Question about intelligent design theory

[Cerpin Taxt]

God isn't restricted by time, he exists in the past/present/future. Why couldn't Hitler have free will?

Because all events are already known. They have been determined. You can't know something that is indeterminate.

I guess a reasonable question would be if God knew what Hitler was going to do, then why didn't he stop it. The reason, of course, is that if he did, Hitler would have ceased to have free will.

You haven't shown how Hitler could have free will. It isn't granted.

 

[02ranger]

You got it, and you are pretty much at the point where i was when i understood it after confirmation, see i'm Jewish by heritage but was raised Catholic, once i got the whole omniscience and "god has a plan for everyone and everything" part then i couldn't reconcile with the church anymore, led to being homeless at age 13 but all in all i'm better off because of it.

Thanks. Homeless at 13 sounds pretty rough. I've been raised Baptist. I don't know how they compare to jewish, but Baptists tend to take the more fundamental extreme views compared to Catholics. I see no problem with the idea that god used evolution and the big bang to create the universe/world and mankind. But the last time I brought that up at church or around family they started stoking the fire and looking for the good rope.

 

[bfdd]

That doesn't solve anything.

Design exists within a framework (that includes the design of frameworks). If God had to design instead of being able to act out arbitrarily, the question arises, who created the framework within he operates?

You can't get around either an infinite regression of designers or arbitrariness at some point. If nature's nature implies God, God's nature would imply God's God.

Theists would place the level of arbitrariness right above God. But that gives us an unneeded additional entity. By Occam's Razor we cut God and place the level of arbitrariness above Nature.

You do with less until more is needed. Gods are not needed.

So what you're saying is we need to like worship God's God? Interesting... how do we get a hold of him?

 

[MJinZ]

No. That is not a given. As has been adequately demonstrated, randomness is incompatible with the existence of a being with inerrant omniscience.


[/B]You can continue to repeat this as much as you can muster, but it doesn't get any less false with each repetition.
If the movie has been seen and it does not change, then there are no events other than what was seen in the movie. Everything has a probability of 1.

No. We're dealing with your inability to grasp a basic reductio. Please stay focused.

LOL, this is what I get with arguing with non-technical people.

In any given ONE timeline model of the Universe, the probability of everything that actually happens is 1. This is obvious.

In any given moment in time, the probability of something happening is not 1. When a dice is rolled on XYZ date and time, the probability of rolling a 6 is not 100%. This is mathematically, logically, and patently obviously FALSE.

What you are failing to understand is that to Sally, the moment she chooses a Red sweater, the probability is not 1. To GOD (the one you describe as omniscient), the probability is indeed ONE.

Here, I'll post it again:

Under the cosmological hypothesis of determinism, there is no randomness in the universe, only unpredictability, since there is only one possible outcome to all events in the universe. A follower of the narrow frequency interpretation of probability could assert that no event can be said to have probability, since there is only one universal outcome. On the other hand, under the rival Bayesian interpretation of probability there is no objection to the use of probabilities in order to represent a lack of complete knowledge of the outcomes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

No. That is not a given. As has been adequately demonstrated, randomness is incompatible with the existence of a being with inerrant omniscience.

[/B]You can continue to repeat this as much as you can muster, but it doesn't get any less false with each repetition.

Okay, I'll repeat it then, randomness and free will is completely compatible with an omniscient and infalliable God. Why you can't see it is a mystery.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Thanks. Homeless at 13 sounds pretty rough. I've been raised Baptist. I don't know how they compare to jewish, but Baptists tend to take the more fundamental extreme views compared to Catholics. I see no problem with the idea that god used evolution and the big bang to create the universe/world and mankind. But the last time I brought that up at church or around family they started stoking the fire and looking for the good rope.

My Grandparents are Baptists...I've heard the N word flung around a few times in my upbringing despite the fact that they are from northern NJ. Not exactly a tolerant religion by any stretch.

 

[her209]

Okay, I'll repeat it then, randomness and free will is completely compatible with an omniscient and infalliable God. Why you can't see it is a mystery.

So God knows (omniscient) what he doesn't know (your actions via free will) before he knows it?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

My Grandparents are Baptists...I've heard the N word flung around a few times in my upbringing despite the fact that they are from northern NJ. Not exactly a tolerant religion by any stretch.

Come on, seriously, you are going to judge a whole denomination by your grandparents?

 

[MJinZ]

So God knows (omniscient) what he doesn't know (your actions via free will) before he knows it?

This is possible if free will chooses randomness. A theoretical omniscient God will know I will pick a Red Sweater tomorrow because I chose to go with a random colored sweater. Though it was 50/50 chance of going Red or Blue, as I exist under God's unique one and only space-time, it is 100% certain to God that I will be wearing a Red Sweater.

