view "freewill theism" (David Basinger has a book called "The Case for Freewill Theism: A Philosophical Assessment")
which is a bit misleading because obviously it's not the only kind of theism that accepts free will.
Yea you are right that there are open theists that hold to a partially open/closed future.
So then, according to open theism, god is NOT all knowing?
Like the host said; "Okaaaay....I am going to have to go home and think about that one"
That was a very polite way of saying; "That didn't make any sense at all".
So.....I am going to go home and think about that one.
Correction: it is a very polite way of saying, "That didn't make any sense at all TO ME." Failure to understand the connection between a premise and a conclusion does not negate the logical legitimacy of the concept.
It seems that WLC could not have ellaborated his point due to limmited time. I believe thinking about next argument will help understanding his point.
1. Necessarily, if john is bachelor then he is unmarried.
2. john is bachelor.
3. Therefore necessarily, john is unmarried.
1 is true because it is logically true. Definiion of bachelor is unmarried man. But conclusion is absurd. Just because you call someone bachelor, he is necessarily (without any option) unmarried?
So the right conclusion is
3R. john is unmarried
Which could mean that he just freely chooses to be unmarried.
PixelSage It doesn't make logical sense, perceptions are out of the question. It was absolutely absurd.
RadioactiveSand well, I don't see any reason to think like you. please show how it makes logical error.
+mysaviorisjc byfaith I would like to hear Radioactive's response to this.
Note how he inserts “Necessarily” into the premises…even then it fails.
1. Necessarily if God knows I will do X, then I will do X.
2. God foreknows I will do X.
3. Therefore, necessarily I will do X.
then he says:
“…all that it means is that you WILL do X, BUT not NECESSARILY do X.”
“You could refrain, and if you were to refrain, then God’s foreknowledge would have been different.” - i.e.: he would have known that you were going to refrain…so we are back at square one again.
Is this guy on drugs?
So basically he’s saying what his opponents have been saying for ages:
If god knows what you will do, then you will do it. If you refrain from doing it, then god already knows that too. Which means, there is no free will. End of story.
Apakah kehendak bebas manusia harus mengasumsikan ketidaktahuan Tuhan? di menit 1:46 WLC berkata bahwa pengetahuan Tuhan tidak serta-merta menghilangkan kehendak bebas manusia.
Mungkinkah maksudnya "Tuhan memang tahu saya akan melakukan X, namun IA tidak membuat saya melakukan X"?
So then, question. Lets say you fall into a bad sin...you want to have godly sorrow and remorse...then, you think that God foreknew that you would do it, therefore you HAD to yield to the sin...it was utterly out of your hands or power to do anything else. Please comment.
"If god knows what you will do, then you will do it. If you refrain from doing it, then god already knows that too. Which means, there is no free will."
You have made the gross correlation fallacy of sorts. Just because God knows you will do something does NOT mean that He /causes/ you to do that something. It also doesn't mean that you don't have free will. All it means is that God knows how you are going to use that free will.
If you're going to argue that we don't have free will, you're going to have to make up something that is dictating our actions.
"End of story."
Don't be so ignorant and naive as to believe that you can just end a conversation/debate like this and pretend that you know everything so that there can't possibly be anything more to discuss.
amanda2324
And you made the error of assuming that I meant that God was controlling my will. I never assumed that God caused me to do anything. Obviously, something is causing me to do something that God already knows I will do and there is nothing I can do about it.
"Obviously, something is causing me to do something that God already knows I will do and there is nothing I can do about it."
Well, what is that something? Or are you just making something up in a failed attempt to argue against the idea of free will? I know for some people, their free will is taken away by alcohol or nicotine. Perhaps you become a slave to whatever earthly forces you allow yourself to become enslaved by?
This is a very man-centered answer. God’s divine foreknowledge is essentially dependent upon man’s actions, not upon His own self-sufficient omniscience, plans, decrees, desires, etc.
I think of it like a decision tree in a video game. We make choices and they lead us onto different paths, God knows every path we can take and where it will lead because He is the designer of the tree, and perhaps there is a path He hopes we take, but he lets us choose the path we want because He loves us.
foreknowledge has no causal power. the end.
However if God is allknowing, then the future is deterministic, because he knows what will happen, he may not cause it, but it doesnt matter. You have either libertarian free will or an omnicient god, not both.
@@kaizal3161 how does foreknowledge necessarily make the future deterministic?
Knowledge and causation are not necessarily intertwined in this case, that's just an inference. If God is timeless, he has a complete and linear perception of the past present and future, resulting in his Omniscience. Your action causes God's knowledge, not the other way around. If this is to be believed there are no contradictions
So why were you replying to this comment? Didn't this comment made you react in a certain way?
If I offer my son ice cream or homework, I know my son will choose ice cream. Does he have free will when I offer it to him? Of course.
+Billy Gibbs And what happens when he doesn't? I've used the same logic that you apply here before (mine was something about my brother doing a good deed). Would you not agree that you are simply using chance as your determining factor? Something like: there is an extremely high chance that my son will take the ice cream, but he doesn't have to.
If so, would you say this "foresight" is also what God has?
Yes, Tlu, it is by chance. As my son get's older, he may choose homework instead. Our choice is to sin or not to sin. As we study and strengthen our faith, we will sin less and less. However, I do believe God knows ultimately where we will end up, we don't know unless we are determined to go to heaven.
Ha, I would also say we know where we're going if we're determined to get to hell. You know as well as I God won't force people into Heaven.
When it comes to this question for me, I simply have to say I don't know. There are convincing arguments on both sides of the "does God know everything?" question.
I do always like to think about the implications that arise, for instance at the beginning of Job. If Satan knows God knows everything, why would he make a bet with him?
I find these subjects much more fun than your typical church subjects.
That is interesting, but I don't want to worry to much with that. I want to focus on going to heaven.
I'm sure you'll make it, my friend. God bless.
If an omniscient and omnipotent God exist, He cannot have an
imperfect plan. There is no amount of influence from the devil, human free
will, or from whatsoever can mess-up His plan. Therefore, whatever happens
yesterday, today, and tomorrow is in accordance to his will. Q: Do humans have free will?
A: It doesn't matter. Everything still happens according to
his plan.
Q: If humans have free will, how can we not influence his
plan?
A: Because our humble capability cannot mess-up the plan of
an omniscient and omnipotent God.
Q: But how can it be possible that we have free will yet
everything happens according to His will?
