Challenge for Atheists: Define God

Indeed. The tension between omniscience (which includes divine foreknowledge) and human free will is particularly tricky. If God is omniscient, then God presumably knows all of the future, furthermore, God can't be wrong about this. So the argument goes, God knew in 1980 what you were going to do on Monday, May 22, 2017 at 1:05pm. Given that God can't be wrong about your choice, it was impossible for you to do anything else than what God knew you would do. Since human free will seems to be defined by "the ability/power to do otherwise", it would appear that God's foreknowledge of events, seems to preclude the ability to do otherwise and therefore free will. Or at least this is the general formulation of the problem.

 

RE: Challenge for Atheists: Define God
※→ Adorno, et al,

Yes, the Supreme Being who is all knowing, cannot be wrong.

It is little dilemma's like this that prevents true believers from describing their version of the Supreme Being. No one can intelligently discuss an Supreme Being, the Creator or the Deity, which cannot be defined by the believers. They believe in something that they do not know what it is.

(COMMENT)

Even more importantly, admitting to Deity with all these supernatural powers, then opens the discussion to the evil and demonic counterparts, and the associated minions; both good and evil. And it opens the discussion about other types of supernatural beings.

I think that is why believers often challenge agnostics and atheist to define the Supreme Being.

But then, both sides of this equation is faith based logic.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

Regarding free will:

Let's consider the fable of Cain and Abel. Cain slays Abel out of jealousy. God rejected Cain's gift but Abel's sacrifice was pleasing to him. One could argue that this rejection is the cause of Cain's action. Cain was jealous so Cain slew Abel. From a moral perspective we condemn Cain for this action. Knowing the cause of the action gives it a moral context. We see that Cain is motivated by jealousy.

Would we consider Cain's action more or less damnable if it were without cause? "Cain and Abel were walking in the park when Cain suddenly slew Abel. The action was completely random. Cain felt no passion and there is no way to predict if he would or wouldn't do such a thing again. He didn't want to kill Abel and was alarmed by the randomness of his action. He just stabbed Abel "for no reason". Without the cause, we lose the moral context with which to judge the action. Is Cain more or less responsible because of the randomness of the action?

It is precisely because there are many varying causes that we have free will. Presumably there were multiple forces at play when Cain made his choice. Consider any decision you make. Should I sell my car? I weigh out how I feel about my car, my feelings about a replacement car, the market value of the car I want, the payments I might have to make on the new car. All of these causes are actually just factors that influence my decision.

We can only be thought of as having lost free will when another will is imposed upon us that restrains us from making a choice. My wife comes along and says, "no you can't buy a car I spent all your money." The decision is no longer mine to make. If Cain didn't want to slay Abel and he just randomly stabbed his brother in the heart with no cause, then he wouldnt have free will. It is precisely because Cain had a cause, a motivation, to kill that made it a decision.

We use this kind of thinking all the time. I bump the lady in the coffee line up and apologize, "excuse me, I didn't see you." I am forgiven. I didn't know, I didn't mean to etc. In contrast, I bump the lady in the coffee line up and reveal a cause for my action "I'm in a rush lady, move it". Now I am seen as having made a decision and the cause is what makes me responsible for my action.

 

None of which has to do with free will in the eyes of God and his knowing every detail of everyone's moves.
Cain had no choice but to kill able, regardless of motivation.
Adam and Eve had no choice but to eat the apple.
All of this was known prior to any creation.

 

So god knows that some people will rise to the challenge and be loyal to him and others will choose to take the easy path. Cain could have chosen not to kill Abel but gave in to the temptation to be violent. He wanted to kill Abel. There are many times in our lives when everything is pushing us to do one thing but we choose to do something else.

Example: I wanted to run away rather than stand in front of the crowd and give my performance. My physiology, designed for fight vs flight, has me poised to run away. My memories remind me of the time I was embarrassed in front of a crowd - all causes are pushing me toward running away. But then I become determined. I take deep breaths to counter the physical urge to run. I push the memory of my previous embarrassment and remind myself of my loving family that is supporting me and hoping for my success. In my mind I begin my performance, reminding myself of all the practice I have done to get to this point. In short, I choose to negate the causes that are conspiring to make me want to run away by creating causes that will enable me to succeed.

These are the stories that capture our attention as humans. We love the story of the guy who had every reason to fail but chose to stand against all those reasons and succeed. It's the person with the indomitable will that inspires us.

 

RE: Challenge for Atheists: Define God
※→ et al,

Our friend "dairyair" has the basis for the solution in the published • Posting #254.

More importantly, in these challenges and paradoxes, --- we tend to assign human emotions, morals and values to the Supreme Being (SB) and Ultimate Cosmic Creator (UCC).

