"But didn't God send his son, Jesus, to be crucified and take the sins of humanity?"
This is the one bit about Christianity I've never understood. Why does God need Jesus to be executed to forgive humanity? In the parents example, once the parents forgive the child they stop punishing him, they don't take another child off the street to punish them or punish themselves.

Respectfully, I think Crazy Anglican's argument is missing the free will/omniscience paradox. If God knows all, he knows EXACTLY what I will do next. Whether or not I think I "choose" my next action is irrelevant--it is already known and determined. Free will presupposes that my choices are not yet made. That's what free will is. Thus, God knows before my birth whether I will end up in heaven or hell, and then lets that happen. That's fate, and necessarily means there is no free will. My choices, if I do have any, are really not choices at all under an omniscient God theory.

Anyway, for me, I believe in free will because it makes me happy to, and my basic moral beliefs require such a notion. I don't like the idea that my actions are predestined, and if we are predestined then there can be no right or wrong or justice. But of course, perhaps I am predestined to believe just that, and I just need to accept that possibility. As such, and ironically, my "faith" that I have free will is basically the same as the "faith" required to believe that a good, omniscient God and free will can coexist.

@Mlempic2. God most likely Measures time much differently then we do seeing as God is immortal and has lived for a really, really, really, long time. BTW the earth was formed about 4.6 Billion Years ago. Either way Adam and Eve were eventually forgiven.

@OMGNSO
Well, since Jesus is the Son of God, wouldn't it mean a lot if he sacrificed Jesus. Well, God did, maybe to show that he is willing to forgive us for our sins even after all those years of sinning.

Groverloaf, God can know all and we can have free will, so think about this. God gave us free will so that we can control our actions and go where we want to. Yes, he does know where we will end up, but with Great Power comes Great Responsibility so it is our responsibility to chose where we go and God's responsible for making sure we keep that Free Will and be happy. We wouldn't be very happy if we were told where to go all the time now would we.

I used the idea of a young earth just so I would have easier numbers to deal with. Just becuase god measures time different and 4000 or 40000 years isn't really any different to him doesn't mean we live by the same. The time between Adam and Eve to Jesus was generations upon generations. It still took until great-great-great-great.... you get the point.

Also since god knew (omnipotent) that Jesus would be resurrected after 3 days having him "sacrificed" doesn't mean that much.

Nexus of Control. What an interesting topic for discussion... Why has this been hijacked into a religious debate?

Nexus of control is all about how you see yourself... An in control actor of your life or someone who is essentially a willing victim of all the actors, from government to the individual who suround them. Personally, I have a very high nexus of control score. I'm guessing the god-fearing amongst you out there probably don't.

I have done a survey where you find your control nexus score, but I couldn't find one when I googled it... 10 points to anyone who can find one for us, and then we can all take the test anc compare how in control we all are.

Also that way, I can avoid playing games with the immature fools who rant off and blame everyone else for their games not turning out the way they want!

Mlempic2, It's a symbolic thing. The sacrifice was more of Jesus taking the blame for all the Sins in the world. Not just having Jesus die. Anyways would it make sense for God's Son to die? Jesus didn't really stay around much longer after that anyways, he just had some things to take care of. It's not like he made a triumphant return and announcing to the world. He just came back did a few things then left.

@ submariner

I think it started with an assertion that belief in an omnipotent/ omniscient God and belief in free-will were mutually exclusive.

@mlempic2

As a father, even if I knew that he would be resurrected, submitting my son to trial, torture, and death would be no small thing. Especially if I knew that he'd done nothing to deserve that fate, but willingly submitted to it for the good of the world. I'd just have to disagree with you on that.

@ Groverloaf

As to predestination, I agree with you and don't embrace that either. I would reassert though that free-will and the existence of an omnipotent/ omniscient God are only a paradox if the timeline is linear.

In a linear timeline all of the choices are aleady made. In a timeline that branches with each new choice allowing for different possibilities, and God choosing to allow those choices to be made independently, then the two are not mutually exclusive.

For instance, if I were able to calculate all the possible choices that you might make in any given scenario, and then add to that an intimate knowledge of your nature and thought processes then I'd have really good chance at predicting your actions. However, if the timeline branches (because an omnipotent deity allows it to do so) then choice becomes a real possibility. Can an omnipotent God control every choice that everyone makes in life? Sure, but having the ability and exercising that ability are two different things. If he chooses to allow free-will then he may do so.

I understand the paradox, but it comes down to definition of terms. While I think that you'd assert that a deity is only omniscient if he intrudes upon a person's free-will by stating what will happen next to the point of already knowing individual outcomes millenia in advance on a linear timeline. I'd assert that a being who could calcualte all of the possible ramificiations of all of the countless choices made by individuals throughout time would have a fair claim to the title omniscient.