A: I don't know. Who am I to understand His nature? He works
in mysterious ways, right? Just accept it that way. Have faith.
Q: You mean all the sufferings and confusions we have are
part of His plan?
A: What do you think?
Having foreknowledge of something doesnt take away free will...It just means that somebody knows the outcome of a persons decision.... Just because somebody knows what somebody else is going to do does not mean you are taking away their free will...Its kind of simple now for me to understand.
It isn't that simple Holy, don't give up on yourself, have faith that you are smarter than that. Factor in the fact that God is the very fabric of reality itself, everything comes from god. Every particle and to the billionth part, he knows, where it was eternally into the past, where it is at present, where it will be forever from now. Even before a person is born He knows. He already knows all the unborn people that will chill with him in heaven singing harp music and praising him forever, and knows all the unborn people that will burn in and be tortuted in hell for eternity. How do you reconcile freewill with that?
Not to mention you can't compare the phenomenon of God's foreknowledge with anything else we have experience with. She says "Just because somebody knows what somebody else is going to do ..." but the point is nobody has or ever can KNOW what someone else will do. You can have a very strong valid, rational, reason for believing what someone else will do and you may end up correct with your prediction.
But when you are talking about divine, omniscient foreknowledge you are talking about an absolute certainty that is really only found in Mathematics and not any of the other sciences(if you even consider math a science). God's foreknowledge would have always existed. He would have know eternally in the past before EVERYTHING, including time and space were created, every single event, even at quantum level, and every thought every conscious agent would ever have. And God is the one who created and supplied everything that exists besides Himself. How then can you say that the creation was free?
I see so many people trying to assert that prior knowledge does not imply cause but NOBODY has ever had ANY experience with genuine prior knowledge. No human has or will ever posses prior knowledge that is as certain as 1+1=2. God's foreknowledge would be necessarily a mathematical certainly. There is no other prior knowledge for which that could be claimed.
@@j-r-m7775 you're right. But there's still no contradiction. True foreknowledge is something no human possesses, thus we can't pretend to know how it works. However, if we infer that the nature of Omniscience is to simply inform God of what will occur IN TIME (keeping in mind God is said to exist outside of time) then there is no contradiction. God sees right through time, thus he has a linear perception of the existence of everything from the beginning of time until the end. But if one asserts that Omniscience is not a causal agent, then there is no contradiction. Omniscience doesn't necessarily have to be deterministic in nature, it can simply be informative.
Don't forget about LOVE. The ability to choose Love means to also have to ability to NOT choose Love. We know that God is Love. And Love is freedom. Love is a CHOICE, not a feeling. That's why it means so much when a man and a woman get married, and when they say "I DO", they are also saying "I DONT DO ALL THE OTHER THINGS." Since God is Love, and since Love is not manipulative or forceful, God WILL NOT force you to love him. It violates His very nature. Bottom line, free will absolutely exists, otherwise there would be no such thing as Love. If everything was predetermined then we can conclude that every bad thing that we do would ultimately be God's fault. And would once again violate His perfect/sinless nature.
Is it just me or will WLC say anything to support his Christian worldview?
He does seem to stretch credibility to its breaking point. Read his thoughts on divine command theory or the "defeasibility of Christian belief". Craig debates a lot, either because he wants to reach people in that way, or because it's a paying gig, or both, or perhaps some other combination of reasons. But it doesn't seem that he debates in order for people to have the same religious awakening that he says he had as a teenager. Interestingly, in many of his debates he acknowledges that evidence and logic are not the real basis for his own belief. His faith is based upon the "witness of the holy spirit in my heart".
It's just you.
7 years totally wasted Mr Craig, lol. Truly submit yourself to God's sovereignty and stop playing at being a Christian. Amen.
***** He isn't the powerful force for Christianity, lol, Jesus is. Craig peddles hell which is a false doctrine, and he believes in human freewill which is another false unscriptural doctrine and that alone simply shows that he is not submitted to God's will and sovereignty.
And being a doctor means very little to me, especially when it's a doctor of theology or philosophy for that matter. I don't have to respect titles just because someone has sat in a chair in a Uni and chant learned academia's rote mantras.
Get of your platform dude, such in your self-righteous attitude and grow a pair of balls and try thinking for yourself instead of licking false preachers and false pastors butt holes, as that won't get you into heaven,lol.
Jeremiah 23:1-5
“Woe to the shepherds who are destroying and scattering the sheep of my pasture!” declares the Lord. 2 Therefore this is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says to the shepherds who tend my people: “Because you have scattered my flock and driven them away and have not bestowed care on them, I will bestow punishment on you for the evil you have done,” declares the Lord. 3 “I myself will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them and will bring them back to their pasture, where they will be fruitful and increase in number. 4 I will place shepherds over them who will tend them, and they will no longer be afraid or terrified, nor will any be missing,” declares the Lord.
5 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
“when I will raise up for David[a] a righteous Branch,
a King who will reign wisely
and do what is just and right in the land.
Happy hunting.
Sincerely in Christ,
Jimi:-).
***** Is it!? What exactly do I need to grow up from? When I see apostasy as a human being, as a Christian, I have the right to speak my mind about it while there is still a smidgen of democratic autonomy left on this planet.
You obviously don't like freedom of speech, and you have no idea whatsoever what my opinions are shallow or not, you are, just as, if not more so, hypocritical than you think I am.
And I have lots of things to do in my life matey, lots, and one of them is to call out fake Christianity.
Now how do you like them apples bro? If you do have something grown up to say to me that is even remotely intellectual and worth discussing then let me know... if not then I guess we both have something better to do.
Sincerely,
Jimi:-).
I have to say that it is hard to accept your completely ungracious criticism of another man's work and particular theology, whilst you simultaneously claim to be doing so in the name of Christ.
You are certainly free to disagree with the man, but just because you do not agree with his brand of theology (which happens to be quite orthodox) does not mean that he is some how not a committed Christian.
So aside from your ungracious attitude, it would seem that you are the one who does not hold to traditional Christian views, such as hell. It is all over the New Testament.
Shaydawg88 I continually ask assured Christians why they believe in hell (when it is clearly not in scripture)?
So I will ask you bro, why do you believe that God is a torturing, vindictive, fiendish, bodge artist?
I know why... but I'm just interested to hear you confess with your mouth why!?
Sincerely,
Jimi.
