That's the problem. When the issue is pushed it reaches a point of absurdity where the definition of a christian God implodes in on itself. Given the premise that God is all knowing, analytically we can not have free will. The issue is that choice is simply an illusion, there is no interference because there was no choice in the first place. Since there is no individual choice in the first place, God can't even begin to influence "it."

The bigger issue is that, what you are saying makes sense. But, when you add the definition of God to the equation, it becomes a contradiction. This individual choice disapears in the face of God's omniscience. It only goes to highlight the meaninglessness and incoherency of the christian God. To develope the argument further, I will demonstrate what I mean exactly.

A1:
1 (p1). Free will is the ability to voluntarily choose.
2 (p2). Choice is the ability to decide among a varitety of options.
3 (p3). There must be at least two options for a choice to be present.
4 (p4). There must be a choice for there to be free will.
5 (c1). Therefor, there must be more than two possible options to choose from for there to be free will.

A2:
1 (p1). God is a perfectly omniscient being.
2 (p2). Men exist.
3 (p3). Men are active.
4 (c2). Because of God's omnisience, God has perfect foreknowledge of the activity of men.

A3:
1 (p1). A man does X.
2 (c2). Because of God's omniscience, God knows that the man will do X.
3 (c1). Free will requires that the man could have done otherwise.
4 (p2). If the man would have done otherwise, it would have made God wrong (imperfect).
5 (p3). It is impossible to make God imperfect or wrong.
6 (c3). Therefor, it would have been impossible for the man to have done otherwise.

A4:
1 (c1). There must be more than two options to choose from for there to be free will.
2 (c2). God knows that man will always do X.
3 (c3). Since God knows man will always do X, he has no other option aside from X.
4 (c4). Since man has no other option aside from X, he fails to have free will.

That was very messy, I must admit. But to put it neatly:
By definition of the terms we are dealing with, men can not have free will given that God is omniscient. Free will requires that we have a choice. Choice requires that we have options. If God has perfect foreknowledge of the activity of men, we can not do anything other than what God knows, because it would be impossible to make God wrong. This creates the illusion of choice. Imagine two "options." Imagine two doors.

(D1) (D2)

Before us we appear to have two options and a free choice between them. If God did not know before hand that we would move into D1 then that would be true. However, God does know that we are going to into D1, so D2 fails to remain and option, because it would be impossible to take D2. To take D2 would mean to make God false, and this is a power we do not have. Because of this, it is an impossibility. And, since it is an impossibility, it can not be an option.

Now, this is what the model looks like:

(D1)

The only "option" is D1. Since there is not a variety of options, there is no choice, and since there is no choice there is no Free Will. It is an entirely analytical argument and can not be refuted unless, of course, someone could demonstrate how it would be possible to take D2 or why there is more than one option.

This doesn't have anything to do with predestination. This has nothing to do with Calvinism. This has nothing to do with Heaven or Hell or even omnipotence. In the end, it's just about the definitions of God, and the meaning behind free will and choice. This is about the implications of God's perfect foreknowledge on the analytical framework of a logical sentence. Because to say, under all of these definitions and concepts, that we can still have fee will under an omniscient God makes no sense.

i took a shit on the playground slide.

^

Please don't spam.

Bad arguement. If I knew you were going to the grocery store, and had the power to stop you via giving you a flat tire or some other way, but I chose not to, does that mean I have partially decided your fate?

If someone had a gun, but chose not to shoot at someone, did that person decide the other person's fate, thus taking away free will?

but you are not all powerful. if you decide not to shoot me, someone else might still.

if god decides something, it's that. there's no possibility of something else happening, because he's allpowerful.

which is why i'm saying an all-powerful and all-knowing god precludes free-will.

Lol.

I'm not all that religious, but like I said before, free will just simply means that you make the decision yourself; no one else is making it for you.

I don't see what someone knowing about it has to do with anything.