Also a being who could create an entire universe would have a pretty good claim to the title omnipotent even if he let's me decide whther to go visit Mom or play golf today.

Also it would be good to note that these are honorifics and titles. Man simply doesn't know the nature of God, so were left to debate the meanings of words (which only carry meaning because people agree on them).

The predestination vs. free-will debate has gone on for centuries in Christendom, and if the very people who believe in God cannot agree on the meaning of the terms, it doesn't seem likely that we can nail down a specific definition of the terms for the purposes of this debate.

I merely assert that if the timeline is linear then omniscience and free-will cannot exist together, but if it branches the terms are not mutually exclusive based upon my earlier position.

*applause for Angelican*

Hey thanks, I've never had internet applause before.

@ mlempic (sorry, I just saw your response)

Again we're supposing to know what God should do based upon what humans might do. I for instance don't have the little plastic things in my house. Does it follow that I'm foolish, or evil based upon that one decision?
I mean really if God, in all his splendor and glory, standing right before you saying "no" doesn't deter you, what good will a little plastic thing do?

The Fall of Man speaks to the nature of temptation. The point is that God's word should be enough, and that he allows you to choose to obey or not. That is implicit in the story. The "moral" God that you seem to advocate does step in and take away the free-will of humans. The problem comes when you ask the question where does that stop and where does it lead. A smothering parent who makes all the "tough" choices for his/ her children? Which parent is better in the long run? I thik it's the one who allows us to make our mistakes and then come back wiser for it.

That deserves another Applause. It also just about sums up this argument.

Fate.

@diplomat1824
Fate off!

@diplomat1824
Yes, it is your "fate" to leave this forum forever and never talk in it again.

"Free will - fate and luck are illusions"

@Crazy Anglican - I think that your parenting analagy is fine up to a point, but it is one thing to allow our children to make mistakes and learn from them, it is another to allow our children to beat up on the whole neighbourhood and turn a blind eye because we expect them to learn from the experience and to be better people in the future. Would you allow your children to fight to the death over who owns your garden? I think not.

"they can make decisions, sure, but rarely do their decisions have the outcome they anticipate."

Hamilton, I do not think that being unaware of the outcome of your decision means you did not make a free decision.

"If you say he simply doesn't act on the knowledge then he has chosen the path that the universe is taking through willful inaction."

Pandarsenic, you may have just convinced me that God cannot allow free will, even if he wanted to.

Anglican, it is of course easy to think that God knows all possibilities, but does not affect our decisions. In a limited sense you'd be right, but I think this argument actually goes beyong meanings of words as you assert. Since God knows what we will do if he does nothing, he is allowing it. Basically, he can alter whatever he wants. He alters only certain things. Therefore he has hand-picked a certain outcome. He did not write our decisions out for us, but he did set us up so that we would make the one that fits in his plan. So in a sense of Christianity, if I were a Christian, I would have to say that God pre-destins us.


All of that aside, inside Christianity or not, I think that it is really foolish to believe in destiny, fate or luck. Because if you consciously believe in them, then your actions may be altered in a negative way. In fact, they usually are altered in a negative way.

On a different note, most girls my age were raised watching Disney films. Disney films preach destiny. They preach that Prince Charming is fated to come to the Princess and that it will work out. Therefore girls my age also believe, indeed, they are brainwashed to believe, that fate says that Mr. Right will come to them eventually, and that they should not have to take proactive steps towards achieving this end, no, it will simply come to them.

This is a plague. It makes them verifiably unhappy because they are likely to end up alone that way. I tell them all the time, if you like a guy you've got to talk to him or nothing will happen, and they respond, no, if it's meant to be, it will be.

That is bull. I hate that. It's not true and they never listen to me. So all I know about fate and free will is that you'd better believe in free will or your life will be pretty miserable. It doesn't matter so much which one really exists, it matters more which one you apply to your life.

I skipped the rest of the thread after the religious arguments started up again. I can't afford to get caught up all over again! For what it's worth, free will and belief in God are not mutually exclusive concepts. But, I'll weigh in with the topic at hand for a change.

Philosophically speaking, there is no free will as my actions are guided entirely by very simple processes. It could be completely deterministic, or perhaps quantum mechanics adds some inherent randomness (is this randomness a result of our approximations and lack of information, or an inherent quality to quantum mechanics) but either way, there's no room for free will.

Practically speaking, free will is a very useful concept. My actions are not predictable, and I still do make choices (albeit mechanically) that have ramifications. It's useful for me to assume that other humans have free will as well. I think it's interesting that some people think that without free will there is no such thing as ethics because our decisions are only a sum of intricate, but simple, processes. Is this the case? I feel that if you've already killed someone, regardless if it was actually the universe's fault, I think it's still justifiable to put you behind bars for the protection of others... worst comes to worst, it was the universe's fault that we put you in jail anyway.

