Why free will doesn’t exist in Christianity:

1.God created everything. (Isaiah 45:7, Genesis 1-2)

2. Because God is omniscient, God created everything knowing what futures everything would have. (Acts 15:18)

3. Because god is omnipotent, he could have created the universe differently. This universe is not the default universe. (Genesis 17:1)

4.Creating the universe differently would change the futures of everything in the universe. He could have altered the futures of what he created.

5.Thus, god created us to have the futures that we do.

6. And therefore, we don’t really have free will.

Of course, without free will, the entire basis for Christianity is destroyed. But oh well ^_^.

By the way, please, don't cite verses from the bible that merely assert that we have free will. Find a flaw in the actual argument. The bible's assertion does not negate the inherent contradiction between an omnipotent, omniscient creator and free will.

Source: Me; the bible.

-- Sierra (seirragrit@yahoo.com), January 17, 2005

Answers

Response to I bet this group will ahve fun with this.

This is merely the same tired old argument that forms the basis for the heresy of predestination. The flaw in your "argument" lies in your #2 statement. God did not create all things "knowing" what "futures" everything would have, because the very concept of "future" is absolutely non-applicable to God. God exists outside of time, and consequently experiences no past, no present and no future. God sees every moment of time and every event that occurs in time simultaneously and eternally, including every individual choice of free will that is made in time by every human being who lives between the first moment of time and the moment when time ceases to exist. God therefore is not a "predictor" or "planner" of our free will choices, but only an observer. An eternal observer. And one who merely observes the behavioral choices of another is obviously not responsible in any way for that behavior.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 18, 2005.

God pay know your future, but you are the one choosing your path

-- kat (riesoracle@hotmail.com), January 18, 2005.

Paul M has a wonderful point, but arguement number 5 is wrong too.

5.Thus, god created us to have the futures that we do

God did not create us for a purpose to have a specific future. We, by nature of being, have a purpose to worship God, but God did not put us to a purpose. why? because to suppose that God needs us for a purpose is to say that God cannot do a certain something for Himself, ergo is not a perfect God. therefore, God did not create us for a purpose, our worship of Him is for the benefit of ourselves and our fellow man only.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), January 18, 2005.

I think you settled Sierra's hash, Paul.

If we consider the infinite love God has for His Creation, the interesting question arises:

Do you suppose God has loved each future He contemplates in me equally? In at least one future, I am converted into an image of his Divine Son. This is the future I was created for, with that same direction for us all. No one was created to present God with anything but THAT one. The others can be holy, I suppose. All have good potential except ONE future. He sees it, no doubt. The devil draws us into it by tempting us. None of us is innocent, WE see it too. Why do some of us go to hell? Can you tell us, Sierra?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 18, 2005.

If you believe in election then really, you can never, ever, truly know if your saved until your death bed.

Are we to praise Adam and Eve for the amount of time they CHOSE not to eat the forbidden fruit up until the time that they did? No! Because free-will is a gift from God. Human beings have no merit or earning for their salvation at all. It's all Gods. Yet with His gift of free-will we cooperate with Him as He draws us to Himself.

I also believe nature has a free-will, though not like man. It's strange. I've read alot of interesting material by a scientist who suggested this.

God give you peace.

-- Jason (Enchanted fire5@yahoo.com), January 18, 2005.

Why free will doesn’t exist in Christianity:

1.God created everything. (Isaiah 45:7, Genesis 1-2)

{tRUE.}-Zarove

2. Because God is omniscient, God created everything knowing what futures everything would have. (Acts 15:18)

{Not true. Acocrding to Chaos theory, there are manny parrallel lines of inersection, that condence into a ingle preasent and slidify into a past. Remember, the pat and future arent things, but measurements of actiosn that have transpired. beign able to predict whihc cours eof action will be taken dods not, hwoever, negate the freedom of individuals on a ven line, and there abilkity to change actions can still reshape the future outcome.

The pther problem is that you asusme knowledge of the future means free will doesnt ecist, this is a flawed arumen because knwojgn what someone will do is not tantemount to direct controle over there actions.