 

[02ranger]

Okay, I'll repeat it then, randomness and free will is completely compatible with an omniscient and infalliable God. Why you can't see it is a mystery.

It isn't completely compatible though. If God is omniscient we can't have free will because we can't make a decision different from God's knowledge. One thing negates the other.

We'll take Hitler as an example. If God knew Hitler was going to attack the jews, and knew everything else as well, then it stands that God is omniscient. That means that God knew millions of years ago that Adolf Hitler would attack the jews and everything else that he did. How could he have possibly chosen to do anything different? If he had, then God's no longer omniscient because he didn't know that Hitler would do something different. You can't have an all-knowing God and people with free will. Your example of your son doesn't hold up because you're not all-knowing.

(Sorry if this doesn't make a lot of sense, I'm getting tired)

 

[MJinZ]

It isn't completely compatible though. If God is omniscient we can't have free will because we can't make a decision different from God's knowledge. One thing negates the other.

We'll take Hitler as an example. If God knew Hitler was going to attack the jews, and knew everything else as well, then it stands that God is omniscient. That means that God knew millions of years ago that Adolf Hitler would attack the jews and everything else that he did. How could he have possibly chosen to do anything different? If he had, then God's no longer omniscient because he didn't know that Hitler would do something different. You can't have an all-knowing God and people with free will. Your example of your son doesn't hold up because you're not all-knowing.

(Sorry if this doesn't make a lot of sense, I'm getting tired)

Replace "Omniscient God" with "Omniscient Monkey" and everything works fine, because a Monkey can't do anything to change things.

There is no reason why we can't have an All knowing Monkey and free will. The issue here is knowledge, not the power.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

It isn't completely compatible though. If God is omniscient we can't have free will because we can't make a decision different from God's knowledge. One thing negates the other.

God knows but we don't know what he knows. We're free to make whatever decision we want.

We'll take Hitler as an example. If God knew Hitler was going to attack the jews, and knew everything else as well, then it stands that God is omniscient. That means that God knew millions of years ago that Adolf Hitler would attack the jews and everything else that he did. How could he have possibly chosen to do anything different?

God's knowing what Hitler would do didn't negate his free will.

If he had, then God's no longer omniscient because he didn't know that Hitler would do something different.

You can't have an all-knowing God and people with free will. Your example of your son doesn't hold up because you're not all-knowing.

I'm not all-knowing, but in the analogy, I knew with certainty how my son would react in that situation.

(Sorry if this doesn't make a lot of sense, I'm getting tired)

Make sense?

 

[DominionSeraph]

[/INDENT]A theoretical Omniscient God knowing what the answer to the question (a random dice roll) is does not invalidate the fact that the dice roll operates independently of the God based solely on Randomness.

This isn't about an interaction with omniscience, it's about the interaction with the quality of time which allows for omniscience. And the die roll cannot be independent of Time.

If the timeline is set, you do not have six options each with a 0.166666 chance of occurring. You have one event with a probability of 1.0 and five with a probability of 0.0.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Come on, seriously, you are going to judge a whole denomination by your grandparents?

Look, I love my grandparents (I'm amazed they're still alive) but I've never been a big fan of baptists...sorry. I've known a great many and been immersed in that religion along with the methodist faith from an early age and I think it's all a bunch of horseshit. Not exactly the same horseshit but very similar horseshit. It weighs about the same when you're shoveling it.

 

[DominionSeraph]

So what you're saying is we need to like worship God's God? Interesting... how do we get a hold of him?

*slowly draws arm across the air, trailing rainbow*

Imagination!

 

[MJinZ]

This isn't about an interaction with omniscience, it's about the interaction with the quality of time which allows for omniscience. And the die roll cannot be independent of Time.

If the timeline is set, you do not have six options each with a 0.166666 chance of occurring. You have one event with a probability of 1.0 and five with a probability of 0.0.

Yes, I don't disagree with this.

However, I think what you and others are arguing is that just because the Omniscience knows what I will choose to do, it actually invalidates the choosing itself.

If I had to eat something for breakfast, I go through a process - random or not (the randomness argument I made was to primarily break determinism) is still a choice I have to make that that moment - Eggs, Orange, Milk, Ice Cream, or Steak.

If you're saying that Omniscience prevents the very action of the moment - my choice involving admittedly, not so random factors - that I can not agree with. I still have to go through the motions to make the choice. Or I can leave it up to the Universe (randomness) to make it for me.