I would argue that it is simply a matter of perspective. From my own humble observations I have witnessed a great number of people in society emphasize the goodness of God, the mercy of God, the grace of God, but somehow they always seem to leave out the perfectly just character of God.
I believe your characterization of God, "torturing, vindictive, fiendish, bodge artist," fails to account for this quality. Is God not justified in sending a rapist to hell? A murderer? If God is perfectly good and perfectly just, does it not follow that such men and women have rightfully earned punishment of some sort? I think this is also what makes God's merciful nature even more so amazing given that he does offer a pardon. In this way not only is God's just nature satisfied, but he is further glorified through this manifestation of mercy.
And I am interested in your interpretation of the numerous passages that do refer to hell (hades, gehenna, or whatever you would like to call it). Here is just a select few passage, of which there are many more.
(Matt. 5:29; 10:28; 11:23; 23:33; 25:41; Luke 12:5; Acts 2:27; 2 Pet. 2:4)
As an aside, I believe C.S. Lewis offered an astute observation when he said, “There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, "Thy will be done," and those to whom God says, in the end, "Thy will be done." All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find. Those who knock it is opened” (The Great Divorce).
Does this seem reasonable to you?
If a red dog had a square ass, he could shit bricks. That's your argument.
*****
Reason. Yeah, Martin Luther said Christians must rip the eyes out of reason. You guys are ridiculous. You use the terms "if" and "maybe" when referring to your god. I'm done with you.
Dr Craig very craftily waters down the second premise to suit his argument. This is how it ought to read. P1: If God, the Supreme, omnipotent, omniscient being necessarily foreknows that I will do X, then necessarily I will do X. P2: God foreknows, necessarily, that I will do X. Conclusion: It follows necessarily that I will do X. On those terms I cannot refrain and I am necessarily fated to do X.
The "necessarily" is unnecessary. It seems Craig only includes "necessarily" in the argument in order to create a modal fallacy. Unfortunately for him, the problem with omniscience can't be dispensed by sleight of hand.
The argument is simply:
1. If God foreknows we will do X, we will do X
2. God foreknows we will do X
3. We will do X
Craig's argument against this logic is to include an infinite loop of decisions contrary to foreknowledge which force the foreknowledge to retroactively change.
From the perspective of an omniscient being, the future has already occurred. This does not allow for any ridiculous "but if we DID do something different, God's foreknowledge WOULD HAVE been different" nonsense.
From what I can evaluate, the word "necessary" is crucial in understanding the fallacious argument. Let's look at the logic with and without the injection of this word. First, with "necessary":
1. If God foreknows we will do X, we will necessarily do X
2. God foreknows we will do X
3. We will necessarily do X
This is how most people assert this argument to prove that God's foreknowledge would dictate human action. The issue is that premise 1 is incorrect. God's foreknowledge does not force action X (the very question the argument is trying to prove). The conclusion cannot be assumed in the premise. This argument is therefore illogical. Now, let's look at the logic as you present it:
1. If God foreknows we will do X, we will do X
2. God foreknows we will do X
3. We will do X
This is now logically coherent, but nowhere is it implied that God's foreknowledge forces action X. This only proves that action X is _correlated_ with God's foreknowledge, not _caused_ by it. Correlation does not imply causation. The only reason premise 1 is true is because action X is the reason for God's foreknowledge.
His argument basically boils down to, if god knows you'll do X, then you'll do X, but you don't necessarily have to do X, if you choose not to do X and choose to do Y instead, then god would have foreknown that you would do Y instead.
What a stupid ridiculous argument that pretty much confirms the fact that an Omniscient deity = no free will. He knows what you'll do before you're born, how then can you have freewill to do something god had already foreknown you would do?
Because God's foreknowledge is based on you're actions. Your actions are free and not based on his knowledge.
God does not determine your actions, he just knows them.
***** Nonsense. If he KNOWS your actions, then you are NOT free to do something contrary to what he knows. And if you do something contrary to what he knows, then his foreknowledge would have been different. In other words, God knows everything you'll ever do before you were even conceived in your mothers womb. Therefore there clearly is NO freewill.
Wilson Kayden
Just listen to what even you're saying yourself. Again, God foreknows what you will do, he has not determined it. His eternal/timeless knowledge is based on your actions and your action are based on your freewill.
***** Lets cut to the chase and stop playing games.
Please kindly answer the following:
-Is god omniscient (knows everything)?
-does god know the past, present and future?
-does god know everything about you (even before you are born)?
If the answers to all those questions is "Yes". Then that means god must know everything you are ever going to do in your life, he knows when you die etc. so you have no freewill. Because you'd have no choice but to do whatever it is that god already foreknows you would do. Even William Lane Craig tells you that whatever you do, god foreknows you are going to do it. Therefore it's IMPOSSIBLE to change your mind, because whatever you do, god already knew you would do. Ergo, no freewill.
Wilson Kayden
Your conclusion simply doesn't follow. God's foreknowledge of your actions is not a determining factor, it is a result of the choices you are freely going to make. It is not impossible to change your mind, it just means God would know this change. Again, our actions are not dictated by God's foreknowledge, it is are actions that determine God's foreknowledge.
You are trying to argue a totally illogical position where cause and effect are circular.
Regardless of whether or not "God's" foreknowledge conveniently changes based upon our actions. (Which wouldn't be foreknowledge). He gets angry in the Bible. Anyone who created the universe and has foreknowledge has no grounds for ever being angry and flooding the world. Mr. Craig, your logic remains clouded and disingenuous, as always.
Who told you He gets angry because He didn't know? Are you suggesting that you can only be angered by things and situations you didn't know?
04l882 You must have learned your apologetics from him. You imply I said things that are similar to what I said, but not quite. Go back and figure it out. When you respond to me, answer my questions. Don't pose trivial questions to me as "answers". I won't play that game, thank you.
It reminds me of the loaded question... "When did you stop beating your wife?" The way the question is posed presumes a certain kind of answer, it is used as a tactic when someone doesn't have a good enough defense.
Maybe I'm missing something. Are you implying that _God should not get/feel/express anger if He knows everything_ or not?
Also I don't see any question in the thread so I'm not sure what you're referring to. Please advise.
Your first reply to my comment was two questions.
I am not saying anything about "should". I am saying that there is no reason behind someone being angry if said being...
1) Created the Universe
2) Created the People
3) possesses foresight
God would have created people differently to adjust to foresight of their sins. Unless he gets satisfaction out of being an Angry, Jealous, Genocidal maniac. In which case, He doesn't sound very benevolent.
