If there is a god, can there be free will?

[BadPoison]

So if omniscience doesn't dictate, it doesn't solve the incompatibility, because omniscience still needs a fixed future.

It's not a fixed future. There is no such thing. It is a fixed past. Remember this god fellow is suppose to live outside of time too.

Even if a future were fixed it doesn't render you unable to make your own choices. It's nonsense from every angle.

You've shown that omniscience doesn't necessarily dictate a fixed future, but you have not shown how omniscience is possible without a fixed future. Show how this works. Thus far, you've made statements that aren't compatible.

You said:

It's not a fixed future. There is no such thing. It is a fixed past. Remember this god fellow is suppose to live outside of time too.

I think this implies that not only is the past fixed, the future and the entire time line must be fixed. God knowing is dependent upon it being fixed. Otherwise he can't know.

"God living outside of time" doesn't support your notion that the future isn't fixed. In fact, it does the opposite.

[Sophus]

I think this implies that not only is the past fixed, the future and the entire time line must be fixed. God knowing is dependent upon it being fixed. Otherwise he can't know.

Again, all in previous statements:

...if one were to see into the future then it would be comparable to examining the past.

Just because this present is our present doesn't mean it couldn't be his past. If he lives outside of time and/or lives in past present and future and whatnot, then the argument that he is seeing into the future is futile.

All in all we're carrying this silly topic on probably longer than it deserves. The theistic aspects of it are too ridiculous to even be considered logically. I think we can all agree there is no god and there is freewill.

[BadPoison]

[quote/]
All in all we're carrying this silly topic on probably longer than it deserves. The theistic aspects of it are too ridiculous to even be considered logically. I think we can all agree there is no god and there is freewill.[/quote]
I'll agree that the theistic aspects of this discussion are ridiculous.

However, god's aside, the article Bowmore linked to earlier about relativity and a fixed future are still intriguing to contemplate. Of course, that is an entirely different argument!

[bowmore]

So if omniscience doesn't dictate, it doesn't solve the incompatibility, because omniscience still needs a fixed future.

It's not a fixed future. There is no such thing. It is a fixed past. Remember this god fellow is suppose to live outside of time too.

Even if a future were fixed it doesn't render you unable to make your own choices. It's nonsense from every angle.

That's just it. God, existing outside of time, knows all of time, to him every point in time is fixed. It is us that perceive the future as unknown, and therefore interpret it as not fixed. For the god fellow there is no difference between past, present and future.
If our future is fixed, there are no choices to be made. That means that, if free will is the ability to make choices freely, a fixed future precludes free will. The perception that we have free will, is then equally wrong as the perception that the future is not fixed.

You'll note that apparently if you want to move your arm you can move your arm, and that therefore you have some control over how the future is laid out. You don't however, because if the future is fixed, what you will is equally fixed as what you do.

[bowmore]

Just because this present is our present doesn't mean it couldn't be his past. If he lives outside of time and/or lives in past present and future and whatnot, then the argument that he is seeing into the future is futile.

He sees what is the future to us.

All in all we're carrying this silly topic on probably longer than it deserves. The theistic aspects of it are too ridiculous to even be considered logically. I think we can all agree there is no god and there is freewill.

Ehm, no. There is no god, and there is no free will. (as I believe the future is fixed).

[Sophus]

He sees what is the future to us.

Precisely my point.

Ehm, no. There is no god, and there is no free will. (as I believe the future is fixed).

You're under that psychological impression that just because the future will have one outcome man is not free to disobey that result if he pleases. However, man will wrought the future with his volitions (or lack of).

[bowmore]

He sees what is the future to us.

Precisely my point.

I felt we agreed here indeed.

Ehm, no. There is no god, and there is no free will. (as I believe the future is fixed).

You're under that psychological impression that just because the future will have one outcome man is not free to disobey that result if he pleases. However, man will wrought the future with his volitions (or lack of).

It is by no means psychological. My opinion has it's base in science. I've linked to this article earlier in the thread, add to this, that I am a naturalist, I can only come to the conclusion I have come to. I acknowledge that there are certain definitions of free will that can operate in this setting (e.g. Plantinga's), but not mine, nor yours.

[Sophus]

Let's do what we should have started off doing.    In your own words please define freewill.

[bowmore]

Let's do what we should have started off doing.    In your own words please define freewill.

Free will is the ability to make choices, free from other determinants.

[BadPoison]

Let's do what we should have started off doing.    In your own words please define freewill.

Free will is the ability to make choices, free from other determinants.

Exactly, and the perception of being able to make your own choices does not refute the possibility of there still being an external determinant.

We all perceive the ability to make our own choices.

[Sophus]

We do make our own choices. The only determinant is ourselves. Although we'll probably never see eye to eye on that so I suspect the debate will die here.

[bowmore]

We do make our own choices. The only determinant is ourselves. Although we'll probably never see eye to eye on that so I suspect the debate will die here.

We may indeed be forced to agree to disagree.

I just don't understand how you can posit ourselves as a determinant free from other determinants knowing that we exist within the time that is fixed. i.e. a determined determinant is not free in my opinion.

[Sophus]

WEll like I said I don't think it's fixed.

[bowmore]

WEll like I said I don't think it's fixed.

Ok. We disagree there.

But what I fail to understand is how you think that even a fixed future would allow for free will. Or perhaps that's not something you've asserted, and then I must've misunderstood you at some point.

[BadPoison]

WEll like I said I don't think it's fixed.

Ok. We disagree there.

But what I fail to understand is how you think that even a fixed future would allow for free will. Or perhaps that's not something you've asserted, and then I must've misunderstood you at some point.

The original post stated the premise was if omniscience existed could there be free will. The majority of our arguments originally were operating with the understanding of a fixed future (as a premise) or so I thought...

If Sophus were to say "The future is not fixed, therefore we have free will. If the future is fixed, we can not have free will" then I would agree. But it's not quite what I'm hearing you say, Sophus.

We can have another discussion about timelines and their static/dynamic properties