Let's talk about predestination

scorpia · Post by **scorpia** » Wed Dec 29, 2004 6:45 pm

for once I'll just like to see what everyone has to say. Beliefs in predestination tend to vary, from total to nil. Well here's a couple of things I'd like to ask to all; If God is predestinating everyone, how far would this predestination go? Would he be manipulating our actions into so many situations for who knows what reason? Would he go so far as to manipulate what we think? He is omnipotent, so if he can manipulate everyone into becoming a christian, why doesn't he?

And for those who don't believe in god or predestination; Who's to say time isn't already set? Just considering the possibility that time may be predestined and set in stone once the universe was formed, with or without God.

Bro Dave · Post by **Bro Dave** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:47 am

juliod wrote:You must know that you cannot prove that there is no God.
Why would you say that? I admit that in order to conclusively prove that some version of god does not exist I have to wait for a theist to define their god. But since all known gods are full of massive internal conflicts (such as the Problem of Evil and the Omniscience/Free-will Paradox) I am not aware of any god that could be described as "possibly real".

GOD IS DEAD! So read the NY Times one day in the '60's. And, it was true. But then, this process has been going on since mankind appeared. We have always created our current version of God to reflect our best vision from our current highest morality, and best culture. But, after some time we realizing we've missed the mark again. It never ends. That is because our finite attempts to define the I-N-F-I-N-I-T-E are doomed to fail. This process has zero affect on God, but it is a growth marker for mortal mankind.
The perceived "problems" you mentioned, and because of assumptions you have made about God. His existance is absolute, and completely outside of time and space. He created us as an "excape" from this absoluteness, where he could participate in the one area God has a limitation; growth. So, sure, from His perspective, it can all be a "done deal", and completely known. However, God has chosen NOT to know, and has invited us to go adventuring with Him in eternity!
His reasons for our creation may not be as simple as this, but this is a part of it. If you are sincerely curious, not just jaded, you might find this link of interest;
http://www.urantiabook.org/newbook/toc_p1.html#god

It is entirely a personal experience, open to all, but limited to those who choose to want to know God.
Is that the same thing as saying that god is a made-up "invisible friend"?

Sure, except there is no need to "make-up" this friend. Of course His friendship is up to you. If you don't seek it, you will not find it.

Bro Dave

scorpia · Post by **scorpia** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:02 am

okay, I've been wanting to refrain from this argument and focus more on observing, but greenlight's no free will theory, which I also skimmed through in the other thread just makes me want to ask another question; Can love exist without free will?

The first two problems are created by religion, and since there is no god, we can ignore them.

We?

juliod · Post by **juliod** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 10:26 am

The first two problems are created by religion, and since there is no god, we can ignore them.

We?

We, meaning the author and the readers.

DanZ

chrispalasz · Post by **chrispalasz** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 12:16 am

scorpia wrote: Can love exist without free will?

Hahaha

This question is impossible to answer!

First, we would all have to agree on a definition of love! If we all take different definitions and perspectives of love... we'll go in loops! Love is one of those great philosophies... argued and sought after just like religion.

Of course my answer to this quesiton is a big fat YES. Ignoring one side for a moment: God's love will ALWAYS exist - and He has free will. If God's love is the only love... then love exists without free will because it is known that Christian love is God's love. God loves people and things through Christians, and without God, I'm not so sure I can say that a person does have love, except maybe a love of sin.

Bro Dave · Post by **Bro Dave** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 12:50 am

GreenLight311 wrote:
Of course my answer to this quesiton is a big fat YES. Ignoring one side for a moment: God's love will ALWAYS exist - and He has free will. If God's love is the only love... then love exists without free will because it is known that Christian love is God's love. God loves people and things through Christians, and without God, I'm not so sure I can say that a person does have love, except maybe a love of sin.
Excuse me, I don't mean to be confrontational, but you seem to be implying that all of God's love is channeled exclusively through Christians. Does that not seem a bit egotistical, not to mention untrue? God floods all his universe with his Love, and all are expected to share in that love by passing it on, regardless of labels.

Bro Dave

chrispalasz · Post by **chrispalasz** » Wed Jan 05, 2005 2:51 am

Hey Bro Dave,

Well, I won't pretend to agree with you on everything

But you have a good point here. I'm not so sure. I'll have to look into it more and see what the Bible says about it.