For instance, if I had a time machine, and go back tot he 1800's. I know that edison will invent the Light Bulb. But my knwledge htta he will invent ht elight bulb is not the same as my aility to force him to invent it. Just like if I went bakc tot he year 1913, and knew thet wright brothers owiudl invent the airoplane. My knwoeldge htta they will invent the airoplane is nto tequel to them lakcign free will, they arent compelled to invent the airoplane. And, if chaos theory i correcgt and I go bakc too far, my ineracotons,even if not direclty with them, may prevent it, but since I have seen the future I pretty much know that they will. God, beign able to observe whtout interference, can see the future, and knwo what wll occure, wthout changing the past, and thus is asusred of the future outcome, regardles of direct invovlement.

So , yur premise here is false.}-Zarove

3. Because God is omnipotent, he could have created the universe differently. This universe is not the default universe. (Genesis 17:1)

{which bares no relevance to the matter of free will. God coidl have made us withiyt it but didnt, so what?}-Zarove

4.Creating the universe differently would change the futures of everything in the universe. He could have altered the futures of what he created.

{which proves we have no free will because God cose certain aws of physics to govern our NIVERSE? at soem point some choices had to be made, but these hcoices do not limit our freedm to acrt wihtin our own sphere after the mecanics are put into place.}-Zarove

5.Thus, God created us to have the futures that we do.

{This does not lgiclaly flow from 4 and 3. Inded, its illogical. he laws that governt he mechanics of the Universe are not tantemount to direct governors of our thoughts and subsewuent actiosn base don our thoughts. The facthtta Graviry holds me to the Earth and light travels at a cnstant speedis in no way the cause of, say, me commiting adultery. I have free will in that I can choose what I eat, what I wear, and what I do within physical limts.

My choices, rather to eat a grilled cheese sandwitch or str fry veggies, makes my futute,a sw ell as coic eof career, where I live, what firneds I make, ect... the laws of Physics erely sets the physical laws hat define my existance and ability to move, but not what hcoics I make within this context.

Thius my free will is stull notnegated, merley defined.}-Zarove

6. And therefore, we don’t really have free will.

{This is irratonal as a conclusion, since we have free wll to act within the bounds of known physical limitaitons. aain, the laws of nture define our ecitance and the limits ofphysical matter, they do not regulate our choices w make, such as career, family, frends, and cltign we wear.

What you rally mean is we have free will over our actions, but not th elaws of phycics...}-Zarove

Of course, without free will, the entire basis for Christianity is destroyed. But oh well ^_^.

{Not accordign to a Calvinist... they beleive we lakc free will as well, and hey, there Christains. I take it you have a limited undertsading of what Chrisanity is. But then, you have a limited understanding of what the term "Free will" means, and a limited undertsandng of time, and no understanding whatsoever of the laws o Physics and how they have no baring on perosnal choices, aside form limiting the ohysical possibilities. Byt limiting and defining existance does not in and of itsself completley eliminate free will, as stated before.}-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 18, 2005.

We are able to do whatever we please. God doesn't make us do anything. Just because He knows what we are going to do in the future, doesn't mean He makes us do it. I know my family well enough that I can plan their responses to certain stimuli, but that doesn't mean I make them respond that way.

-- Cameron (shaolin__phoenix@hotmail.com), January 18, 2005.

HAHAHA, that sounds like a lame excuse... i do the things i do because God made me that way so it's all His fault so why should I get punished for the bad things i do since i have no free will anyway.... LMAO! oh, i wish i could use that argument on judgment day!!! thanks for the laugh. by the way, this is how much free will that we have...

think of Jonah, God tells him to go somewhere and Jonah takes off in the opposite direction. see, he had the choice to obey God and he chose to disobey. what happens? he gets swallowed by a huge fish. so you can make the argument that God was coercing Jonah to do His will but that proves that Jonah DID have free will. think about it, if you have to coerce someone to do something, then you're not in control of their free will. God was BENDING Jonah to His will, but not "controlling" his will.

-- rina (hellorina@aol.com), January 18, 2005.

Again, his fatal flaw snt his logic ( whih is bad, most of his conlusiosn do nto flow form each other) but his ignorance.

Calvinism beleives in Predestination an the total soverignty of God, defiend ehre to eman that he chose everythign that will happen.

So his claim that without free will the entire Basis of Christianity is destoryed is wrong.

Remidns me of David Ortez, actulally...