I don't understand his logic. He seems to not understand that foreknowledge has to occur before the event which was foreseen. You can't have a different choice occur and retroactively go back and change the foreknowledge.
That's not what he said God does, so....
I think it could be stated more simply than WLC stated it.
Knowledge and will are two different things. God knowing the future decisions of humans does not mean he makes those decisions.
For example: I can know that someone is about to commit a crime, but my knowledge doesn't mean I will have any influence on that person's will to do so. They are two very different things.
This man has given me more insight to Christianity than Sunday school has
+SXS66 I believe that the church has become lazy and stagnate. All humans are lazy, even Christians. Christians are lazy because they are relying on the same things that have worked in the past and they don't want to put forth the work of learning the new and difficult things that Dr. Craig puts forth.
I didn't hear about Dr. Craig until about the age of 30 or so. Like you, I have learned more about God in the past few years than all of my prior church life before. Dr. Craig has spoken about this before.
A very large percentage of people who go to a University end up abandoning their faith because their parents and church didn't prepare them for the onslaught of secularism. He is pretty harsh of parents and churches for not teaching their children about rational faith.
WLC really does spout such a load of garbage. Absolute tripe.
Horrible logic skills of WLC.
First, let's at least get the syllogism right:
1. If God foreknows I will choose X, then I must choose X.
2. God foreknows I will choose X.
3. Therefore, I must choose X.
-----
And then, if we are so inclined, we can go on (though it's not really needed)...
1. If I must choose X, I cannot choose Y instead of X.
2. I must choose X.
3. Therefore, I cannot choose Y instead of X.
1. If I cannot choose Y instead of X, I don't have the free will to choose Y instead of X
2. I cannot choose Y instead of X
3. I don't have the free will to choose Y instead of X
1. Y represents anything other than X
2. I don't have the free will to choose Y instead of X
3. I don't have the free will to choose anything other than X instead of X
1. If I don't have the free will to choose anything other than X instead of X, my choice of X is not a free choice
2. I don't have the free will to choose anything other than X instead of X
3. My choice of X is not a free choice
-----
And if god has foreknowledge, the word is "contingent" not "necessarily". In other words, the truth is contingent on gods foreknowledge.
1. If God foreknows I will choose X, then I must choose X ... is a contingent truth
2. God foreknows I will choose X.
3. Therefore, I must choose X... is a contingent truth.
My Transcription.
When you watch a movie before someone else you know what happened.
when you tell them what is going to happen does that mean you made the movie that way?
God Has watched the movie of your life before you have finished it.
He is not bound by time.
***** "If God has watched the movie of your life before you have finished it then you don't have free will"
False
*****
Non sequitur
"You therefore can’t not do
Therefore you Will not do X.
***** Are you ok upstairs?
if you didn't do x God did not foreknow that you will do x.
This is basic logic. lol
***** "If God knows today that you will do x tomorrow, you will do x tomorrow, you have no choice"
you have no choice in what?
***** "You have no choice but to do x. You can’t not do x"
what? lool. you are making no sense.
God knows you will do x because he has seen you do it from eternity.
how you cannot get this is amazing..
If God knows everything you will do even before you are born, you do not have freewill because if God is all knowing and all powerful he knows what you will do. Dr Craig says "God doesn't necciserly know what you will do" So God all knowing yet limited is some way??? So then if he doesn't know what you will do in the future then how is God all knowing???
There is no mechanism by which anyone's foreknowledge of an event could possibly cause that event to happen,
and there is no mechanism by which anyone's foreknowledge could possibly curtail anyone's free will.
Nobody has ever mentioned what the mechanism supposedly is: There simply isn't one.
Therefore the conclusion is that God has perfect foreknowledge, and man has free will.
Quantum Physics is easier lol
When you mess up theology like these guys it is. The Bible is clear in this subject and the view this man is bringing up is nothing but the popular traditional thought. That's why he has books to sell.
If God knows the future and if our environment and our physical predetermination at least partly defines our will ..God is essentially responsible for everything we do.
How does that make any sense?
That's like saying the Barometer is responsible for any bad weather we have.
04l882 No because i said AND {if our environment and our physical predetermination at least partly defines our will ).
Kostas Spiliotopoulos what evidence do you have to support this claim?
04l882 Is one on one logic.
That doesn't provide evidence for your claim. In order for your argument to be true you'd need to show/explain:
*(a.)* How knowing = doing
*(b.)* How knowing has causal power.
I'd be pretty interested if you had that. Would you let me know?
Religobabble, as ever - how about a simple answer to a simple question, at least once William?
It's not a simple question. What is your answer to such a "simple" question.
mam somal You're asking the wrong person as I don't believe in anything superstitious/supernatural/silly.
Didn't Willy give you the answer (you wanted to hear) here? Or like the interviewer, did you "have to go home and think about it?"
Ian M The reason you don't believe in the supernatural, or an afterlife is merely don't to your lack of knowledge on that particular topic. There is not a single book ever written to debunk the existence of an afterlife. Look up the Scole Experiment.
Can't stop you believing any tosh you like - but I will give you all I own if there is ever any evidence that will stand up in a UK court of law (not your own silly mind) to prove the existence of God, Heaven, Hell, Satan, Allah, Ganesha, Thor, Zeus, angels, ghosts, devils, pixies, fairies. Are there any other supernatural things you would like to add to the list that you think exist?
Like Pascal's Wager, you've got nothing to loose - except spending the only life you're going to get as a delusional idiot.
Ian M Who said anything about Satan, Allah, , etc?
A court of law finds one witness suffice to find someone guilty of a criminal offence, but when I mention the Scole Experiment (where there was a substantial number of credible witnesses) you say it wouldn't stand in a court of law? Where is the logic in that?
God knows all the possibilities you can do, or what ever can happen. All the possibilities of all the things....
So, God knows everything....
So, God knows what you will do. Because He knows all the possibilities.
In real world, God knows permutations and combinations of everything!
We have free will, God just knows what we gonna do ahead of time, we still free will do it, that's reasonable to say, after all he is our supernatural creator God 😇♥️♥️♥️🙌🙌🙌🙏🏽🙏🏿🙏🏼🙏🙏🏻
You cannot freely act on how he foreknows you to act thus the outcome is inevitable
Poor old Bill, still talking Goobledegook..
Even the host was lost with his jarble.
