Tuesday, February 3, 2009

God's Will or Free Will?


"There's no difference between creating something whose every future action is known to you, and creating something with no free will that is programmed to follow that exact behavior. Both entities reach the exact same expected ends. Either way you would be a monster if you decide to *punish* something that you knew with perfect certainty would turn out wrong."

I thought about this for while and came up with a somewhat coherent response. First of all, the Bible does not teach that God makes decisions for us, it just says that God knows the beginning from the end (omnipotence). The easiest way to understand how God might see us is to think about yourself as a 2 dimensional being and God as a 3 dimensional being. This is illustrated very well in the following video clip.



So we are 3 dimensional beings (bound by time) and God is omnipotent (not bound by any dimensions or time). We can only see our world one moment at a time. However, when He looks at us, He sees one continuous person (a finished work), from the time we are born to the time we die (which encompasses every good or bad decision we make along the way). Whether or not the outcome of a choice can be known by an infinite being makes no difference to the free will of the agent making the choice. Likewise, the fact that He can intervene in our life or that we can choose to do right/wrong, doesn't change his ability to predict it.

The real question is why God chooses to created individuals whom he knows will be predestined to go to hell..... Greater Good?

6 comments:

Scubaman3D said...

I guess if we have to resort to thought experiments, featuring "flatlanders" to provide a simplistic understanding of the nature of God and how we perceive him, we recognize that an attempt to completely understand God's "omni" qualities is futile.

If we recognize that we can't answer "who, what, where, when, and how", to a full extent, to attempt answering the question "why" is equally pointless.

Still, I'm a bit confused by the question, since you make the argument that foreknowledge doesn't necessitate "predestination" but in your question, you assume it to be true.

Aaron Csicseri said...

The purpose of the thought experiment is to illustrate that we CAN'T understand how God perceives us. Just like the flatlander CAN'T understand depth. I don't know a soul who would disagree that completely understanding God's "omni" qualities is futile. (of course it is!)

Just because we can't answer who, what, where, why, when, and how (to a full extent) doesn't mean that it's pointless to ask, or at least investigate. I don't believe that we've somehow reached a magical limit of what we can possibly know about God's nature. If we have, then in what year did we reach such a milestone?

You misunderstood my argument. I NEVER implied that foreknowledge doesn't necessitate predestination. I argued that foreknowledge isn't mutually exclusive to free will and I don't believe predestination is either. The Bible is clear that God chooses those whom He will reveal himself to, but on what basis does he decide and how does that decision incorporate free will? Just because we won't ever fully know how that decision is made, doesn't mean we can't postulate the question. Sometimes the simple act of pondering a thought like this can bring about a new appreciation of who God is. A concrete answer is not the only end.

Finally, If your whole argument is that we can never know so we shouldn't ask, then you can just piss off! :)

Scubaman3D said...

The point was that we are equally unable to answer the question 'why' so for me, why is 'why' a more important question than 'who, what, where, when ,how'?

Also, you did imply that foreknowledge doesn't necessitate predestination, by making the argument that foreknowledge and free will aren't mutually exclusive. On this, I definately agree, and I think you can't then go on to say God chooses his folowers as "elect" and others are ignored - because this would imply the opposite, that free will is irrelevent.

This means, in terms of probability that there is a P = 0 that a person who wasn't chosen can be saved, meaning that all other factors, including free-will, are rendered irrelevent.

There must logically exist a probability, however small it is, that a person who is never saved, could have been saved. Otherwise, you're contradicting the nature of God and the promise in Romans 10:9-10 is then false.

Could you imagine if it instead said: "It dosn't matter if you believe and call on the name of the Lord, because - I'm sorry, you're probability for salvation has been determined to be 0. Enjoy your stay in hell..."

I think God has elected for everyone to be saved but the non-mutually excluded factor of free will has dropped the probability of a salvation event for many. Even your argument supports this.

Aaron Csicseri said...

That's all well and fine that you don't place "why" as a higher priority then any other interrogative. Everyone has their own opinions and interests. Scientist seem to like the "how", "where", and "when." Those questions have led to many significant advances in science and astronomy. Philosophers would tend ponder the "who" and "why". All these questions have importance regardless of whether you are interested in asking them or not.

I though I was fairly clear in my original post and in my last response, but I will explain again. In my original post I argued that an absence of free will does not necessarily follow foreknowledge (said nothing about predestination). Then I asked a separate question: Why does He create people that he knows (in his infinite foreknowledge) will choose not to serve Him.

You seem to think that if I assumed that foreknowledge and free will can co-exist, then I must somehow reject predestination. My position is that foreknowledge DOES necessitate predestination and vice versa. The very fact that God knows what you will do before he even creates you (and then still creates you anyway) proves that God does in fact predestine all of us to either heaven or hell. If God is omnipotent then predestination MUST be the case. The mere act of creating you is predestination in itself, but not necessarily at the expense of free will.