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 18, 2005.

i am Christian. i teach a bible study group. i also attend a reformed Christian church. but most of all i know i am a Christian because of the. Testimonium Internum Spiritu Sanctu:

it seems as though in asking if i am a Christian you imply that "real Christians" defend free will. which is not the case.

real Christians believe the bible.

real Christians believe god when he says that you are born again not of your own will but of gods will (John1) (Ephesians 1) (Romans 8)

real Christians believe god when he says that he has chosen some men to be saved by grace and he has reprobate others to destruction (Romans 9)

real Christians believe that god does whatsoever he desires no matter how we feel about it.(Romans 9)

real Christians believe god when he says that not a hair of your head can be damaged unless it be gods will.

real Christians realize that without god choosing them they would have never believed on his name.

and real Christians praise god because he has not left it up to our "free will" but he has saved us from sin and from ourselves.

so i would like to ask you are you a Christian?

do you believe gods word when it says these things? because i see you disagreeing with scripture when you preach free will, and i see you making excuses for god as if he needed you to justify what he has clearly stated. Is it that you do not understand the concept of gods sovereignty?

god never said your will is free. to the contrary he says it is dead in sin. So why would you waste time with this argument? If you are a Christian then stand firm on the words of scripture because all else is folly.

We cannot understand god unless he reveals himself to us which he has done in his word, and in that revelation he tells us who he is and what he has done. All we need to is read it believe it and trust in him alone for our salvation. That is what a real Christian does.

-- AT0lvl (AT0lvl@aol.com), January 19, 2005.

well then God must be downright unjust. cuz that means we're all suffering from the consequences of adam and eve for no reason except that God is sadistic. i mean, if there is NO free will, then adam and eve were booted out of the garden and all of mankind lives in the agony of our sinful bodies because God chose to make adam and eve sin. that goes contrary to God's nature. perhaps these versus refer to the fact that if God didn't call and choose people, then NOBODY would choose God.

-- rina (hellorina@aol.com), January 19, 2005.

Be that as it may Rina, he did disporoveseirra's claim that a lack of free will undermines the premise of Christainity as a whole.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 19, 2005.

Allow me to use a crude allegory. If parents put their newborn child in a playpen, that child is restricted and cannot do everything. However, the parents aren't there controlling the baby's actions of moving its arms/legs, controlling its crying, etc.

Thus, the child has restriction on the one hand, according to the parents will, however, it still has a limited freedom.

In like manner, although we cannot do everything by our own desire, we still have circumstantial freedom.

God uses our circumstantial freewill to accomplish His purpose.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 20, 2005.

Coming to think of it, I don't think newborn babies would fare too well in a playpen. I meant toddlers. Anyway, you get the idea 8-)

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), January 20, 2005.

You misunderstand my argument. I am not applying the word 'future' to god, only to humans. We are temporal beings, and thus, we do have futures. That god created everything knowing how it will all pan out, because, from our perspective, it does pan out, actually helps my argument. God created existence one way; he could have created it differently. He made one painting, he could have made it another.

I'm saying your theology is self-contradictory, that an omnipotent, omniscient creator does not mesh with free will. That Christianity asserts that it can is of no consequence. And I very well can use it against you. I very well can use it against you. It's a logical contradiction, and it calls into question the whole basis for the need for divine absolution.

That he could have created it differently shows he did, in fact, create it to be this way. If he is infinitely self-sufficient, why did he ever create anything in the first place?

You said that free will is not negated, but defined. I disagree. If you want another argument on this topic, consider this: Could an omnipotent, omniscient god answer truthfully a question about the 'future' to a temporal being that has free will?

I'm not simply assuming that foreknowledge negates free will. This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of my argument, or a straw man. It is not fallacious, because your god is not simply omniscient; he is also the omnipotent creator.

3. Because God is omnipotent, he could have created the universe differently. This universe is not the default universe. (Genesis 17:1)

Which bares no relevance to the matter of free will. God could have made humans without it but didn't, so what?

It does in that it shows that god could have altered the will of everything in the universe by changing how the universe is structured. I put this in there to defeat the 'foreknowledge does not mean no free will' argument. It's not just foreknowledge. It's the ability to decide what will constitute the foreknowledge.

Most of your argument simply is a strawman of my argument, or assertions that I'm wrong because I'm ignorant and illogical. I'm well aware of Calvinism. I know that Christianity does not teach that we lack free will. However, this does not negate the logical contradiction; it simply means that Christianity is illogical.

-- Sierra (Sierragrit@yahoo.com), January 20, 2005.

Thats why I don't think that logic is an infallible tool in matters of faith.

-- Jim (furst@flash.net), January 20, 2005.

You misunderstand my argument.

{No I odnt... your arugment is stupid. The logic dosnt work.}-Zarove

I am not applying the word 'future' to god, only to humans.