Ahahahahahahahaha! WLC at his most hilarious!
An awful explanation. I don't subscribe to fatalism but his justification is as usual pathetic! It's really quite easy. An omniscient power (which doesn't exist, but let's say god did exist) knows what CHOICE you will make. Therefore it knows the outcome of your own free will.
William Lane Craig is a proponent to Molinism. Molinists summarizes Luis de Molina's teaching as God has three types of omniscience. First, God's natural knowledge, he knows all the possibilities of what could happen. Second, God's middle knowledge, he knows all the possibilities which are feasible and would happen. Third, God's free knowledge, he determined the things that will surely happen. So in God's foreknowledge, he is sovereign, by having exhaustive knowledge over anything, that he has meticulous control over everything, that he is free from all things, and he is righteous in his holiness. I've got a book I'm reading right now called "Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach" by Kenneth Keathley. It's a good book, you can find some of the sample pages (I was quoting from the first chapter, you can find it on Google Books).
I was a programmer, and to make our application structured and clear, we ought to make a blue print of workflow diagrams, full of if and thens, switch cases, conditionals, but there are also some things that are definite that I want this to happen every time the user press this button, or whatever. Years ago when I read about predestination and God's foreknowledge, that is how I understand it, that God's knowledge is like a big blue print full of conditionals diagram, full of things that could happen, would happen, and will happen. Years later, I found out about William Lane Craig and Molinism, then found out that my own personal thinking that I imagined myself wasn't new at all.
Makes sense I think.
Wrong, an omniscient being doesnt know what you will chose but how what you chose will end. Some may call it a ripple effect.
Jasonwins Ridiculous, if it knows the effect and it knows the mechanics then it knows the cause. Omniscience means knowing everything and that includes choices. But nowhere in that statement does it imply that the omniscient being is therefore forcing your choice.
Not if the creator made us that way.. See thats what you arent getting.. IF a creator that knows all makes something designed to have free will than he can. Period! Hes THE creator! He can pretty much do what he wants to! LOL
I don't understand his argument at 1:25 at all. If I act in a certain way, God has foreknowledge of it, does he not? And I can't change this foreknowledge with my actions, correct? So where exactly does the freedom come into play? If someone could explain Craig's argument here, I'd love to hear it.
the freedom comes into play when you choose to make the actions you do. you have been given the choice to make. God is all-knowing , all-seeing so he knows what decisions you're going to make but doesn't tie your hands behind your back and force you to make the choice
Emmanuel Akinfenwa I have to call BULLSHIT to your response. In all knowing god scenario if he (I call god a he because if the bible is true then god most certainly is a man. No woman ever would fuck things up like the biblical god does.) foreknows what you are going to do, you do not have the option of changing that. Ergo- no free will. However, since no apologist has ever come close to meeting the burden of proof for a god, personal or otherwise, the points William Lane Craig makes in his various cult meetings doesn't mean diddly squat.
I don't mind the bullshit call.I am speaking from a Christian's perspective. God knowing what your going to do does not mean he makes you do it.
Either way you CANNOT prove there is no God. There is no truthful evidence in your support. Why?, because just as Psalm 14:1 " A fool says in his heart there is no God". Your mere existence is enough evidence.
Emmanuel Akinfenwa "God knowing what your going to do does not mean he makes you do it."I don't think anyone argues that god is forcing anyone. His for-knowledge however does imply that there is at least one framework in which the future is either set (causaly deterministic to predict).
So our 'free choice' becomes the same deterministic 'appereance of free will'.
P.G. Burgess Two questions.
*1.* How did you move from _"imply...framework"_ to _"becomes... deterministic"_ without justification?
If you posit a framework, then you use that comment as support for your conclusion, that seems suspect, don't you think?
*2.* Can you present a fully formed argument that demonstrates *(a.)* why this framework is true and *(b.)* why/how one entity's (uncommunicated) knowledge negates another entity's free will?
Thanks.
I wonder how he explains the biblical flood. God creates people, having complete foreknowledge of what those people will do, then he watches them doing it, gets angry and destroys them.
fotbalmfotbalm ever watch a movie you’ve seen before yet still laugh or cry at your favorite parts? I think it’s the same thing
As interesting as this is, the Bible reveals that God stored the waters of the flood - preparing/ holding back
In fact, the Bible declares that the all knowing God reveals all things for the right moment
PS. the emotions expressed by God in creation are through agency - as in; those carrying out the interventions
If God really wanted me to have free will, so I could make my own decisions, then He should have asked me, before I was born, if I wanted to be created in a world where I'd go to hell if I didn't obey the rules that are not clear enough in my opinion.
How could God have asked you before you were created ? Your existence started at the moment you were born. Think before you post.
maxavail So couldn't God have created my soul before I was born? Does my soul need a body to exist? Come on. You and Craig put limits in God and take it out when it's convenient.
Gaudio Wind but you are alive, you are a thinking person. You can choose right now if you want to live a life with or without god. Its entirely up to you really.
Scott Mutley Oh come on. Now, I don't have options anymore. If I chose not to live with God then I'll go to hell, right?
KillFireIII So, do you think God could only create my soul and communicate with it after my body was complete?
Wow this guy is simply insane. I don't even think he understands the words coming out of his mouth.
Actually, I think it is you who doesn't understand anything he says, not him.
Obviously I don't understand his attempt at logic, that is why I wrote what I wrote.
Do you have the ability to understand the ravings of a lunatic?
Adding "necessarily" after 7 years of working on this philosophical problem doesn't make it go away. He is an idiot. Just because there are legions of idiots admiring and supporting him because he takes a view that they agree with, it does not change the fact that his reasoning is sophomoric at best.
He basically says, if god knows you will do something you will do it, but not "necessarily" (WTF?). Because you can choose to do something else, in which case it would simply change his foreknowledge of what you will do.
So basically, you supersede god's knowledge and you get to decide what he will foreknow by your own will. Which makes you even more powerful than god...which is not what the bible teaches.
-------
Colossians 1:16 “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:”
Proverbs 16:9 “The heart of man plans his way, but the Lord establishes his steps.”
Psalms 103:19 "The LORD has made the heavens his throne; from there he rules over everything."
Lamentations 3:37"Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not?"
Mark 14:36 "And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt." - Jesus
And so on..ad nausea...
You will excuse me if I call bullshit on this apologetic shoehorning of personal views of WLC against the bible's words.
I don't think Dr. Craig is insane.
