Questions for "Our Role(s) as Christians on Atheist Forums"

[SteveII]

The first sentence is just wrong. It is never the case that "will do" is the same as "cannot not do".

Um... we're talking about an omniscient being that knows you will not not do X. If there is no possible way in which you ever not do X then it makes no sense to speak of X being a choice. Again, a choice between X and X is not a choice. A choice between X and not X is a choice.

You are adding some unnecessary connection to the definition of omniscience or free will (I don't know which). 

I'm saying a choice between X and X is not a choice. If God knows you will do X then you must do X otherwise you contradict God's absolute knowledge that you will do X.

In a nutshell, libertarian free will is choosing an action that is not causally determined by factors outside of ourselves. 

And when God causally determines everything...

Outside knowledge of how a person will choose does not negate the choice. 

If God knows that you will do X then you cannot not do X. How are you not seeing that? If you don't do what God knows you will do then he isn't omisicent. Therefore if X= the action he knows you will take then there is no choice because a choice between X and X is not a choice. Likewise, if God knows you will not do X then you cannot do X because that would contradict God's knowledge that you will not do X. And again, a choice between not X and not X is not a choice. A choice between X and not X is a choice. A choice has to have an alternative. If you have to do or not do one specific thing, if there are no alternative options, there's no choice.

You continue to miss my point. You are confusing foreknowledge with middle knowledge. It is not that God knows what you are going to do (foreknowledge), he knows what you will choose to do as a result of perfect knowledge of you and all the antecedents and conditions of your choice (middle knowledge). The key concept is how he obtains that knowledge. He has not seen the future event. He knows the truth of all future subjunctive conditional statements of what someone will freely choose do in a range of circumstances (whether they are realized or not). The mechanics of the choice are still in place. 

Example. I know that my wife will choose chocolate ice cream over vanilla every time. I know that when we go to my daughter's house tomorrow, those are the two options. The fact that I can almost guarantee that my wife will take the chocolate choice in no way infringes on her choice. I further know that if there is only vanilla left, she will almost definitely skip the calories altogether. That is what God is doing--but with a near infinite amount of background knowledge. 

Additionally, I think that God intervenes all the time to bring about circumstances that serve his purpose. Even an orchestrated series of events that guarantees a particular outcome does not change the fact that you freely chose it even though circumstances dictated your choice--because the definition of libertarian free will is that the decision was made using mental processes that were not themselves physically determined. An example of this would be if you were in a voting booth and you have a choice between candidates A and B. But you did not realize that the booth was fixed that if you went to push the lever for B, you would be subjected to a mind control device that would make you vote for A. However, you voted for A on your own. The fact that really you couldn't have done differently under these circumstances does not change the fact that you freely chose A.