{Can you pelase spell it God and not god. I know you dont beeliv ein gid, but its bad grammer, and used onlyto offend. The word God here is sued as a proper noun, and athists becan spellign it in lower cae to diliberatley offend.

Plesase spell it properly.}-Zarove

We are temporal beings, and thus, we do have futures.

{Yes but this doesnt mean that knowledge of the future is thecsame as controle of actions...}-Zarove

That god created everything knowing how it will all pan out, because, from our perspective, it does pan out, actually helps my argument.

{ Pleas epsell it God. Not to harp but it rellay does annoy when its spelled god.

And no, it doesnt.

Again, think of the tiem traveler scenario.

If I go back in tme to the year 1909, I know full well the wright brothers will invent the Airplane in a year. This knowledge of there futue actions does not mean, however, that I controle there future actions.

The same aplies to God. ( sepelled with a Capitol G.)

Just because he mad eus and knows our acitosn does nt mean he cotnrles these choices.

Thats the critical flaw to your ligic.}-Zarove

God created existence one way; he could have created it differently.

{But he didnt "Create" ur hcoices. we made those. Thats the point. Kowign what choices we will make is not the same as controling those choices.}-Zarove

He made one painting, he could have made it another.

{How do you know he didnt? Have you never read up on quantum theory and the idea of Parrallel worlds?}-Zarove

I'm saying your theology is self-contradictory, that an omnipotent, omniscient creator does not mesh with free will.

{and youer wrong. Free will simpley means I have the ability to mak choices. Omnipotent beigns can have two different ways to allow free will.

1: multiple futures, in whihc every choice will be made therefore seurign our freedomto select which future line we choose.

2: The idea of a fixed timeline in which God can look ahead. This dosnt negat eour free will, so much as ves God as able to see hwat choices we mde and go bakc in tme and notify us, or rahter see all time as the same.

swe still owever make the choice.

Again, see the time travler analogy.}-Zarove

That Christianity asserts that it can is of no consequence.

{But "Christanity" dosnt assert this! The while poin of Calvinism is that we DO NOT have free will! did you NOT bother to see that all of christnity isnt based on free will?}-Zarove

And I very well can use it against you.

{But you didnt prove by the Bible that Free will doesnt exist, all you did was prove that your too daft to realise that KNOWING the future is not equel to CONTROLING the actiosn that LEAD TO the future.}-Zarove

I very well can use it against you.

{Only if you ignore the main point that defeats your argument.

Ill repeat it.

Knowledge of the future is not equel to controel over the actiosn that eladtot he futue.

Again, I refer bakc ot he tme traveler analogy.}-Zarove

It's a logical contradiction, and it calls into question the whole basis for the need for divine absolution.

{1: Its not a cotnradiction since Christainity dosnt hinge on free will, if it did, Calvinism wouidl bnever have been able to form. Im not a calvinist, but the existance of Calvinism discredits your claim tjat free wil is essential to Christainity.

2: Your logic doesnt flow, please see my above rpsnce to your logic.}- Zarove

That he could have created it differently shows he did, in fact, create it to be this way.

{Again, which only proves that he created the set environemnt a certian way, NOT that he created us to make spaiifc choices and exersises comlete controle over said choices.}-Zarove

If he is infinitely self-sufficient, why did he ever create anything in the first place?

{ for fun? whoever said he "Needed" to create, maybe he just wanted to?}-Zarove

You said that free will is not negated, but defined. I disagree.

{I said free will isnt negated, and didnt mention deifning it. Ill repost my repsonce sine yo ignroed mine.

The tirht is your ligical conclusion doesnt flow form the premise.}-Zarove

If you want another argument on this topic, consider this: Could an omnipotent, omniscient god answer truthfully a question about the 'future' to a temporal being that has free will?

{Yes. Again see the Time Traveler analogy.Likewise, if you beleive the uture is maluable you can still get the anser to read "Yes".

Do I need to go to oainful detail?}-Zarove

I'm not simply assuming that foreknowledge negates free will.

{Ah, but you are.}-Zarove

This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of my argument, or a straw man.

{Straw man woid means a diliberate misrepresentaion, not a misundersanding.}-Zarove

It is not fallacious, because your god is not simply omniscient; he is also the omnipotent creator.

