Login or Register

Forgot?
I'm new, register me!

What is OmniNerd?

100% of OmniNerd's content is generated by you, the reader. OmniNerd allows content of all sorts and highlights the nerdiest of what's around.

Want to know more? Check out our welcome page, or simply register and have a first-hand look.

Submit New Content

Voting Booth

Been a victim of a violent crime?

22 votes, 3 comments
1
Nerd-It
+ -

RE: Not "Required"

Comment comment by Occams on 17 March 2008

Gnifyus

Please excuse the late reply but I have been thinking more about your thoughtful response lately.

I accept that god gave us all free will. We can make our own choices without any interference. However, being omniscient, He knew before He created us exactly how we would act in every situation throughout our lives. So freewill and predestination are not incompatible notions. One applies to Him and the other to us..

This begs the question of why we will be on trial for our performance on Earth when he put us here knowing exactly what we would do. I would not punish my golden retriever for mounting a bitch in heat because I know he will do that if I put him in that situation. I would blame myself.

It absolutely beggars belief that God would create us knowing what he would have to do to save us and then expect eternal gratitude.

Favorite
[Show/Hide] [Reply]   1 Nerd-It - + Favorite
RE: Not "Required" by gnifyus :: NR7 :: on 17 March 2008

However, being omniscient, He knew before He created us exactly how we would act in every situation throughout our lives.

I'm not sure of that statement. I mentioned the possibility that God “gave up” some of his omnipotence and omniscience when allowing for freewill. Maybe ‘deferred’ is a better way of putting it, as one might believe that God could use his all-knowing, all-seeing ways at any time if he deemed it necessary, but chooses not to in any direct manner. Instead of an omniscience of details it becomes an omniscience of overall purpose and direction which each person has some part in if they choose to search for it. So, the purpose itself is predetermined by God, but the way in which it is arrived at, or if it is ever arrived at, is left to the uncertainties of freewill. Instead of micromanaging every detail and decision of our individual lives, these details, (which can all add up to our ultimate personal direction and destiny) are also a product of freewill. When by acting on our own, if we actually manage to fulfill his purpose, God then derives his subsequent joy from these actions. Again, the analogy of not doing and controlling everything for our own children (painful as it might be) comes to mind. I personally get a sense of joy whenever my children (both teens) make a good decision on their own, and this could not happen without the freedom given to make those decisions.

This begs the question of why we will be on trial for our performance on Earth when he put us here knowing exactly what we would do.

Besides the predetermination part of that statement which I tried to address above, it seems you are questioning what I would call the 'scorecard belief' or the belief that each transgression against God is tallied up at the end and one's ultimate destiny is decided from those results. I prefer to think of it as a much more analog "direction of the heart". Each transgression or act against God's purpose causes a persons heart to turn "away from the light" so to speak. Enough of these actions might cause a person to change beyond recognition; sort of a Darth Vader story, or Elliot Spitzer, if you will.

It absolutely beggars belief that God would create us knowing what he would have to do to save us and then expect eternal gratitude.

I'm not sure what you mean by eternal gratitude, unless you are talking about "praise" which is very different concept when applied to God as opposed to our fellow men.

I'll leave you with a C.S. Lewis quote to further your confusion:

"I think we delight to praise what we enjoy because the praise not merely expresses but completes the enjoyment; it is its appointed consummation."

When you reach a point where you "enjoy" God the praise is only natural, this seems to say.

I'm not putting out these thoughts with any pretense of convincing you of anything; in fact most of it was composed while trying to eat left-over stir-fry for lunch, but thanks for turning over the hay and drudging up old conversations. There's two things that are telltale signs of becoming an Omninerd veteran. One is when you begin to repeat yourself, and the other is when you read your old replies and think: "Did I really write that?"

[Show/Hide] [Reply]   1 Nerd-It - + Favorite
RE: Not "Required" by Occams :: NR6 :: on 17 March 2008

Gnifyus,

An excellent response for which I am grateful. I am clearly not up to your standard of knowledge or eloquence on this subject, but if you will forgive an under-informed view, I would reply that you seem to be lapsing into the mode of shaping God's powers according to the needs of your argument. Suggesting that He can suspend some of His powers for the purpose of equivocation in creating free will is a bit like saying He can make a rock too heavy for Himself to lift - a logical contradiction.

Either He is omniscient or He is not. Perhaps you assume that His thoughts are laid out in the time domain as ours are, but it seems more likely that he has them all at once. With His brain power I think it unlikely that he is using a serial processor or I/O. That is why I feel that he knows what he knows during the process of creation. If true knowledge of every decision we make exists somewhere before we are born (in God or elsewhere) then everything is predestined for us. That is simply by definition and not my opinion.

