Theists: How can predetermined fate and free will coexist?

[robvalue]

God creating reality, knowing every detail of what will happen the instant he creates it, is akin to him writing a very complicated story. He writes every word. He writes every murder, rape, AIDS baby and hurricane. He could have changed any of those details so that something else happens at that precise time, since he has an infinite numbers of scenarios to choose from and he has no boundaries (so we're usually told).

In this story he decides to write, for some reason he thinks making some elements of it self aware is a good idea. Let some poor bastards endure all the rape, murder, hunger and tragedy. Sure, they get to enjoy some good times too. But that doesn't justify all the bad stuff he's choosing to write in. He knows the bad stuff will happen. He could have missed every and any single instance of it out. But he didn't. Sadist.

Talking about what he's trying to achieve is laughable, because he has no obstacles or adversaries (who can stop him). He can write whatever ending he wants, without having to write in a bunch of shit first.

Oh yeah, he then judges the characters in his story. Hmm, that character did a wank. Even though I wrote that he did a wank, I'll say it was his decision. I could have written other stuff, so that means he had free will. I'll just burn him forever. Wow this is getting boring, I'll go play some god-basketball now.

---

Of course, this doesn't play out quite like this if God sets up the initial conditions but then isn't able to predict everything that will happen. So if you drop precognition, he loses at least a little of the responsibility.

However, he has still set up the parameters of the reality so that suffering is possible. That's on him. There was no requirement to do that.

Would you do that, if you were setting up a reality?

[Pat Mustard]

Yea CL I'm honestly not sure how it's so hard for you to see the contradiction in this.

Let's pretend time travel is possible, which we're already doing and more.  We all 'know' Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK.  If I travel back in time to Tokyo 1 minute before it happens, is there a chance I can turn on the TV, and JFK doesn't get shot?  

Do you think the 1st time Oswald had a choice, and the 2nd time he didn't?

The only way that scenario happens with an omniscient being is in a multiverse situation wher you travel back to a different Oswald and JFK, a one where Oswald isn't able to make the shot.

That doesn't change the fact that in universe A JFK was killed by Oswald and was always going to be killed by Oswald.

[robvalue]

It's pretty clear that a lot of theists need us to have free will, because it excuses their deity from the bad things people do. Now, I don't buy that anyway, as I've mentioned above. The deity still created the framework, and decided that suffering was something it wanted to include.

What I don't get is why they need the deity to know the future. In fact, it seems at odds with everything. According to many, God is screwing with our affairs. Often on a daily basis. Why on earth would it do this, if it already had a perfect plan and knew what would happen? Did it deliberately make it so that things kept going wrong so it could dive in and help? Hero complex? This is another contradiction. How do some people so easily live with these?

And the idea that God has a "plan" is at odds with knowing the future. The word "plan" indicates a strategy, usually. A way of going about things, to try and achieve a goal. But how can God have goals? It has nothing stopping it instantly achieving anything it wants. It needs no strategy. It needs no "means to an end". It needs no sacrifice in order to deal with some problem that has arisen.

This points to other contradictions many people seem happy to live with. God is all powerful; yet it must do things in a certain way to cope with what is happening. It created everything: what is possible and what is not, the rules regarding how things work, our capabilities and intentions; yet somehow it has no responsibility whatsoever for what happens.

[AceBoogie]

It's always interesting to me how so many theists simply ignore, or even fail to recognize, these blatant contradictions in order to continue holding their beliefs. Even when they paint themselves into a corner they will say, "Those are just my beliefs. I have mine, you have yours," as if this somehow reconciles the contradicting ideas they hold.

I've heard some theists, after painting themselves into a corner, say things like "The idea of god doesn't have to make sense to us, we're just humans and we can never understand god," almost as if our lack of comprehension of god somehow reaffirms its existence...?

Here is one bone I will throw to theists/deists... sure there MIGHT be a god. Just like there might be fairies, unicorns, dragons and vampires. Each of these things existence are supported by the same amount of scientific evidence.

[robvalue]

It's funny how being too powerful renders you utterly unable to act, because you'll contradict yourself. It's like being so pumped full of steroids that your arms explode.

Well, not quite like that.

Notice how theology seems to mainly consist of:

1) Trying to argue something into existence (double fail, since it's usually something that's not even internally consistent)

2) Making excuses for the deity

What kind of deity needs crap arguments and excuses?

[AceBoogie]

Right, so then must the theist not admit that while god is very powerful... it's not ALL POWERFUL...? If this is true, how are we to know the actual limits of its power? These types of questions, along with realizing that obvious contradiction between free will and fate, are what lead to me being a deist and then eventually an atheist.

[Ignorant]

God creating reality, knowing every detail of what will happen the instant he creates it, is akin to him writing a very complicated story. He writes every word. He writes every murder, rape, AIDS baby and hurricane. He could have changed any of those details so that something else happens at that precise time, since he has an infinite numbers of scenarios to choose from and he has no boundaries (so we're usually told). [1]

In this story he decides to write, for some reason he thinks making some elements of it self aware is a good idea. [2] Let some poor bastards endure all the rape, murder, hunger and tragedy. Sure, they get to enjoy some good times too. [3] But that doesn't justify all the bad stuff he's choosing to write in. He knows the bad stuff will happen. He could have missed every and any single instance of it out. But he didn't. [4] Sadist.