{wihc means nothign to rather or not free will is negated... ahain, simpley possessing allpower is nto the same as excersising it over people.}-Zarove

3. Because God is omnipotent, he could have created the universe differently. This universe is not the default universe. (Genesis 17:1)

{I agree, but simpley becaue he choose to create the Univers ea certain way doesnt mean that our choices where automaticlaly predetmrien at the momnet of creation.}-Zarove

Which bares no relevance to the matter of free will. God could have made humans without it but didn't, so what?

It does in that it shows that god could have altered the will of everything in the universe by changing how the universe is structured.

{

1: its GOD with a Cap G.God. Not god. Bad grammer used beause toy font beleivein God is not an excuse.

2: Changing the sturcture if the Universe woidl change ghe nvironmnt and lead us to diferent choices, but it woidl do so in an indirect way. He STILL is not controlign EVERY SINGLE DECISION MADE.

For instance, if theland masses where different, differnet national boundaries woiud have been formed. But national boundaries themselves woil have arisen and fallen based on the efforts of men.

Cnaigng hte nevironemtn may change the tyoes of choices we make, but will not negate the ability to choose.}-Zarove

I put this in there to defeat the 'foreknowledge does not mean no free will' argument.

{But it doesnt defeat the arugment, indeed itss nto even related t it! f I where Born in Pensylvania instead of neglan, and lived there my whole life instead of mocing to Tennessee, my ptions woidl be different. But I woidl stull jave options and thus stil be able to make choices within the given set of cwercmstances.

Simpley sayign God coidl have given us different initial cercumstnces doesnt mean God has absolute corole over the spacific choices we make.}-Zarove

It's not just foreknowledge. It's the ability to decide what will constitute the foreknowledge.

{ You are confusing the Ability to controle the cercumsyances we liv ein withhte ability to esice what we do within the ocnfines of said cercmsyances.

If God ad decides to let me be Born in Pakistan instead of enfgland for instance, my cercumstances woidl be different, and I woidl be presented with differnt options, but I woidl stull have choices to make.

Chaniggn the environemn changes the types of choices that can be made, but fdoes not negate the ability to make choices.}-Zarove

Most of your argument simply is a strawman of my argument, or assertions that I'm wrong because I'm ignorant and illogical.

{No, my arugment larlgey poins out that changing the environment and ths the cercumsyances only changes the optiosn set before us, it des not remove our ability tohave free will.}-Zarove

I'm well aware of Calvinism.

{Then you know Christyaiity;s premise isnt all abut fre will...}- Zarove

I know that Christianity does not teach that we lack free will.

{Calvinism does...}-Zarove

However, this does not negate the logical contradiction; it simply means that Christianity is illogical.

{Or your arugment is illogical.

1: Christainity in general doesnt spea to free will, thoguh most theologies within the greater umberella teahc we have free will.

2: Your arugments are flawed, sicn you confuse the cercumances we ar epresented with with the choices we make. Just because we are givin a different set of cercumstances doesnt mean we are automaticllay subject to the cercumstances and lack free will.}-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 20, 2005.

Reproduced from above.

Why free will doesn’t exist in Christianity: 1.God created everything. (Isaiah 45:7, Genesis 1-2)

{tRUE.}-Zarove

2. Because God is omniscient, God created everything knowing what futures everything would have. (Acts 15:18)

{Not true. Acocrding to Chaos theory, there are manny parrallel lines of inersection, that condence into a ingle preasent and slidify into a past. Remember, the pat and future arent things, but measurements of actiosn that have transpired. beign able to predict whihc cours eof action will be taken dods not, hwoever, negate the freedom of individuals on a ven line, and there abilkity to change actions can still reshape the future outcome.

The pther problem is that you asusme knowledge of the future means free will doesnt ecist, this is a flawed arumen because knwojgn what someone will do is not tantemount to direct controle over there actions.

For instance, if I had a time machine, and go back tot he 1800's. I know that edison will invent the Light Bulb. But my knwledge htta he will invent ht elight bulb is not the same as my aility to force him to invent it. Just like if I went bakc tot he year 1913, and knew thet wright brothers owiudl invent the airoplane. My knwoeldge htta they will invent the airoplane is nto tequel to them lakcign free will, they arent compelled to invent the airoplane. And, if chaos theory i correcgt and I go bakc too far, my ineracotons,even if not direclty with them, may prevent it, but since I have seen the future I pretty much know that they will. God, beign able to observe whtout interference, can see the future, and knwo what wll occure, wthout changing the past, and thus is asusred of the future outcome, regardles of direct invovlement.

