Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site azure.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!azure!jonw
From: jonw@azure.UUCP (Jonathan White)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: More Omni vs Free Will
Message-ID: <2558@azure.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 22-Feb-84 17:21:20 EST
Article-I.D.: azure.2558
Posted: Wed Feb 22 17:21:20 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 24-Feb-84 00:14:45 EST
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 72

David Norris may be having "fun" in this discussion, but thus far he has
contributed little of substance.  Careful readers (and even not-so-careful
readers) of David's latest free will article may have noticed that he did
absolutely nothing to resolve the contradiction between omniscience and free
will; he merely picked away at some peripheral points.  To avoid being accused
of making vague accusations, I will briefly summarize the points that David
seems unwilling to address and give him another chance.

First of all, I agree with the following statement from David:

   ...I don't think it is possible for God
   to do things which are inherently self-contradictory.

In fact, it can even be proven that an omnipotent and omniscient being
is incapable of doing anything (self-contradictory or not) that it does not
"normally" do.  Proof upon request.

Anyway, because God cannot do things that are inherently self-contradictory, He
cannot be omniscient if we truly have free will.  Conversely, if He is
omniscient, we cannot possibly have free will.  Christians can't have it both
ways unless they can successfully resolve the contradiction.

Now for a recap of the points to which David seems reluctant to respond:

1.  It should be obvious that an omnipotent and omniscient being would not be 
constrained by "our" time.  Therefore, God, by definition, is in a constant 
state of being everywhere (past, present, and future) at once.  Because God 
exists in the future (as well as everywhere else), it stands to reason that 
there must be a future out there for Him to exist in.  Therefore, God must 
have created the entire lifetime of the universe at the moment of creation.  

2.  If you accept the model set forth in step #1 (the entire lifetime of the 
universe already exists), then you must accept that all of our individual
destinies are preordained by God.  That is, we do not have free will.

3.  If you reject the model set forth in step #1, then you must explain how
God could be omniscient if the entire lifetime of the universe does not already
exist.  Earlier I suggested a possible alternative to this model, which you
could accept if you reject the model in step #1:

God created only the initial state of the universe, and subsequent states 
spontaneously "layered" themselves on to previous states.  However, this would 
mean that there are future states that do not yet exist for God to observe (or
exist in), and His omniscience would be invalidated.

4.  To present this contradiction from a different perspective:  If God knows 
in precise detail every action that we are ever going to take, is there 
anything that we can do to change the future actions that God thinks that we 
will take?  If we could somehow surprise God and change those future actions, 
His omniscience would be invalidated.

5.  I have shown in the above four steps that there is an inherent
contradiction between omniscience and free will.  If Christians allow this 
contradiction to stand, it is a devastating blow to their theology.  After 
all, what is the point of even trying to live according to God's law if our 
fates are already decided?  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the only statement from David that attempts to refute the above points:

   The flaw in your logic, Jon, as I see it, is that you falsely assume that
   *knowledge* is the same as *control*.  To *know* something is not to *do* it.

It is obvious that David has not struck at the heart of the matter.  Merely 
saying that knowledge is not the same as control does not even come close to 
resolving the contradiction.  I hope that in David's next submission he 
provides us with an answer for each of the above points or at least admits
that he is stuck with the contradiction.  It is unbecoming for a Christian to
exhibit such evasive behavior.  :-)

			Jon White
			[decvax|ucbvax]!tektronix!tekmdp!azure!jonw