→ Does the SB/UCC (the creator of the universe) need praise?
→ Does the SB/UCC (the creator of the universe) feel disappointment or sadness that humans make one choice over another?
→ What does the SB/UCC (the creator of the universe) need that only humans can provide?
→ Does the creator of the universe even have unfulfilled wants and needs?
​

IF you are the SB/UCC (the creator of the universe) THEN what does life mean to you when you can create all the life you want in any form you want?

The understanding of the SB/UCC (the creator of the universe) with unlimited powers, is well beyond human comprehension. We cannot even imagine what existence must be like when even the concept of existence may not apply.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

No reason to go any further than the bolded. You don't know the meaning of OMNISCIENCE.
adjective
1.
having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.
noun
2.
an omniscient being.
3.
the Omniscient, God.
Do you need the definition of ALL?

NO. GOD WILL NOT KNOW SOME people will rise to the challenge. An OMNISCIENT god will KNOW ALL, will do exactly as known.

Now if you want to change the omniscience of GOD, that's completely different.

You need to come to grips with yourself. Is your god omniscient or not?

 

I don't believe in God. But assuming I did, his omniscience shouldn't necessarily influence my free will. There's obviously a lot wrong with the biblical account from Genesis and ultimately my opinion of it is that it doesn't make sense in terms of the problem of determination and free will because these weren't concepts that were very fully developed at the time the myths were originally conceived.

The problem of free will vs determism is influenced by the uncertainty principle. We as humans are a subset of the universe and therefore do not know what caused it, what might end it or even if it has a cause or end. We don't know how much of reality is determined. There is some evidence to suggest that we make decisions subconsciously before our conscious minds are even aware of it! This may mean that nothing is my decision at all and my consciousness is merely a passenger in this vehicle (not that I am suggesting my consciousness exists after my body is gone).

Think about the vastness of the universe and the process that took place that has lead to my existence. The very substance of what I am began to form billions of years ago. It was Carl Sagan who said "the cosmos is within us, we are star stuff, we are a way for the universe to know itself" and it's a great idea. From that perspective you and I are the same. If I was you I would make the same choices as you because I would experience the same circumstances as you. I can understand you and forgive you from this perspective. This is almost a fourth dimensional perspective of reality. We see time not as a snap shot of just this slice of now at this moment but the entirety of being from the moment of conception to the moment of death.

That's a beautiful interpretation of reality and it makes a lot of sense so I agree with it sometimes. It's hard to say you don't believe in God when explaining this interpretation because this is the God of Einstein and Spinoza - the universe itself, the natural processes within it. It can't be prayed to and it's not conscious other than the little beings that spring up within it. The universe experienced itself through me, through you, through that dinosaur and this bumble bee. In this regard I am not an atheist but a pantheist.

But that said, I also think that free will could also be something we experience in varying degrees. As we progress through life our options diminish. Now that I am in my forties I will never be an astronaut. Choices I've made in my past limits decision I can make in my present. But I am a human, a change agent. I experience reality one moment at a time from a limited perspective aware only of only what is here now and making decisions (or at least experiencing the illusion of making decisions). I am free but only in a very limited way. I am a change agent. Events occur that were set in motion in some uncertain (to me) past and I choose how I want to respond to them based on the resources available to me now. I can cause minor changes in the timeline. I can expand my free will by being physically fit, by remaining mentally aware by remaining free from financial, physical, metal constraints.

There are other perspectives too. The universe from the possible fifth dimension (if I remember my dimensions right - what a confusing thing to keep straight), is like viewing all possible timelines stretching out from a central point. In this perspective there is an infinity of mes in an infinity of timelines each one making just a slightly different decision in a slightly different universe and in that regard certainly there is no free will because each reality is a mathematical certainty and this me is just required to make this decision.

But that's the uncertainty principal. We are a subset of the universe so we don't really know how much of reality is determined. We can only speculate and theorize and we owe it to ourselves to give thought to the different possibilities.

 

I think your question is really short sided here. Because people have so many different definitions already of what god looks like to them...

God looks different to different people, even people who believe in a god. So there's no one answer to your question. You'd get different answers from different atheists if they were even to answer your question.

Here's how I'd define it: "An infinite, omniscient, and omnipotent being that transcends understanding and comprehension". Anything less than that would not be god to me.

But it doesn't really matter, I don't believe a being like that exists anyway. Everything is finite, it's just a matter of perspective.

 

Being forgiven doesn't mean that you are no longer responsible - it just means you no longer have a debt related to your action.

And, when judging your responsibility your intent isn't the issue - that is, having no evil intent doesn't mean you aren't responsible. Having evil intent may cause additional penalties, though.

If the person you bump in the coffee line dropped their coffee as a result of the bump, you owe them coffee and are responsible for the added inconvenience, clothing stains, burns, or whatever - regardless of your intent. That person may forgive you all or part of that debt. But, it does not mean you weren't responsible.

 

I never understand this argument.

The fact that God knows in advance of your birth whether you will wind up in hell just means he knows that. It doesn't mean that you were restricted to that. In no way does it limit your choices.