So , yur premise here is false.}-Zarove

3. Because God is omnipotent, he could have created the universe differently. This universe is not the default universe. (Genesis 17:1)

{which bares no relevance to the matter of free will. God coidl have made us withiyt it but didnt, so what?}-Zarove

4.Creating the universe differently would change the futures of everything in the universe. He could have altered the futures of what he created.

{which proves we have no free will because God cose certain aws of physics to govern our NIVERSE? at soem point some choices had to be made, but these hcoices do not limit our freedm to acrt wihtin our own sphere after the mecanics are put into place.}-Zarove

5.Thus, God created us to have the futures that we do.

{This does not lgiclaly flow from 4 and 3. Inded, its illogical. he laws that governt he mechanics of the Universe are not tantemount to direct governors of our thoughts and subsewuent actiosn base don our thoughts. The facthtta Graviry holds me to the Earth and light travels at a cnstant speedis in no way the cause of, say, me commiting adultery. I have free will in that I can choose what I eat, what I wear, and what I do within physical limts.

My choices, rather to eat a grilled cheese sandwitch or str fry veggies, makes my futute,a sw ell as coic eof career, where I live, what firneds I make, ect... the laws of Physics erely sets the physical laws hat define my existance and ability to move, but not what hcoics I make within this context.

Thius my free will is stull notnegated, merley defined.}-Zarove

6. And therefore, we don’t really have free will.

{This is irratonal as a conclusion, since we have free wll to act within the bounds of known physical limitaitons. aain, the laws of nture define our ecitance and the limits ofphysical matter, they do not regulate our choices w make, such as career, family, frends, and cltign we wear.

What you rally mean is we have free will over our actions, but not th elaws of phycics...}-Zarove

Of course, without free will, the entire basis for Christianity is destroyed. But oh well ^_^.

{Not accordign to a Calvinist... they beleive we lakc free will as well, and hey, there Christains. I take it you have a limited undertsading of what Chrisanity is. But then, you have a limited understanding of what the term "Free will" means, and a limited undertsandng of time, and no understanding whatsoever of the laws o Physics and how they have no baring on perosnal choices, aside form limiting the ohysical possibilities. Byt limiting and defining existance does not in and of itsself completley eliminate free will, as stated before.}-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 20, 2005.

Small mistae, I meant "was defined" not "was not."

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 21, 2005.

I'll say it again. It's not just that he has foreknowledge. He has foreknowledge AND control. He could have created the universe a different way, which would have resulted in different futures for every creature in the universe.

I mean, the argument works even without omniscience, as with the parent analogy.

Say I'm pregnant. I have a choice to live in city a vs. city b.

Are you honestly arguing that my choice of which city to live in will not affect the potential future of my child?

-- Sierra (sierragrit@yahoo.com), January 21, 2005.

He does not have "foreknowledge" because "foreknowledge" means "knowledge before the fact", and for God there is no such thing as "before the fact", because in an eternal existence there is no such thing as "before". Time-related terms are meaningless and irrelevant to one who exists outside of time. God simply has TOTAL knowledge, which includes knowledge of events which are in the "future" from our limited temporal perspective, but which He has already observed from all eternity. Not knowledge "before" an event. Not knowledge "after" an event. Just total, eternal knowledge.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), January 21, 2005.

i also dont think that sierra caught on to my first arguement either, big Paul. God didnt create us to serve a set function, nor a set goal that He needs us to accomplish. does the choice of city a or b affect the future of your child? yes. does that mean you have complete control over the future of your child? no. this is a logical fallacy by weak analogy, however, as God is infinitely greater than that which is temporal (such as you).

Again, there can be no express purpose that God created us for because that would mean that God created us in order to do something, when God is completely sufficient unto self. our purpose of existance, then, is of benefit to the self, not to benefit God. it just so happens that fulfillment of humanity demands worship of God, but that, again, is not a necessary being in the universe. if no one worshiped God, then God would still exist and would still be perfect.

back to the example, however, even if we are created with a purpose, if i make a device (say, a widget) and then give it to my friend, i dont necessarily dictate the future of that device. whatever my friend chooses to do with it is the future of that device. as such, the example of the universe is the same, God created it and gave it to us for our own use (see genesis). at the same time, WE are the determiners of that existance. your arguement doesnt hold water because it demands that God have foreknowledge (when what God has is ultimate knowledge) and that God have a need for us to serve a specific purpose (which, being God, He does not)

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), January 21, 2005.