Think about humans as computer programs. You don't just start writing code and figure out as you go what you want the program to do. You start with idea for a program (what it will accomplish) then you write the code. You knew what it would do before you created it. It has been predestined. It will fulfill its purpose. The analogy isn't perfect since computer programs don't have free will (yet;)

As far as probabilities go I would say/guess that when it comes to God's perspective, there are only two P values (P=0 or P=100). If God played roulette (and his intension was to win) He wouldn't bet money on both black and red, because he knows the outcome with certainty. If John Doe calls on the name of the Lord, he will be saved, but that event was perfectly expected / predicted even before he was born. To say anything else would be "contradicting the nature of God." It's not like God thought John was going to hell and was then suddenly surprised. An individual who's P=0 will never call on the name of God, that’s the point.

I'm not sure "how" God is able to predestine us and at the same time respect our free will, but I know it to be true because the Bible teaches both. I also don't know "why" He makes people whom he knows will have a P=0 of going to heaven. I don't have a problem taking the "how" on complete faith, but the "why" is what I struggle with.

Scubaman3D said...

First, the reason we're not understanding each other is you are making an assertion "free will and God's omniscience are not mutually exclusive" and you are supporting this by saying "we can't understand God". I agree with you on this, but I'm saying that this exact fact is a good argument against predestination. You have so far not put forth a good argument that supports it, other than saying that "in God's view, He sees us as 0% or 100% and so this means predestination exists.

It appears you're defining predestination as "the fact that God knows the final outcome".

But if we recognize our folly to understand God from our point of view, you cannot take the point of view of God and make a dogma about his character - it is beyond our comprehension to do this.

Since we have such corrupted and narrow perspective about Him, I think we can only rely on what is written in the Bible to provide evidence of his nature. This means that all debate about doctrine, must center around scripture and not exclusively logic, which you admit is flawed.

To that end, I again bring up Romans 10. It clearly says "Whoever will call on the name of the LORD will be saved" (v13). There is no qualification to this statement. Also without qualification is 1 TIMOTHY 2:3-5 says God "will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. Same in 1 Timothy 4:10."

I believe that God is perfectly "good" (Mark 10:18) and will attempt to save us, even knowing we wont. There are plenty of examples of this in the Bible, where God attempts many times, over and over, to save individuals, or the nation of Israel as a whole - but many times, they do not want it. God could say "well, I know the outcome, so I'm not going to even try".

We should never take this point of view either. We are not perfectly good so from our point of view, we must assume there is a probability that every individual can be saved. This is exactly the point of view described in the New Testament. So our dogma is that everybody can be saved, because not holding to this dogma leads to a belief that much of our work is waste, because P=0.

Anyways, this all makes for an interesting discussion and we can say we believe one way or another - but at the end of the day, its just acedemic if we're not practicing it too.

Aaron Csicseri said...

Let me be clear here. I am making only one assumption, then asking a follow up question:

-Free Will and Predestination are both taught with equal clarity in scripture.

So far, You have only provided verses that support free will, and haven't indicated (yet) that you believe in any form of predestination. I contend that you must believe in both, regardless of whether it's antimony or not.


Romans 8:28-30-And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethrn.Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Ephesians 1:4-5 -For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will

Ephesians 1:11 -In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.

Ephesians 2:10 -For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Acts 13:48 -When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.

Acts 4:27-28 -Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.

I'm not saying that God forces us to make any decisions, since that is contrary to the Word. I'm saying that we are predestined in the sense that God makes certain people whom he knows will not accept him. How is that NOT predestination?

"We should never take this point of view either. We are not perfectly good so from our point of view, we must assume there is a probability that every individual can be saved."

I agree that God commands us to treat everybody as if they can be saved, simply because we don't know which ones are predestined to be saved and which are not. That doesn't mean that witnessing is pointless. In fact witnessing benefits the giver just as much as it benefits the recipient. Either way, your not wasting your time.

-If you believe that God knows with certainty how each person will exercise their free will before He creates them...must he be cruel? Since He could just as easily choose not to create that individual.

I have no problem reconciling predestination with free will, but I struggle to reconcile predestination with divine justness. However, as a Christian I believe (by faith) that God cannot be cruel.

"if we recognize our folly to understand God from our point of view, you cannot take the point of view of God and make a dogma about his character - it is beyond our comprehension to do this."

I think anyone who studies the Word honestly, will come to the same realization that we cannot "understand God from our point of view, you cannot take the point of view of God and make a dogma about his character - it is beyond our comprehension to do this." Again, I assert that asking the question can still be useful and NOT as you contend... "pointless."

Post a Comment