Free will: an illusion

This is my position although I wouldn't so quickly reject Codegates reference to 'multiple timelines'. Following that line might reveal something of the mechanism whereby "God is all knowing yet we have choice". If there was x amount of options truly open to us (in other words, the totality of the result of human activity and interaction could have followed any number of quite different possibilities) then our choice determined that it would be the way it is. He knew everyway it could be (free will within boundaries as I was saying before) - and he knew which of those it would be.His knowing which path it would be doesn't affect the fact that our choices led us down one of the many, many possible paths we could have taken.

It just struck me. It seems to me that "if what will be will be" is true then what will be will be and no one should concern themselves too much about it. If I (for example) end up in heaven and you (for example) end up in hell because we were destined to end up there (without our having a part in proceedings) then that is just the way it is.God would have exercised his sovereign choice, destined this one and that for whatever reason he had in mind. There would be of course no injustice in him picking as he likes. We are simply items of his manufacture, made for whatever reason and his to do with as he pleases.Whats the big deal if we do not, in fact, have free will?

For the record my position is that if saved God has chosen us and if damned we have rejected God. Free will allows this. In that case you are not obliged to enter hell. You choose to go there.But if your position was correct: Then there is no reason why you should worship him - you have no free choice to worship him. You are destined not to worship him (not that pre-destined worship makes any sense: I can programme my computer to say "Iano you are the best, Iano you are the greatest" but it's not really the computer worshipping me - its me worshipping me. And as the old proverb goes "self praise is no praise at all" Why so mournful? You seem to express a want, a desire, a will. But at the same time you know you haven't got wants, desires and a will - these thoughts are only determined by God. He has his reasons for it being so and if its good enough for him then what will be will be. Even your pre-determined thinking of him as cruel is simply (according to you) him making you think that way. You are not making a free choice. You certainly have no reason to suppose he is being cruelYou could chose to look on the bright side however. You could chose to dump this notion that you have no free will. As soon as you do so bright skys open up ahead. There IS light at the end of the tunnel. You are currently on a path to destruction - okay, that is the way it is. But it doesn't have to be so. You too can be saved.That's why the Gospel is called Good News! Edited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Fair enough. I was dealing with the assumptions we started with and was pointing out that the consequential thinking of that core conclusion ("no free will") can't actually follow from that conclusionWhat does the conclusion DO in fact. Do any consequences flow from it?

Can we work this is one direction: God is all knowing is the assumption and no free will is the consequence. Assuming free will and concluding God is not all knowing is a different issue - for the assumptions have changed. This is the primary conclusion. I know this is what you hold. My question is what else can be drawn from that. What comment about the 'fairness' of one being saved and the other not. Or asking the question "why should I worship a God like that?"What sub-conclusions can you draw from the primary one - if anyEdited by iano, : No reason given.

Thank you. You have no control for something to be completely outside it.How does one apply concepts of fairness and justice to God who would is simply exercising his right to deal with products he manufactures. Is is fair to squash a complex play-dough models when one tires of them? Hell being the squashing processIf those thoughts are pre-configured to occur then where do objectivity judgement that something is fair or not come from? Punishment implies right and wrong - but you have done no right or wrong you have done what you must do. That concept too must be eliminated Damnation too implies punishment.Can you begin to see that there are no sub-conclusions to be drawn? That there is no 'one' to draw them? That the conclusion is hollow in that is says nothing of use?

It's a concept that would blow my mind were it only true. Briefly: assuming it was the case for a moment, wouldn't that mean that initial conditions a long long time ago were such so as to ensure I would type what I am typing now and also that which I will type tomorrow? The very first hints of a person convicted by the holy spirit of their guilt. Heart warming.

This is not semantics. "I have no control..." is a sub-conclusion. Accepting this sub-conclusion you cannot then apply something you haven't got as something which is being overridden by Gods choice. Another sub-conclusion is that you are a machine. Use the words which your conclusion demands of you. Is it fair to send a machine to the scrap yard when one has no more use for it. You ascribe yourself a value when the sub-conclusion demands you have none in particular. Or at least none other than what the machine maker ascribes it Another sub-conclusion is that we have no point of view. Our view is determined. We will say 'not fair' because that is determined - not because it is actually unfair. We might as easily say it is fair - were we so determined. Even our words are not our own. So why ascribe worth to what they say (sorry for my overuse of the word ascribe) Another discussion for another day. What we are dealing with is whether "God being all knowing renders our free will an illusion". The answer cannot be Yes.Edited by iano, : clarify

Bump for the message I am replying to

Okay - can't picture it myself. But assuming that there is no choice in the sense we mean choice but it is more "what will be will be (or in GR, is already or already has been or whatever", how do we arrive at a knowledge that that is the way it is - if the knowledge that that is the way it is was determined to be - whether it is that way or not? I didn't: Hallelujah Considered as a black sheep but still a sheep I imagine

If one is holding to the assumption of Q.1 and affirms the conclusion then there is no tecnnically about it. That is the way it is. But technically, you accept the sub-conclusions that follow on from the main conclusion - now try telling that to Crevo will ya Not if your are assuming the assumption and affirming the conclusion. You must (as you are doing) suspend affirming the conclusion of Q.1 in order to comment using logic and reason etc. This means the conclusion cannot actually in fact be. If it were then you couldn't step outside it to comment. Edited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : edit to add sub-conclusion

Maybe the problem lies in the understanding of the word foreknowing. If one takes the view that choices haven't been made yet by us but God can see into the future and thus foreknow then you could well have a point. But is that the only way to picture it?God is eternal - and that (possibly means) that there is no past, present and future for him. Time wouldn't elapse for him as it does for us.God would look at every moment of our lives as still frames on a piece of film. He knows what our choice is not because he is looking into the future but because he is looking at the present. Him looking at the present doesn't mean we weren't the ones exposing each frame on the film. We exposed, are exposing, will expose each frame and are free to do so. God, in eternity simply observes each frame that we have already exposed.All our decisions are already made in eternity. We just haven't made them yet in time. But they are our decisions whenever it is they get made. It doesn't matter which decisions we do make. That will just affect a film in the making (in time) which is already made (in eternity)A time vs eternity issue. Not lack of free willEdited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : insert (possibly means)

I don't see the necessity for determinism. You are forcing the two concepts time/eternity into one.You are failing to keep separate the time and eternal dimensions in your post. You are a character in a book that is being written by you (via your choices) in time. The book is already written in eternity. You are free to write the book any way you like but whichever way you do that is the book that God is viewing. No matter which way you WILL chose to write it, that is the book he IS viewingHis being able to view the whole completed book (perpetual present in eternity) doesn't mean you cannot write it anyway you like (future in time)Edited by iano, : No reason given.

See message 298. Time for the fat lady to sing-a-ling

Of course, whilst you are in the process of writing the book of your life, God can give your arm a nudge so that you write it slightly differently. Give you a nudge down a certain route (leading to him), you can accept the nudge and follow and be saved. Or you can re-set the course to the one you yourself wanted to followFree will but subject to influence and intervention (Satan gets to nudge you too). Whatever way it gets written though, he sees it already.Funny, God knows if you will be saved and you don't. And today (in time) he nudges you in his direction whilst knowing (in eternity) whether your salvation will occur or not. Time/eternity. Edited by iano, : No reason given.