People can't practically justify close-mindedness with saying they don't believe in free will... You can't say you're religious or non-religious because the universe made you that way and you can't change. You're an ever changing bag of atoms that will always be subject to new forces, and there's no way of predicting whether or not you'll remain religious or non-religious. If I'm trying to convince you (albeit mechanically), I still exert a force upon you and perhaps the universe will have you start out religious and then end up non-religious or vice versa or with any other example. I'm using this one because I believe Hamilton said something related to this earlier.

Of such an arguement doesn't actually imply anything but is merely a useful philosophical tool. Here is what I mean.

One inevitable argument that crops up whenever determinism is extolled is how it effects views of guilt, the assuption being that a person cannot in anyway be guilty if they are simply a puppet.

However, as Chrisp showed, determinism comes from the mechanical interaction of particles. The particles that have the most impact on a persons choices are the ones in there brain. Therefore they are puppets to their own brains and are as guilty as otherwise.

Thank you or your thoughtful response, Crazy Anglican. I appreciate your argument, but must say that I find it unconvincing. Your linear timeline vs. multiple timeline theory fails in part because you're merely renaming "choices" with "alternate timelines." Allowing for alternate timelines is the same thing as allowing free will. But this still fails to address the fundamental point--that if God is omniscient, then he knows which of the "multiple timelines" will come to pass before they do. Whether or not God allows me to choose one or more possible futures is merely the same thing as saying he allows me free will. In either nomenclature, an omniscient God must know which choice will be made or which of the many timelines I will walk. The fact remains that God knows what the future holds, and therefore my choices are already made for me.

I am not saying God or a deity intrudes on free will and forces us to take a predestined action. Rather, God already knows what path will be taken, and since that path is already decided, any "free will" I might perceive or God may "allow" is merely an illusion.

Finally, and this goes to several comments on this terrific thread, the idea that Man cannot understand God's mind is, in my opinion, a cop out. This is equally unconvincing as the "quantum mechanics made me do it" argument, that others in this thread have put forward. If our actions are already decided by the unknowingly complex movement of particles in our bodies, then that too is fate. To me, both these arguments are unconvincing because they use ignorance and mystery as a reason. That God's mind and/or entropy combined with quantum mechanics are so complicated that we cannot possibly follow may be true, but I don't believe that is a convincing result.

Obviously, I don't have an answer to the question either. I think about this sort of thing a lot. Crazy Anglican is right that this has been argued about for thousands of years. I'm not sure we are going to have an answer in our mortal lives, but (to me) not having an answer but trying to find one is different than saying that an answer is simply beyond our reach so we should just accept it on faith/science. A semantic distinction? Yeah, probably. ;)

Quote Thucydides
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basically, he can alter whatever he wants. He alters only certain things. Therefore he has hand-picked a certain outcome. He did not write our decisions out for us, but he did set us up so that we would make the one that fits in his plan.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Thucydides,

Basically I half agree with you. Yes, God does choose at times to intervene and not at others. That's part of the theology most of the Christian churches. I'd have to say that I disagree with the ending statement though. If he sets us up to make a choice it's implicitly stated many times over in biblical and extra-biblical sources that he allows for the choice to not follow his plan for us. I'm curious as to what your source is for the above statement that he sets us up to make a choice that fits his plan. I apologize in advance; it's been a long day, and I'm probably not catching your meaning.

Hi Groverleaf,

Thanks for the response, I get the feeling that we will not really come to an agreement on this, as I really think that the controversy rests more in the mindset from which we come rather than either of us not thinking clearly about the subject.

Sorry, but I'll have to consider it a little later as it's a bit late. Not that I won't end up staying up till the wee hours getting embroiled in this in spite of myself, but my intention is to get some rest anyway :-)

@maniac (like the name btw)

Perhaps, I wouldn't allow my kids to behave in such a way, but I'm not God. As a believer though, I do not think that's what God has done either. Surely, there have been wars in God's name, but in Christ we've a different plan altogether. Have there been wars in Christ's name? Sure, but they inevitably are shown to be against his actual teachings. From Christ's teachings it seems that his will is for us to live peacefully, which most Christians seem to be able to do given the huge numbers of us and the realtive dearth of wars in God's name in the past two hundred years or so.

Something that hasn't came up is the fact that God might not have Total Omniscience and just Inherent Omniscience. The difference is this. Total means that you know everything even if you don't want to. Inherent means that you know only what you want to know. So God may have Inherent and limit his knowledge so that we can have Free Will.

Either way everyone should believe in Free Will because believing in Fate to much isn't healthy as you might just wait for something to happen instead of going out and making it happen yourself.

having not read any of the above except the first few, I just want to throw in this quote I heard once.

Everyone is dealt a hand of cards, that is predestination. How you play them is freewill.

Translation: God has given you opportunities but it's your responsibility to take those opportunities when you can

Okay so is Fate then defined as the deterministic way of things?