Free will: an illusion

So it doesn't really make god capricious, it just makes god capricious from the human perspective. Of course you couldn't tell if it was random or not, but not knowing doesn't mean you should assume its random.

Unknowable to omniscience but knowable to omnipotence (becuase omnipotence has the power to control the future and make it knowable).I guess you could to say it moves the goalposts but I don't think so. not to me. I don't think the future exists until it becomes the present and then it immediately becomes the past. Right, but if I want to argue that free will does exist, I can't use a movie as an analogy. It is not, IMHO. I know there's the whole 4d universe with a fixed future theory, like Ned posted about, I just don't agree with it. Yeah, even I can know the past.

Evidence!? What are you talking about? There is no evidence in this discussion.Anyways...Let's say you don't know if the next decision you make is predetermined or freely willed becuase god could either know or not know the decision you're gonna make, so, you assume that god is randomly deciding to know or not? That doesn't make any sense.Of course you cannot tell the difference, so if you want to pick one or the other, you could just pick randomly, but that doesn't mean god is picking randomly.IMO, most of the decisions are based on free will and only a small fraction of them are pre-determined by god. So, if I had to pick I would say that it is probably a decision by free will.

Its not contradictory to me because I think omniscience is limited to that which is possible to know. Umm, no. You got it backwards. If something doesn't exists then it simply can't be known, in the context of omniscience and the future.

Because then god is an asshole.He predetermined the life of a little jewish boy to be one of torture in a concentration camp and then damnation for all eternity. What an asshole!ABE: I don't mean to imply that all jews are damned.Edited by Catholic Scientist, : see ABE

I'm placing limits on omniscience.Is omniscience limitless?I would say no. Could it just include everything and not neccessarily everywhen? It isn't clear. I don't think it is. No, anything can't NOT be a part of everything but some things can (not be a part of everything) and these are things that do not exist, because they are not things to begin with. The future is one of these things, IMO. Better now?

I guess not. Yeah, I was saying earlier we could have a thread on just what omniscience includes, but I think we've pretty much worked it out here, it comes down to an opinion. No free will.That we don't really have free will and it seems like we do, the OP is correct in that it could be called an illusion.That or god isn't omniscient, because it sure does seem like I have free will.My original post in this thread was without reading the OP and really only disagree with the interpretation of the definition of omniscience. Omnipotence. Yeah, I realized that affter I read the OP (after I had already began discussing). Other than what omniscince includes.

It works though, yeah?Why is it so humorous?