Sierra, what are you trying to truly get at? Are you implying that those who believe in "free will" are not saved because that to you is a works/grace gospel?

I used to believe in election big time and I would go on for hours arguing, wow that was a long time ago as I think about it, but again it all comes down to how do you know that what you are teaching and believing is true? Where is there the infalliable interpreter. Oh I know it's the Holy Spirit but through whom is he using when there are numerous conflicting beliefs?

Free will also is a God given gift. All Gods and not ours therefore we can not claim ANY credit what-so-ever on our salvation. We can not even seek Him until He draws Himself to us and then we have to make a Choice. We cooperate with Him yet He gets all the glory. Man, Salvation is an AWESOME mystery.

God give you peace.

-- Jason (Enchantedfire5@yahoo.com), January 21, 2005.

oops, I meant "until He draws us to Himeself"

-- Jason (Enchanted fire5@yahoo.com), January 21, 2005.

I'll say it again. It's not just that he has foreknowledge. He has foreknowledge AND control.

{tHATS YOUR BIUG MISTAKE. yOU ASUSME CONTROEL OVER THE CERCUMSYANCES IS EQUEL TO CONTROLE OVER THE CHOICES MADE, IN REALITY, AS BOTH i AND pAUL h HAVE POINTED OUT, THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

Simpley being able to chose the cercumstances with which we live in as an putside environment is not the same as controle ove r our decisions within the given environment.}-Zarove

He could have created the universe a different way, which would have resulted in different futures for every creature in the universe.

{ Whiuch doesnt negater free will.

As stated above,contorle over the cercumstances of the nevironment is not equel to contorle over the choices we make within said environment.

You sem to think that free will is dependant on this eign the default Setitng ofr the Universe, and so since God could have chosen to create the Universe in another way, we lack free will thus Christainity as a whole is poitnless and self contradictory.

None of these premises flow logiclaly into each other.

Since Free will is not inhenretlyu nessisary in Christanity, then Christanity isnt defeated by a lack of free will.

and since the ability to set fdifferent rles for the Universe is not identical to controling our choises made iwhtin the neviornment once it is created, the ability to construct a Univrse with different rules is not proof that we lack free will.}-Zarove

I mean, the argument works even without omniscience, as with the parent analogy.

{ No, it doesnt. A parent can choose some things about WHERE the child is, but not HOW the child chooses to respond to given stimuli.}- Zarove

Say I'm pregnant. I have a choice to live in city a vs. city b.

{ But do you have complege cotole over your childs decisions after giving Birth and after said cild grows and matures? You conrole the initial nevironment in which the child is born, just as God chose the initial setitng rules of nature for the Universe before creating us, but this is not equivolent to us lakcign fre will any more thant he child will have free will no matter what city the cild is born in, and you will have no conrole over what the cilds reactions will eb to any given stimuli.}-Zarove

Are you honestly arguing that my choice of which city to live in will not affect the potential future of my child?

{effect yes, oblitorate free will no. Therein lies your problem.

You asusme that, since God may have made the Univese diffeently, hwo we choose to respond ot the nevironment is lakcign in free will.

Again, simpley controing he cercumstances of our environemnt, in this case the hwole of the Physical Universe, is not equivolent to controling our responces to it.

Indeed, I covered htis in the " What If I had not been Born in sussex and instead was Born in Pennsylvania" comment.

It widl have shaped what I was exposed to and ultimatley cotributed to changes in my personality, but how I cose to respnd to the stimuli would be wihtin my own power, and not my mothers. }-Zarove

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 21, 2005.

TO SUMMERISE.

You beleive that becausehtis is not the default Universe, and becaue God has complete corle over how the Unvierse formed and what Ohysical laws govenr the Unvierse, then we lack free will. You therefore beelive Chrisyantiy is slef conradictory because without free will the abasis of Christainity collapses.

In addition tot he fact that free will is not a prerequisite to Chrisyntiy as a whole, you overlook the obvious error to yout line of logic.

Simpley beign able to cotorle the laws that Govenr the Unvierse and how it formed is not equel to cotroling the hoices made by free agets after creation.

IKn short, just becase God cuased a certain cercumstance to arise in the formaiton fo the Universe dosnt mean that how we choose to rpsond to the givin stilumi is direclty udner his cotnrole.

we are still free to react to the stimuli howsoever we choose to, thus we have free will.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 21, 2005.