He's simply Human, and Humans hold contradictory belief systems quite naturally.
Like all theists, his beliefs can be represented as a series of interlocking Penrose triangles. He can focus on a corner at a time, but can never view the entirety as each corner contradicts the overall shape.
Insane? I think he's just on a level of intellect that you can't really follow, i think calling him insane, here, really is a compliment.
"It means that you will do x, not that you will _necessarily_ do x".
Sigh. Just go to bed.
do you not know the difference between those two statements?
Drigger95 what's the truth maker of "you will do x"? If time has already played out as a real series events and God sees it then God knowing you will do X is dependant on you having actually done x, which means that God knowing isn't merely a trick of modal logic, it's passively dependant on you having already done it, past tense, from him perspective. It being past tense fact means him knowing it NECESSARILY depends on you already doing it.
If your future act being certain is the truth maker for the statement that you will do X then you doing X is indeed necessarily true.
You "may do y" is an absurd fantasy at that point.
This is based in a timelessness foreknowledge model.
In a sort of predictive model of moralistic middle knowledge alone, the truth maker isn't the action or you since at that point in a Molinist system, no reality of universes yet exists, God is planning then at this phase and is logically using middle knowledge to "know" what you or I might do in any given situation, should we actually exist.
Such a conception of middle knowledge either fails or is coherent entirely based on what you think of anthropology and how the parts of hypothetical universes interact with agents. That's to say: Billy always does X in situation y only work if Billy NECESSARILY can't do other than X on every situation y, and God 5hink makes the world with Billy and you in it in a manner so they absolutely will interact when planed so that X takes place. For this to be absolutely certain in all cases, and utterly precise in every moving part of every atom and every emotion and every "billy" to do X precisely when they must to make the next billy who then does X in the next year (basically all of human history), then each interaction MUST be totally fixed in a chain of mechanistically determined causality... with NO ROOM for deviations. With 0 play, 0 deviations, then once God says "let there be light" and the plan goes into action, then it's no longer a middle knowledge matter, all that ever will take place must necessarily take place from that moment on because there's never again a functional difference between what could happen, would happen should happen or must happen, at that point all of human history becomes a determined brute fact of design. And all free agents are designed to freely do X based on a larger scale flow that billy can't ever do otherwise in. Billy is designed to always do X in y, his freely choosing it is an illusion at that point.
In timelessness it isn't "you will" it's "you did". It's already done, you're literally living out fixed events.
Both of these models depend on an understanding of how objects, humans and events interact that is utterly newtonian, every action has precise interactions, and from each action, all of its causes and effects, if UNDERSTOOD FULLY, are utterly knowable due to their precise interrelationships, even psychological ones.
All of these models totally fall apart if your anthropology incorporates contracausality. If Billy can do X or A in situation Y, then middle knowledge is predictive and complex, not certain and absolutely factual.
The difference between "Billy WILL do x", "Billy might do x" and Billy necessarily did x" become meaningfully distinct then, because human action becomes a truth-maker in real time.
This freaks people out because they think it's akin to saying "man is more powerful than God" or "then God can't know anything", but that's absurd. It simply posits that more interaction in real time is necessary for middle knowledge to be certain in all situations, but in any given situations, the number of free radicals that can upset the apple cart of any given plan are known, their variables and triggers all thoroughly weighed. Middle knowledge becomes a Web instead of a line, and God can easily turn that Web or branching tree into a line whenever he wants by simply cutting branches.
The question is; how much variability does he allow (if there is any at all) and how many branches does he cut and when?
It could be possible that middle knowledge is indeed perfect as Molinism suspects, and it's possible billy always does X in y... but taken to its logical ends, this just means that we vantage ever have done otherwise, and the universe is utterly determined and every part if it is fixed.
If God sees the future actions if agents timelessly, then they're fixed as well, but for different reasons.
Craig's response is perfectly valid. Basically, god's foreknowledge is contingent on your decision. That's obvious, because there's nothing about his foreknowledge that would make you decide one thing over another.
Vic 2.0, no Craig's response is not valid at all because His premise isn't sound. Basically, God's foreknowledge is contingent on your decision isn't talking about the God of the Bible, therefore Craig's reasoning is invalid. God's foreknowledge isn't contingent on any finite person's decision because God is self-existent (Exodus 3:14), therefore all His knowledge is derived from Him. Before Genesis 1:1, God foreknows all things. It can't be contingent on the created because God knows it all before He created all things. In fact, God chose those that would be saved before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4-5), therefore those choices are set in stone in eternity past, just like those that don't choose is also set in stone.
What Craig has done is elevated sinful, finite man above holy, infinite God to reconcile the problem of "free" will. Yet man's will isn't free in the respect that he can choose anything that he hates. He hates God, Christ, and Christians (John 15:18-23) and he can't come to the Son unless the Father draws them (John 6:44). Mankind is a slave to their sin nature and only Christ can set them free (John 8:34-36). Craig is embracing Molinism, a philosophical system invented by man to cling to the notion of free will and in effect, making God subservient to man's will, even before God ever created man. When you embrace man-made philosophy or lean on your own understanding, you violate Colossians 2:8 and Proverbs 3:5. This is the reason Craig must be philosophical with his answers and not quote a Bible verse that backs up his assertions. He may sound like a clever apologist, but even sinful atheists can spot the fallacy of his logic.
Those area a lot of extrapolations that don't follow. You've put the full range of theological speculation over millenia and squeezed out everything that isn't meticulous hard determinism.
Okay, Mr. Crag, I will rewrite the argument:
1. God is necessarily never wrong about anything.
2. Therefore, God necessarily knows which box I will choose: box a) or box b).
3. The ability to choose either box is a function of free will.
4. Therefore, free will does not exist.
e.g., I chose box a). God knew this, therefore it was impossible to choose box b). For, if it were possible, then (1) is falsified. Since it was impossible for me to choose box b), it follows from (3) that we have no free will.
I see what you're saying. However, this idea is what Craig was trying to dispel.
Allow me to point out the logical fallacy in your argument. While you will freely choose between box a) or box b), it does not negate the fact that you will eventually choose one of the boxes and not the other. This future choice of yours is the dictator of God's foreknowledge. This creates a correlation between God's foreknowledge and your future free choice, and people often misinterpret this correlation as God's foreknowledge being the cause of your actions.
God's foreknowledge is NOT, I repeat NOT the cause of our actions. This is the biggest problem in the other side trying to understand our arguments.