I accept what you say about our desire and need to praise. That explains a lot to me as I have always felt that all the "Praise Him, Praise him" rant was a lazy way of praying. We don't praise anything else by saying "praise it". Instead, we give some thought to composing a decent compliment. Is praise from a vastly inferior creature valuable. Would you be pleased if an ant told you what a big, strong and smart fellow you are?

I am relieved that you reject the score card accountability model - too scary by far.

Your quote has added to my confusion as you feared - but in a nice way.

Thanks sincerely

[Show/Hide] [Reply]   1 Nerd-It - + Favorite
RE: Not "Required" by gnifyus :: NR7 :: on 19 March 2008

I am clearly not up to your standard of knowledge or eloquence on this subject..

First, I'm flattered you think I'm knowledgeable, but really please; these are just thoughts and opinions I have about the subject (based on what?), and any perceived eloquence is quite frankly being used as a mask to cover up that fact. (I'll try to prove that statement in my subsequent comments.)

I always loved the paradox of "Gods Rock". It creates a simple circular impossibility that is humorous in poking fun at our conception of omnipotence. Wasn't it George Carlin who used it in his old comedy routine about his experiences at Catholic School? I wonder if he invented it? I don't think it quite applies to my theory of deferred omniscience though, because having the ability to know something and actually knowing it form a much more linear relationship. In order for freewill to exist in a world with an omniscient God, I guess he would have to allow events as they pertain to us to manifest themselves in a serial fashion. I also get confused when thinking about an entity that by its definition must be able to exist in all times and places at once. Perhaps being outside time and place somehow allows for this. But we are not outside time and place, so why can't our futures be variable based on events and decisions that happen here with God only observing and giving subtle influence? We move through time like a line being drawn, the nearest end able to change direction in accordance with these events. (If you haven't already, see Omninerd's Philosophy of Time Travel when you feel the need for a good headache.)

You are right, in my opinion, that if omniscience cannot be suspended then freewill is replaced by complete pre-destiny and we are trapped in a book that has already been written, read and shelved. Pre-destiny carries its own set of problems for me; the biggest one being the question of "why would He bother?" It also removes the concept of joy from the argument because we have no chance to please Him and no reason to praise Him; two things theologians seem to think are very important to God. The only thing I do like about pre-destiny is that if it were to be proven (which it probably can't) then the existence of a supreme being becomes obvious. (Who's prepared our destinies?)

The only other thought I can come up with would be that every possible outcome is known and we traverse a winding path through these possibilities based on our immediate choices. That seems overly complicated to me, but who knows?

I hate to say this because it's not what you're looking for, but in the end these arguments always boil down to a matter of faith. Faith is a concept one either rejects completely, upholds by trying to explain the un-provable and unknowable, (hence the "shaping of Gods powers"), or as in the case of some, just accept as presented. No one ever seems to be able to totally convince anybody but themselves and their like on this subject, and even that wavers back and forth sometimes causing the search to go on. A quote from Ursula Le Guin from "The Left Hand of Darkness" comes to my mind for some reason:

"The unknown, the unforetold, the unproven, that is what life is based on. Ignorance is the ground of thought. Unproof is the ground of action. If it were proven that there is no God, there would be no religion. But also if it were proven that there is a God, there would be no religion... Tell me, Genry, what is known? What is sure, predictable, inevitable—the one certain thing you know concerning your future, and mine?"

"That we shall die."

"Yes. There's only one question that can be answered, Genry, and you already know the answer…. The only thing that makes life possible is permanent, intolerable uncertainty: not knowing what comes next."

Your quote has added to my confusion as you feared - but in a nice way.

You seem to have understood it. It would be extremely hypocritical for me not to be 'nice'; after all, we're just two neighbors talking over The Fence...

[Show/Hide] [Reply]   1 Nerd-It - + Favorite
RE: Not "Required" by Occams :: NR6 :: on 19 March 2008

gnifyus

Thank you. You make sense, but who knows? I would not want to know my destiny and I would prefer that no one else did.

I think you are right about it being a matter of faith - belief without proof. You either have it or you don't. I think it is harder if you are well educated. If you don't I suspect that you can't get it by praying or studying because for that to be effective you already have to believe. Even the very knowledgeable and most devout can still lack faith.

I doubt that you can teach faith either.

It is hard to draw a clear line between the faithful and the gullible. If that sounds offensive to a Christian, then think in terms of other religions.

It's nice to have a friendly neighbour who can talk metaphysics over the fence.