It's like saying you didn't have the free will to pick your favorite color of shoes because your friend figured you would pick that color anyway. Just because she knows your personality and knew you'd probably go with the blue instead of the red, does that mean she's deciding your fate? Not really.

I do think that "free will" is a bunch of crap anyway, though. I don't think it's fair for God to let us do whatever and then we get punished for it. It's like parents who let their kids do whatever they want and then yell at them when they get home too late.

It's fine if he knows AFTER the event happens; that would make sense. But, God supposedly knows your entire existence before anything happens to you. If he knows exactly what's going to happen to you and it's all a part of your plan, where does the free will come in? You can't change anything in God's plan.

{ sigh }

I don't really see this debate going much farther..I'll keep saying that free will is about YOU making the decision, and you'll keep saying that there's no free will if God knows the future.

So whatever.

Read my argument at the top of this page. It seems like you havn't read it yet.

yes, the whole "i can still choose even though my friend knows what i will choose" thing will work. except your friend isn't all powerful or all knowing.

god is.

I suppose I'll post the link again, since people have ignored it.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06259a.htm#cat

I'm still a little confused, Nate. I understand completely what your basic stance was at the top of the page, but why does there have to be more than two options for there to be free will? Shouldn't there be free will to pick between door 1 and door 2?

well,yeah, obviously.

but your response didnt fit...

two of the stipulations nate pointed out were omniscience and omnipotence. i was saying the two can cancel themselves out.

saying ther could be a god, but we dont have free wilkl didnt make sense to me as a repsonse to the whole post

I still don't get the reasoning behind the argument. Let's say you wanted to go outside and stand on your head in the rain while singing "Afternoon Delight". This is obviously something that I doubt anyone has done, but if you wanted to do it, you could. You're saying that, "analytically", if God knows you're going to go do this foolish thing, you didn't make the choice?

That makes such vague and completely stupid sense.

Yeah, I think that's basically what they're saying. They're saying that God already has a path led out for you so there's no way you can stray.

But you know, it also makes me wonder..what if God knows a basic plan of our lives, not every little detail? Like, what if he knows that you will go to a certain place, but he doesn't necessarily know that you will take door number 1? Kind of a stupid arguement..nevermind.

And people will continue to ignore it if you don't summarize it.






Oh yea, I saw this on Wiki, thought it interesting, and was wondering if someone, preferably a Christian will answer it.
"Assuming that an individual had no choice in who, when and where to come into being: How are the choices of existence determined by what he is?" [wikipedia]

I read your signature. <3Fae.

QUOTE

Yeah, I think that's basically what they're saying. They're saying that God already has a path led out for you so there's no way you can stray.

But you know, it also makes me wonder..what if God knows a basic plan of our lives, not every little detail? Like, what if he knows that you will go to a certain place, but he doesn't necessarily know that you will take door number 1? Kind of a stupid arguement..nevermind.

That wouldn't make him omniscient, would it?

well not necessarily...

just because you ARE something, doesnt mean you have to employ it all the time...

just because im not bending over backwards at the moment doesnt mean imnot flexible, for instance

Yeah, I think that's what I meant.

But knowledge isn't something you can choose to turn on and off. If you know something, you know something. I know the quadratic formula; I can not use it for a really long time and forget it, but that's not my choice of when to forget it, and I'd still know it if someone jogged my memory.

this argument makes me smile, such lame arguments... why do u rely on articles and online encyclopedias to make your point?

How do you write an argument involving facts, or debunk a widely accepted belief without any source to back up your claims when one is needed? If people just pull statistics or a claim of truth out of their ass, no one's going to think their argument's credible. And then there's the problem that your stance on the topic has already been argued/explained for. What's the point of rewriting that same argument when it hasn't been refuted?

Arguments are built on supporting arguments.

If you have a better argument, by all means, go ahead and introduce it.

Pretty much what they said. ^

And I think it's pretty lame too to just come in a debate complaining about how lame the arguements are when you yourself have nothing new to offer.