Talking about what he's trying to achieve is laughable, because he has no obstacles or adversaries (who can stop him). He can write whatever ending he wants, without having to write in a bunch of shit first. [5]

Oh yeah, he then judges the characters in his story. Hmm, that character did a wank. Even though I wrote that he did a wank, I'll say it was his decision. I could have written other stuff, so that means he had free will. [6] I'll just burn him forever. Wow this is getting boring, I'll go play some god-basketball now.

---

Of course, this doesn't play out quite like this if God sets up the initial conditions but then isn't able to predict everything that will happen. So if you drop precognition, he loses at least a little of the responsibility. [7]

However, he has still set up the parameters of the reality so that suffering is possible. That's on him. There was no requirement to do that. [8]

Would you do that, if you were setting up a reality? [9]

1) Yes. His only boundary is himself, and everything that takes place (down to the finest detail) takes place according to the story he writes exactly how he writes it.

2) Yes. According to Christianity, he wrote this part because he wanted his story (i.e. creation and history) to participate and share in his own divinity (i.e. his own image). We hold that rationality is a participation in God himself.

3) Sadly, yes, this is true. But it is the whole story?

4) So far I'm with you. He knows the bad stuff will happen because he's the one writing the story about the bad stuff. He could have left them out, but he didn't. Why? We don't know. All we know is that at some point, he wrote himself into the story. He wrote himself in as the one who experiences all of those rapes, murders, hunger, and tragedies (he really suffers the experience of every particular rape, murder, hunger and tragedy) on the cross. He never wrote a single moment of suffering into the story without writing his own suffering of that same moment. 

In other words, he writes the story with bad stuff in such a way that HE suffers all of that bad stuff WITH us. "To suffer with" =literally= "to be co-passionate/sym-pathea". He is not merely compassionate in the sense that he understands our suffering, but he is actively compassionate. He suffers everything WITH us. He is God-WITH-us. Seeing as Christmas is right around the corner... Jesus is the Emmanuel: "God-with-us". 

Does that answer the question of "why" the bad stuff is in the story at all? No. 

5) Correct

6) I'm not sure that is how he "writes". He doesn't write the action, and then assign decision making capacity after the fact, and then conclude freedom later. It is more like, "that character is free to seek the good as he sees it. I freely show myself to that character as the ultimate good to seek in everything, and I do that in Jesus Christ. That character freely sees some good in manipulating the sexual organs in a way to obtain the good of sexual gratification without giving itself to another person. That character freely decides to seek that good in wanking. That character freely obtains that good in wanking, but that good obtained in this way will never be enough so as to fulfill the character's own sexual aspect of existence. It will always fall gravely short of what the character could obtain through the mutual, life-long self-giving to another person".

7) Yes.

8) Correct

9) I don't know. Maybe if I wanted to create people who could ask this question, suffering needs to be a potentiality? Who could even know if that is the case or not? There can't be any mercy if there is no compassion. There can't be any compassion if there is no passion (which is an old word for suffering). In a world without suffering, there is no mercy or compassion. I don't know if that would be a better world or not. Maybe a world without a need for mercy or compassion is better than a world with such needs?

[robvalue]

Yeah, one version I've heard is that God can do anything that is logically possible.

That instantly wipes our precognition, because knowing the outcome of a genuine choice beforehand is logically impossible.

It has no need to know outcomes anyway. At any point it can reset the whole of reality to any point it wants. Nothing can "go wrong". It can't lose. It can't run out of mana. It can just fuck around to its heart's content.

It's far easier to defend a God that hasn't seen the future. Still not easy, but easier.

The thing is, on the one hand this is supposed to be an environment created solely for us and as such is supposed to be impressive. We're supposed to have this amazing existence which is really good.

On the other hand, this is just a test, which lasts for 0% of our entire existence. The real "life", where we'll actually be happy, begins after all of this is done. Another contradiction. No one expects to be on the beach in Barbados during their maths exam. But then, I don't expect to be taken out and tortured if I fail the test, either.

I do fully respect that each theist has their own ideas about God and how all this works. The fact that they can't agree on a single point about is entity is pretty good evidence that they can't all be talking about the same thing. Or if they are, they know nothing about it.

[AceBoogie]

So basically... god created all of us so that while many of us suffer and live in misery, some others in our group can praise the glory of his creation? So he created us to worship him.... and then let's many of us suffer... and you're completely okay with chalking all of this up to 'god's plan?'

[Ignorant]

So basically... god created all of us so that while many of us suffer and live in misery, some others in our group can praise the glory of his creation? [1] So he created us to worship him.... [2] and then let's many of us suffer... [3] and you're completely okay with chalking all of this up to 'god's plan?' [4]

1) No. God created all of us so that even those who suffer and live in misery can share in God's life and joy, even in the midst of that suffering and misery. Christians suffer too, and they praise the glory of his creation because his creation includes the resurrection and renewal of all things, and not merely this age which is "passing away".

2) He created us to share in his life, not bow before him. Sharing the divinity causes you to kneel in humility, rather than kneeling causes you to share in the divinity.

3) I am pretty sure everyone suffers, and some more than others. He let himself suffer, and united his suffering to all of ours. His divinity can transform my suffering and sublimate it, because he suffered it right there with me. In this way, I don't put up with it in anticipation of going to heaven. Instead, heaven itself has come to me in my suffering. The suffering remains real, but it is suffered WITH the divinity itself. That is a game changer for the poor and the oppressed and the outcast.

4) It certainly makes it easier knowing that God himself has gone through all of it with us.