What we're actually saying, rather, is that God's foreknowledge implies that actions are predetermined.
My future choice does not dictate god's knowledge, because it was impossible for me to choose box b.
Let me break this down simply:
At 12pm god knows for 100% certainty that, at 1pm, I will make my choice, and decide to choose box A.
So now it's 1pm. My question for you: can I choose box b? No, it's impossible, if God is never wrong. And surely being free to choose box b is in line with the doctrine of free will.
Now, the typical way around this (Aquinas') is to say that at 12pm god doesn't know for 100% certainty that I will choose box a; he only has certain middle knowledge. And if this is the case, most would argue that god does not have total omniscience. Because to have all knowledge, he would have to know for 100% certainty that I will choose box a.
SteepDescent Thanks for the clarification. I assume that this is your argument:
1. If I *will* choose box B, my choice is predetermined
2. God knows I *will* choose box B.
3. I cannot contradict God's foreknowledge
4. I *will* choose box B (2&3)
5. Because I *will* choose box B, my choice is predetermined (1&4)
With this logic, I suppose our choices are indeed predetermined (if we assume premise 1 is true). However, the question asked in the video still remains: _"Is free will possible if God knows all of our thoughts and actions beforehand?"_ Notice that predetermination does not negate free will:
6. If I *must* chose box B, I have no free will
7. Since I *mustn't necessarily* choose box B, I *mustn't necessarily* have no free will.
It is key to note that *"will"* does not imply that I was forced into any action or given no other choice, while *"must"* does imply as such. The only reason that I cannot choose box A in the future is because I will _freely choose not to_ in the future. My future self freely predetermined my future action at the time of the future action. When my current self catches up to my future self, I will then be the current me that freely choses box B. It is fallacious to assume predetermination negates free will.
Therefore, the answer to the question above is "Yes, free will is possible even if God knows all of our thoughts and actions beforehand."
_"If I must chose box B, I have no free will"_
This is my argument, and if God is never wrong, then yes, I must necessarily always choose this box.
The reason you cannot do anything otherwise is because god's omniscience implies that time is a constant construct. This doesn't only apply to our choices, but to every event in the past, present and future. Those three states would be one in the same for God.
It would be impossible for the axis powers to win ww2, for example. Everything that has ever happened and ever will happen is 100% set in stone, and could never have been different. If the past or future could be different, then God would not be endowed with total omniscience. If you asked him, in the year 1000, who would win ww2, and he said anything other than "the allied forces", then he wouldn't have total omniscience. And so that would mean that the allied forces must, necessarily have won ww2. And you have conceded that this negates the doctrine of free will.
SteepDescent Your argument is my point number 6, which is a point that I refuted in 7. Therefore, argument number 6 fails, because it cannot be proven. Let's look at why prophesy exists, and how it relates to our actions and God's foreknowledge.
Let us first assume that we do have free will, meaning that our choices now and in the future are not forced (that we *mustn't necessarily* choose box B). At future time T, I will, out of my own free will, choose box B. My future self will freely choose box B, therefore creating a prophesy that at time T, I will choose box B. Since the prophesy is a result of my free will, it will never contradict my free will.
Therefore, the existence of the prophesy does not force my future decision, nor will it ever contradict my future decision. It simply exists as a result of my future decision. God, being unbound by time, has access to all prophesies (which are dictated by our free will decisions). Therefore, God is never wrong, but His omnipotence does not, to any degree, mean that I *must* necessarily choose box B. It just means I will.
To demand that free will requires me to be able to contradict a prophesy makes no sense, as the prophesy spawns from my future decision.
Understanding the nature of prophesies beautifully reconciles free will and God's foreknowledge.
There is no mechanism by which foreknowledge could possibly curtail anyone's free will.
If you walked into Willie Clawhands car dealership and asked about the life expectancy of a particular vehicle he was selling and you got a response that he had just presented. Would you buy from Willie Clawhands dealership?
Craig ignores the fact that God created the universe and its initial conditions. It is this rather than foreknowledge that makes God the author of our actions. However, a consequence of God's omniscient foreknowledge is that the universe must necessarily be deterministic, and libertarian free will cannot exist in a deterministic universe. So God's foreknowledge isn't irrelevant to the question of whether or not we have free will.
So to sum up the impossibility of free will with an omniscient being: if an omniscient being already know every single action you will do in your lifespan then free will is truly an impossible feat. Although, we may have the placebo effect in which we believe what we do is of our own violation, that is not a sound argument against not having free will. Thus this being a strong deterrent (at least for me) in believing in the Christian depiction of god.
It would have been helpful if Craig had defined "freedom" and "free will." There are various definitions of these terms, and it is not clear (to me) which one (compatibilist? libertarian? something else?) he is using.
So, then: our actions can change God's foreknowledge of them?
This paradox was demonstrated in Bruce Almighty - see: how many fingers am I holding-up
I though John Lennox answered this better. He poses it as a question. "if you were in a helicopter flying above a town and saw two cars on a collision course. you knew they were going to crash. does it follow that you caused it?"
+Just Curious
i think you missed the point. because gi know its going to happen is not the same as me CAUSING It to happen. so its not at all illogical.
+Just Curious
i still find your logic unsound. if you put broccoli and icecream infront of a child and asked him to pick you would know what he would pick. that doesnt make his choice meaningless nor does it make it an unfree act. similarly sin is to God. that is where grace comes into play. we can ask God for his grace to not do the bad he knew we would do. God Bless!
+Just Curious
still unsound. and i do believe that God could know we would do something, but give us the grace not to do it. which would mean He is the reason we didnt do something He knew, on our own, we would have done. there is nothing illogical about anything that I have said. this can all take place and God can still maintain His omnipotence.
+calm critic No one said God 'forces' anyone's action...
The fact that the future is foreseeable, by definition, means you cannot have a 'free choice' to do otherwise.
Logically that doesnt follow. You can still have free will, even if someone (God) knew what you are going to choose. Unless your actions are coerced you freely choose it whether or not it is forseen.
If god knows how everything is going to turn out, does he have the ability to change his own predestined outcome?
If god knows everything in advance and can't change it, how is he omnipotent?
If god cannot change outcomes or events, does god have free will?
Can an entity without free will be considered a god?
If god knows how everything is going to turn out, does he have the ability to change his own predestined outcome?
Your concept of god is limited by space/time constraints such as pre-destination.