Dilettante · Post by **Dilettante** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 8:44 pm

On this issue, apart from the Catholic philosophers mentioned by Greenlight (thanks, Greenlight)

there is another, a Spanish Jesuit called Molina (1535-1600) who proposed a very original concept to reconcile free will and God's foreknowledge. Molina writes about God having "middle knowledge" (scientia media) in addition to the other two types of knowledge mentioned by Aquinas. This means that God has knowledge of the actual events and also the possible events, but there is an intermediate type of divine knowledge, falling between the preceding two. That is knowledge of events which would have been actual had certain counterfactual conditions been true. In other words, God also knows what policies Kennedy would have implemented (e.g. about Vietnam) had he not been assasinated.

Sounds plausible. That way we don't have to accept the doctrine of predestination, free will is preserved, and so is responsibility for our actions. With predestination and without free will, it would make little sense for God to hold us accountable for actions and life decisions we couldn't have failed to choose.

bernee51 · Post by **bernee51** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 10:32 pm

Dilettante wrote:On this issue, apart from the Catholic philosophers mentioned by Greenlight (thanks, Greenlight) there is another, a Spanish Jesuit called Molina (1535-1600) who proposed a very original concept to reconcile free will and God's foreknowledge. Molina writes about God having "middle knowledge" (scientia media) in addition to the other two types of knowledge mentioned by Aquinas. This means that God has knowledge of the actual events and also the possible events, but there is an intermediate type of divine knowledge, falling between the preceding two. That is knowledge of events which would have been actual had certain counterfactual conditions been true. In other words, God also knows what policies Kennedy would have implemented (e.g. about Vietnam) had he not been assasinated. Sounds plausible. That way we don't have to accept the doctrine of predestination, free will is preserved, and so is responsibility for our actions. With predestination and without free will, it would make little sense for God to hold us accountable for actions and life decisions we couldn't have failed to choose.

Perhaps I have a misunderstansing of the term omniscience. I was of the belief that it meant "knows everything". If that is the case there cannot be "actual events and posasible events". Possible events implies that they may or may not happen. Omniscience would seem to preclude this possibility. God, to know what Kennedy would have done had he not been assassinated is allowing for the possibility that he was not. God, in his omniscience, would have known that he would be.

God also knew there was no WMD...why didn't he tell the Shrub and save a lot of lives? Lives of his beloved creations.

Dilettante · Post by **Dilettante** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:27 am

bernee51, I don't know if I am qualified to explain the theory of "middle knowledge" very well (when it comes to philosophy I'm at basically beginner level). But I'll give it a shot.

Imagine God has a TV set (to anyone reading this who might be offended, I'm not implying that God is a couch potato in any way). God, of course, has a remote control to flip between three channels (well, this is a simplified version I guess). One channel is called "Natural Knowledge" and its contents must necessarily be the way they are. Those contents include all things which are necessarily true, like mathematical axioms, truths of logic, etc. God cannot alter the programs on this channel because their truth precedes God's will. On God's TV this channel is stored with the number 1.

There is another channel (stored as number 3) called "Free Knowledge". The contents of this third channel are God's decision inasmuch as they are contingent upon what kind of world God has chosen to create. This is what happens in our world, the world as it is, and it includes human free will. George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq (a war of choice after all) is featured on this channel.

Now, there is also an intermediate channel stored as channel 2 and which we will call "Middle knowledge". On this channel God can watch what would happen if certain conditions are fulfilled (perhaps a prime time feature would be Kennedy's decision to deploy more soldiers in Vietnam, followed by Kennedy's decision to withdraw all troops, and perhaps Kennedy's decision to drop the H bomb on Ho-Chi-Minh City. Not that those things are really happening (they can't be) but God is able to see them anyway as in a vision or a blueprint for things which may or may not materialize. By watching this "Middle knowledge" channel God can decide whether or not to make adjustments to channel 3, such as telling "W" there are no "WMD" in "I" as opposed to not telling him and allowing Saddam to stay in power. Only God knows what comes next, after the break. He has both the remote control AND the TV Guide.

So God is omniscient but free will is preserved. Now, If I've done a botched job of explaining this, and I probably have, let me refer you to a couple sources.

http://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/papers/molinism.htm
http://blog.johndepoe.com/2004/11/human ... ge_08.html

..or you could search under "Molinism" in any online philosophy encyclopedia.

Now, I'm not saying the middle knowledge theory is definitely true, but it's worth examining. I like it.

If not illuminating, at least, I hope I have been entertaining.

vanillamoon · Post by **vanillamoon** » Fri Jan 14, 2005 6:42 am

1) The Problem of Evil. If god is all-powerful and all-good, then there can be no evil anywhere, ever. Since there is evil (define it however you want) god must be either not all-powerful, or not all-good (or both).

Just a thought; How can anything be good if there is no evil? It like this quote; 'bravery isn't the absence of fear, it is the conquering of it.', wouldn't goodness be the same? Then again this depends on your view of goodness...................