All it means is that He is there at both (in fact all) points in time and thus happens to know the actual outcome. He just knows what you did/will do.

That doesn't mean you didn't have a choice.

 

Again I just see this as a confusion between knowing what happened and restricting what happened.

It makes no more sense to me than suggesting that Hitler had no choice, because we know what he did.

 

One minor point I hope is clear here. "Excuse me." is a sentence in the imperative (like "Go away." means "You go away.").

You are demanding someone to forgive you.

Whether or not that person complies with your demand is up to them.

 

I see it as a shortened form of the request "please excuse me" as in please excuse or forgive my behaviour. But you are right, it has a lot to do with delivery.

Often good manners are misused used this way. My niece will scream at her mom, "I SAID I'M SORRY!" as though it's a magic word that automatically lets one off the hook for bad behaviour once invoked.

 

Yeah I suppose that's true. There is the matter of negligence, due care etc nevertheless we judge these things based on the mitigating factors. its rare that we judge actions without first considering the causes that influenced the actions.

 

Yes, I absolutely agree that we have methods of measuring the magnitude of the infraction. And, when the infraction causes zero damage (like in the coffee line) we do fully expect to be forgiven. Having someone be upset because of an unintentional and harmless bump would even be irritating.

I just viewed the coffee line as an example for the issues of responsibility, forgiveness, etc.

 

If one believes in an omniscient God, then Hitler was known to happen, right down to all the details.

 

If god knows before you are born that you will end up in hell, how can that person end up in heaven? I'd like to hear your explanation.
And if it is know what one will do, can one ever do anything different? That God didn't know?

 

I know that if I offer someone $100 they will accept it. Did I decide to accept it for them? I know that my wife goes shopping with her sister every Sunday. Did I decide to go shopping for her?

 

This is just more of the difference between knowing and controlling.

Think of it this way. You live your life, doing whatever you choose to do. At the end, St. Peter picks up the time-o-phone and radio's back in time to God-before-you-were-born and whispers to him what it is that you did with your life.

That doesn't affect what you did. It just means that god KNOWS what YOU did.

There isn't anything in that scenario that limited your choices.


Now, maybe there IS a way in which your choices were limited. But, it has to have come from something else or something more than simply God being omniscient and timeless.

That is, simply having God know what you chose doesn't mean you had no choice.

There would have to be some other element that entered into the story in order to actually limit your choice.

 

Well, GOD knew down to all the details. No earthly creature knew that until it happened. God's omniscience means He has full view of all time - something we clearly do not have.

Of course, one must assume God could prevent us from having free will - perhaps he chose to work us like puppets. I'm sure there are people who believe that.

But, that's very different from Him simply knowing what choices we made.

 

Well your answer has been the traditional argument since at least Augustine: God merely knows what one will do. But this answer presupposes either 1) freedom is defined by doing what you want to do (rather than the ability to do otherwise), or 2) our actions today can change the past. The first has had certain philosophical problems - this would mean that you have to act the way that you do (you can't do otherwise), but as long as you have the right attitude, that is, that you want to do this, you are free. But this has certain problems - taking aging for example, if someone defines freedom as doing what one wants to do, and let's say that a 7 year old child wants to get older, wakes up everyday celebrating being another day older, does this mean the child is free in respect to aging? It doesn't appear so.

As for the second, to say that what I do today, changes what God knows in the past seems problematic.

However, by adding the idea that God is in all points in time (simultaneously) - you are suggesting that God is outside of time (see Boethius on this for the classic philosophical view) - but this makes it difficult to see how common talk of God acting in time can actually occur - since acting is always in time (every act has a beginning, middle, and end - hence every act is temporal - i.e. in time). Answering that God is outside of time, will solve the dilemma, but it seems to remove a traditionally important aspect of many traditional religious beliefs - that God acts/interacts with the world.

 

To my point above about freedom being defined by some theists as doing what you want to do - your answer here seems to open the door then to the following objection: if this is how freedom is defined, then why not create human beings who are so morally good (and intelligent) as to always want to choose the good? So you can save the free will objection by answering in this way, but it seems like you dig a deeper whole for answering the problem of evil.

 

Interesting. I've never studied this stuff, so I could be being ridiculous at times. For one thing, I seem to have problems knowing where the limitation of some special power should really be. (So, I'm not much of a sci-fi buff, either).

But, the fact that god is outside time doesn't hit me as a problem. That is, it seems like such a god would still be able to change an event on earth - could help out Johah so he lived in a whale, blocked a bullet during war to save a life that would become an important contribution, or whatever.

- not that I believe there IS such a god, but just logically speaking it seems like an omniscient, omnipresent, timeless god could do that.

 

Yes. In general, God's motivations and methods seem more than just obscure.

I really just hoped to limit my posts to this one issue of the affect of god knowing the future on free will! Obviously, it may not be that easy.