Not to mention how boring it would be for everything to be a rerun!

And then the question would arise if the Father knows what the Son is going to do and think before He does it. Does He know what He, himself, is going to do before He does it? Does He even make choices or are they also fixed in eternity? Is the nature of creation destiny or dynamic?

scott

Any "decisions" would have been made in eternity, before anything was done, and then creation and everything that followed would be merely the playing out of what God knew would inevitably happen.

You're right, that does sound boring.

OTOH, when one considers chaos theory and quantum mechanics, we see the possibility of even inanimate creation behaving in a spontaneous, not determined, way. The Creator was well pleased because creation was "very good."

I am free to write or not to write. The angel wouldnt have had to go and erase what I wrote because if I had not wrote it then the book would have said that. I think God gets His information from our future free decisions. Its not that He would have been wrong if I decided to do something different but that He knows what I was actually going to do. His knowledge is descriptive instead of prescriptive like your trying to make it. I dont understand how you can say its not an issue of causation. It is an issue of time and how God interacts within our time/space. It seems that is what your saying to me, that Gods knowledge of it means you can only do that.. What if His knowledge has nothing to do with what you were going to do. What if He just innately knows it because He is God? Somehow He transcends time to know the future without actually effecting it(causatively or otherwise)




Thats what I was saying about affirming the consequent just because you say "If God foresees that only one option is available then only one option is available." You are assuming that God only foresees that one option is available. I would reject the premise before I even get to the supporting arguement. He sees many options and He knows which one will be chosen. I cant explain my position any clearer I dont think. But I do enjoy discussing it. Risk can be real because Jesus could have actually failed. Using middle knowledge would God have been able to see what would have happened if Jesus failed? Again what does God knowing whether Jesus would fail or not have to do with anything? Do you think this openness is a self limiting thing or that God only knows what is to be known and there is no object of the future to be known until it happens? What do you think about texts like

Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me,
Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying, 'My counsel shall stand, And I will do all My pleasure,

Isaiah 41:21 "Present your case," says the Lord. "Bring forth your strong reasons," says the King of Jacob.
Isaiah 41:22 "Let them bring forth and show us what will happen; Let them show the former things, what they were,That we may consider them, And know the latter end of them; Or declare to us things to come.
Isaiah 41:23 Show the things that are to come hereafter, That we may know that you are gods; Yes, do good or do evil, That we may be dismayed and see it together.
Isaiah 41:24 Indeed you are nothing, And your work is nothing; He who chooses you is an abomination.
Isaiah 44:6 "Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: 'I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God.
Isaiah 44:7 And who can proclaim as I do? Then let him declare it and set it in order for Me, Since I appointed the ancient people. And the things that are coming and shall come, Let them show these to them.
Isaiah 44:8 Do not fear, nor be afraid; Have I not told you from that time, and declared it?You are My witnesses. Is there a God besides Me? Indeed there is no other Rock; I know not one.' "

Acts 15:16 'After this I will returnAnd will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up;
Acts 15:17 So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the Lord who does all these things.'
Acts 15:18 "Known to God from eternity are all His works.

Psalm 139:16 Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them.

Once one comes to the point where they feel God partly determines things in our lives like Peter denying Christ then how do we know what is being determined and what isnt? Isnt that a small step toward hard determinism? Do we really have free will at all if we never know at what points in our lives God is going to take it away?

Free how? This is a very important question, as there are two ways to define free will (two main ways). One is compatibilisic free will, and the other incompatibilisic. If you mean the former, then I agree with your statement, given your presuppositions. If you mean the latter, then you're not.

In case your not familiar with the term "compatibilistic" it means in harmony, or compatible, with determinism. In this case "free" means that you can do what you choose to do (as opposed to being able to choose from more than one option). In the incompatibilistic definition, you would not be free, since even though you can write if that's your choice, writing is the only option available (logically) to you.



Don't get the cart before the horse! What the angel writes comes down *first*. Not *after* you act, but before.



He would be wrong if He told the angel you were going to write, and you didn't. Given that can't happen, you can't not write.



No, this is completely incorrect. I've been assuming the whole time that God's knowledge is descriptive. Otherwise I would not have argued against your statement that I was saying God's knowledge was causative.