The idea that an Omniscient Monkey up there knows I'm going to be eating Steak for breakfast isn't incompatible with the fact that I'm still sitting here using a number generator or deciding based on my weight what I'm going to eat. Assuming you can accept even the possibility of an Omniscient monkey.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Look, I love my grandparents (I'm amazed they're still alive) but I've never been a big fan of baptists...sorry. I've known a great many and been immersed in that religion along with the methodist faith from an early age and I think it's all a bunch of horseshit. Not exactly the same horseshit but very similar horseshit. It weighs about the same when you're shoveling it.

I think that are good sorts and bad sorts in any denomination.

I respect any church, regardless of the denomination, that holds to the fundamental tenets of the faith.

 

[02ranger]

Make sense?

You're missing the point. Forget Hitler. If God knows everything past, present, and future, then we can't do anything to negate his knowledge. Either he knows what we'll do or he doesn't. If I have the option to do whatever I want, then God can't know what I'm going to do because if he knows without a doubt what I'll do then I don't have free will. If I can truly do anything that I want then God can't know everything.

It took me this long to understand the point John was making. When I finally did understand it it wasn't because I'm some genius, it just kinda clicked. Maybe it'll just kinda click for you, or maybe you'll think of a way to explain your point of view that makes me think you're right. Like I said earlier, I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong. I just don't believe I'm wrong on this point.

 

[02ranger]

Come on, seriously, you are going to judge a whole denomination by your grandparents?

I have to say I agree with him for the most part. Most Baptists that I've met are VERY opinionated and very loud about it. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when you combine that with the fact that I'm from the south it makes for some "interesting" Baptists. lol

 

[DominionSeraph]

If you're saying that Omniscience prevents the very action of the moment - my choice involving admittedly, not so random factors - that I can not agree with. I still have to go through the motions to make the choice.

The problem is that if there was never a time that the outcome was not known, there was no first "you" to make a choice. The movie of the universe never went through the process of being filmed, it simply has always existed as film.
That the movie of your life shows you going through the motions of making a choice does not mean you ever had a choice. For you to have ever had choice, at some point the outcome had to be in question.
"What will he choose? He could choose X or he could choose Y!"
If the outcome was never in question, there is no "could". There is either did or did not. There was never a future of endless possibilities, only a singular past of banal actuality.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Here, I'll post it again:

Under the cosmological hypothesis of determinism, there is no randomness in the universe, only unpredictability, since there is only one possible outcome to all events in the universe. A follower of the narrow frequency interpretation of probability could assert that no event can be said to have probability, since there is only one universal outcome. On the other hand, under the rival Bayesian interpretation of probability there is no objection to the use of probabilities in order to represent a lack of complete knowledge of the outcomes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability

You don't seem to understand what you're quoting.
It's referencing a deterministic system, so there's no free will there. There is no choice at all. The unpredictability it mentions refers to the fact that the inhabitants cannot model the deterministic universe with 100% accuracy for practical reasons. It does NOT say that unpredictability is an internal quality of a deterministic universe. (LOL)
The limitations of the inhabitants presents to them the illusion of probability and so allows for the illusion of free will, but neither probability nor free will actually exists.

To use your terms:
Sally, the moment she picks a red sweater, THINKS that the probability is not 1.
But it is.
Deterministic universe FTL.

 

[her209]

This is possible if free will chooses randomness. A theoretical omniscient God will know I will pick a Red Sweater tomorrow because I chose to go with a random colored sweater. Though it was 50/50 chance of going Red or Blue, as I exist under God's unique one and only space-time, it is 100% certain to God that I will be wearing a Red Sweater.

That makes no sense, but I'll play along. Instead of a "red sweater", let's change it to "adultery". If God knows I will cheat on my wife, but I don't know it until I actually do it (which is predestination btw) so its appears as free will to me, then can it really be held against me?

 

[DominionSeraph]

nm

 

[DominionSeraph]

Replace "Omniscient God" with "Omniscient Monkey" and everything works fine, because a Monkey can't do anything to change things.

There is no reason why we can't have an All knowing Monkey and free will.

Completely wrong.
This has nothing to do with power. Only the prerequisites for knowledge. Those prerequisites are what are incompatible with free will.

If the conditions exist for the future to be knowable, the conditions do NOT exist for the future to be choosable.

And I can't believe it took you this long to get to, "They're arguing that God forces you to do things." That takes me back to my high school days on the AOL forums, because that idea was the first stop of EVERY fundie to enter a free will debate.
Why are you just getting to the Fisher Price version now? You were actually at a decent level a page ago, and now you bring out, "My First Argument"?

 

[sao123]

It isn't completely compatible though. If God is omniscient we can't have free will because we can't make a decision different from God's knowledge. One thing negates the other.

The quantum double slit experiment would disagree with your assertion.

All possible choices have, are, and will be made, until the choice is actually observed.

Free choice and omnipotance are not mutually exclusive, because all possible choices are taken, and every possible outcome is known.