If god knows everything in advance and can't change it, how is he omnipotent?
Your concept of God is not omnipotent.
If god cannot change outcomes or events, does god have free will?
Your concept of God has no free will.
Can an entity without free will be considered a god?
An entity lacking free will isn't even a human being, let alone god.
I conclude your concept of god doesn't work .
Try another or are you clinging to that particular limited concept .?
I'm asking if you have free will to choose.
jonesgerard You're confusing my concept of god with William Lane Craig's. It was his I was addressing, and I agree, it doesn't work.
George Forsyth
God is unchanging.
God is Perfect.
jonesgerard God is imaginary.
George Forsyth I wonder how long before Mr Christian here starts his display of cursing and swearing at you.
He's right by saying that his god is perfect and you're right to say it is imaginary.
Combine the two truths and you get the perfect imaginary god.
Clearly the christian god cannot be omnipotent since according to their scripture, he cannot forgive. He needs to be paid to forgive people's transgressions and he wants the payment in blood. But not just any blood but his own son's blood (which in fact is himself !?!)
1 Corinthians 13
Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not want what belongs to others. It does not brag. It is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor other people. It does not look out for its own interests. It does not easily become angry. It does not keep track of other people’s wrongs. 6 Love is not happy with evil. But it is full of joy when the truth is spoken. 7 It always protects. It always trusts. It always hopes. It never gives up.
So, is god in fact love?
Love does not look out for its own interests - as in creating people for the sole purpose of worshiping you, or as in making a plan before the creation of the universe that includes torture and killing of your only son !
Love does not keep track of other people’s wrongs. Does god keep track ?
Love It always protects. - tell that to those who were killed with the flood, the first born of Egypt (Egyptians or slaves) and the list can go on and on.
Love does not want what belongs to others. See, when those shitheads christians say to give your life and money to god, it's bullshit. God doesn't want what is yours, doesn't want your life, your mind or your money. Unless he isn't love. Is he?
Sure you can see more examples than that in just one chapter of their book.
All i see is childish insults on the comments. Where is your proof that god is not real because life is my proof that he is.
I think Craig overcomplicated it.
It's simple. Foreknowledge does not equal predestination , nor does it equal force.
Predestination implies that we have no choice, but we obviously do, and we aren't possessed and controlled and forced to do anything. If either of those things were true, then we wouldn't be responsible for anything, good or bad, that we have done.
Let’s think of how free will makes you evil. For example we are on the motorway and have the choice to exceed or not the limit. What are factors contributing to your decision? General background and instincts, knowledge from the past, brain performance (intelligence) that leads to rational calculation. Then you evaluate instincts over logic and make a decision. But the decision is still based on those factors you don’t have control over so what makes you evil?
i don't understand,if god foreknows what you're going to do then how does
it change your free will ? what you choose is still your choice right
The one Well supposedly god makes us each and decides where on the earth we are born. from this initial choice he can see the whole future of our lives not just one choice but all the choices we will make so essentially god could change the outcome of any of our lives depending on how he made us.
If as hes making you he sees if he puts you in Detroit you he can know if you will become a gang member but if he puts you somewhere else you could be a cop or something, He could change your personality or physical traits to succeed or fail as you are being made the future should be changing until he decides what your fate is by how and where he puts you.
He can see that maybe you almost got to heaven but you shaved your beard or wore clothes that aren't 100% cotton or satin, he could change this by making you more gullible to the religion. before you are made he should be seeing your future; if you go to heaven or hell...so essentially he chooses who gets to go as you are made because he can see past present and future.
The christian gods own overpowered abilities makes him obviously fake or at least obviously evil.
If God foreknows that I will do X, then how could I ever chose otherwise? If I had opted for Y, God would have foreknown that. God's omniscience necessitates that his foreknowledge is objectively true. By foreknowing all actions, those actions must occur or else they were never truly foreknown which means God was never a maximally great being.
Craig's argument seems to elevate human action over divine attributes.
this is the way I see free will as a common man.
A. God is all powerful (omnipotent)
B. God is omnipresent ( all places at all times)
C. God is omniscience. ( meaning all knowing)
People are over thinking this too much. God knows eternity past from eternity future. Just take it by faith. otherwise you will go bonkers in the head.
God knows I will sin tomorrow for how long and to the exact detail. this is why he is God and I am no. I am limited as a sinner saved by grace. I could die tomorrow but hope I do not sin and am found abiding in him.
I don't try to change fate or to change God's timeless character. I simply take the measure of faith God had given me and try to trust in his provision to lead a simple godly life. I am given a choice. I do not have foreknowledge but I can exercise foresight and attempt to exercise faith and self control not to sin. This is my sanctification.
God gave me the ability to have and make choices ( free will) this is common sense,
Most of us will not go after Phds in philosophy.
Read 1 Coritnthians 1:18-31
what does this mean to people? this destroys man;s atempts to understadn God fully.
that makes no sense Just curious.
WHY dont i have free will. I do have the option. god just does not interfere.
Maybe i misuderstood your comment
He proposes some kind of backwards causality - our actions causing God's foreknowledge.
The problem with this is that God created reality in the first place, so in the end "everything in creation" must be fully causally dependent on God. He could have created reality in which I choose X, or reality in which I choose Y. He chose to create one and not the other for his own reasons. Thus stopping me from choosing the other option.
Modal logic has its problems anyway.
Yeah right, thats like saying that my free choice of doing X is causing god to create reality where I will do X. That's nonsense because my free choice actually required the reality to exist before I choose X
@@levimark548 With Craig's argument, you are already making God's foreknowledge contingent on things that didn't happen yet or don't even exist yet, pre-creation. If God is a truly non-contingent being and everything else is contingent on him, then our natures, choices that are available to us and the circumstances in which these play out are all contingent on God.
God is not just supposed to be the Knowing One, he's also the Creating/Decreeing One.
If there are any circumstances in which I could have been saved, apparently he chose to create circumstances under which I'm not (and if there are no such possible worlds, then it's just bad design).
What you could claim though is that all those specific, individual human natures are not contingent on God - that they are somehow mathematically necessary and somehow outside of God's ability to mend once created. But all of that is implausible to say the least. That doesn't really make our choices free either. Some contingencies simply would exist outside of God.
I kind of think that maybe God doesnt "know" stuff the way we think. It's just that his mind has such computational power, it can assign a probability to every possible outcome, so it's not like a Psychic thing, it's a Math thing.