The Problem of Free Will, A Theological Problem. Options

[NoSex]

Alright, the purpose of this thread is to discuss the theological Problem of Free Will. So, under common christian theolgy, God is described as being all-knowing (omniscient) and all powerful (omnipotent). Men are also described as having free will. This is at the heart of the reality of theological fatalism. Solving this issue is vital to christian theology as it becomes an inherent contradiction as well as threatening to the christian conception of salvation and damnation.

I hold that God's infallible foreknowledge makes impossible man's free will. If god knows the future, how can we choose our own path?

Discuss.

[illumineering]

Latent knowledge does not interfere with choice as it does not inherently effect causation. This issue presents no fundamental problem. As long as God does not influence individual choice, free will remains.

[NoSex]

Latent knowledge does not interfere with choice as it does not inherently effect causation. This issue presents no fundamental problem. As long as God does not influence individual choice, free will remains.

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.