God is a bit of a red herring here. The problem is really about the nature of the future, not God's knowledge of it. If *any* being could know the future as you are suggesting (it doesn't have to be God) then the future would have to be determined. If the future's determined, then it's not not determined, which is to say, not determined by us, since we haven't acted yet.



Because it's a logical problem I'm pointing out. The problem is not one of cause but of inference. If one assumes certain assumptions, then conclusions follow from that. It's not a matter of the assumption causing the conclusion to follow in some direct cause and effect way, like if I push you then you move backwards, but in a logical way, like being able to prove that there's no largest prime number



Again, it's not about God. Substitute any other being for God, and the same problems remain.



You're missing the all important middle step. It's not:

a.God knows what you will do
b.Therefore you must do it

as if a cause b. That's not it. It's

1.
a.If the future is determined then
b.You don't have more than one option

and

2.
a.If God knows what you will do then
b.The future is determined

1. is probably easier to see, so I'll comment on 2. The reason that 2a. implies 2b is because God knows things as they are. If God knows you will do this and not that, then God is knowing the future as determined, since it's already been determined that you will do this and not that. Only if you might do this or you might to that can the future not be determined.



Try thinking of things without using God as the being who is seeing the future. Say an angel or a person has crystal ball like powers. The same issues apply.

I think it would be good to consider the proof too. I'll repost it.

Here's the proof.

Assume some other option, other than A, is available for a person making a decision. Then the probability that not A will happen is greater than 0%.

If God's foreknowledge is such that He knows with certainty that something will happen, then the probability of A is 100%. Otherwise we would be led to the absurdity of God's knowing with certainty that something will happen and the thing not happening, with God's being wrong.

Given the probability of A is 100%, then the probability of not A is 0%. This is a contradiction. Hence, given each of the subsequent assumptions and conclusions are valid, the original assumption that there was some other option available is false.

End of proof.

The way a proof works is to start with an assumption or assumptions and then work logically step by step to a conclusion. In order to argue that the proof is invalid, you must either disagree with an assumption or one of the logical steps.

Is there an assumption or logical step that you disagree with in the above proof?

I understand that. What I want to see is if you are willing to put your premises together and take them to the logical conclusion.

When God promised, "He shall bruise your head," could Adam take that as a 100% certainty? Yes or no?

Had Christ failed (sinned) then Satan would have been proven right about God all along and it wouldn't matter if He kept His promise or not!

Adam's hope was in who God is and Jesus revealed that! Christ proved that love is stronger than Satan's lies! God knew it from the beginning!

scott

To Abraham God made a similar promise, the same actually, and swore by Himself that the promise would come true. So yes, Adam could take it as a certainty. If Christ had failed, the repercussions would have been great indeed.

Okay. But what part of it explains what the holy angels learned about God that they didn't know before they choose to side with God when the other angels rebelled?


Does this mean God knows in advance with certainty which of all the options will play out in the future? Or, does it mean God cannot know in advance with certainty which of all the options will play out in the future?


I appreciate you explaining what you believe. I wasn’t aware you believe this way until just now.


What good does it do God to know all the possible ways the future can play out? In what way in this knowledge useful to God, or to anyone else?


You say God is not limited by time, but what do you mean? What you wrote above about God and time makes it sound like He is no different than us, that He is limited in the same way we are. That we die the first death is irrelevant.

Also, the view I have been sharing does not limit God’s ability to relate to us within our time and space constraints. Why would it? And, why wouldn’t He?

Tom, what do you hear Sister White saying in the following passage, especially as it relates to what the angels knew about God before rebellion broke out?

Satan, the chief of the fallen angels, once had an exalted position in heaven. He was next in honor to Christ. The knowledge which he, as well as the angels who fell with him, had of the character of God, of His goodness, His mercy, wisdom, and excellent glory, made their guilt unpardonable. {4BC 1163.2}

There was no possible hope for the redemption of those who had witnessed and enjoyed the inexpressible glory of heaven, and had seen the terrible majesty of God, and, in presence of all this glory, had rebelled against Him. There were no new and wonderful exhibitions of God's exalted power that could impress them so deeply as those they had already experienced. If they could rebel in the very presence of glory inexpressible, they could not be placed in a more favorable condition to be proved. There was no reserve force of power, nor were there any greater heights and depths of infinite glory to overpower their jealous doubts and rebellious murmuring (Redemption: The Temptation of Christ, pp. 18, 19). {4BC 1163.3}
[/quote]