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