No! That's not the point, and never has been the point, and has nothing to do with any relevant point. One can only wonder why you keep repeating this.

If God knows the future to be like history, then the future *is* like history. *That's* the point!



I don't even think this makes sense. Why would God's knowing nothing about the future impact whether or not things happen sequentially?



That's true. So you can fairly state this. However, for you to state that I don't believe God knows the end from the beginning is surely not. It was just as fair for me to say that you don't believe that God knows the end from the beginning, if the criterion for making such a statement is that you interpret what this means differently than I do.



No, this is wrong. I believe it means that He knows the end from the beginning. That is, say you choose a certain path. You are in the beginning of that path. God knows the end of that path. The idea has to do with blessings and cursings, where God urges taking the right path, because He knows the consequences of each path.



In this case our view that time is sequential is an illusion, unless you think that time was sequential for God too, but He's already lived through it all already, and we're simply repeating what God has already experienced. Is this your idea?

If God is standing at the end of time, then the future has already been settled. You don't see a problem with this?

I didn't say I thought your view of God and time is logical. What I said was:



I said *if* it is the case that the past, present, and future really exist simultaneously, then what you say would logically follow (i.e., that God experiences the past, present, and future simultaneously, and sees the future like history).

Is it your view that the past, present and future really exist simultaneously? If not, then my comment about the rest logically following doesn't apply.

This is true. And God knowing the future like history has no bearing on it.

We've been discussing the possibility that the future is fixed (which I've referred to as "single-threaded", or that it is open ("multi-threaded"). I've made the following argument:

1.God knows things as they are.
2.Therefore, if God knows the future to be fixed (single-threaded), then the future is fixed (single-threaded).

Now we all agree that we experience the future as open, or multi-threaded. That is, from our perspective, we can alter the future. And this is the real issue were are dealing with. Can our decisions alter the future, or impact what God will do?

If the future is fixed (single-threaded), the answer is "no." Nothing we can do can alter the future, nor impact God's decisions, which are already set in stone, as God has already taken into account what we will do. If this is the case then:

1.We cannot hasten or delay Christ's coming.
2.We do not have free will, under the libertarian definition of the word.

Free will can be defined in different ways. One way is that we are free to do what we please. This is a less restrictive definition, and the definition that Calvinists use. One can read Edwards or Luther's work on the bondage of the will (both on line) to get a sense of the arguments involved. Basically the idea is that defining "free will" this way is compatible with a fixed future.

However, if we define "free will" to involve the ability to alter the future, then there is a logical inconsistency between this concept of "free will" and a fixed, or single-threaded, future.

What it comes down to is, is our perception that our decisions make a difference really true? Or is it merely an illusion based on incomplete knowledge?

There is also the question of why God would create a being He was certain would sin. If God set into motion a course of action He was certain would result in sin, how can we maintain that God is not responsible for it?

If the future is already settled, we can't change it. If God knows the future is settled, then it is settled. His knowing it is settled has a bearing on things in that what God knows corresponds to reality. Do you understand this point? If so, please repeat it in your own words. I keep saying this over and over again. I have no indication that you have understood the point. Please give me some indication that you have. Every time you repeat that God's knowing the future like history doesn't change it, or words to that effect, that sounds to me like, "Tom, I don't understand what you're saying." So I would like some indication that you are understanding what I'm saying.

The point to me seems to be simple, which is that what God knows is what reality is.

". . . without making it single-threaded or multi-threaded" as opposed to what you wrote "that would make the future single-threaded."


It wouldn't. And neither does His knowing the future like history. You seem to agree with this.


Okay.


How can God know the end of a particular path if He doesn't know the precise choices they will make thereafter? For example, if they make an unexpected choice it would place them on an entirely different path.


Since God exists in the past, present, and future simultaneously "all of the above" is true. In other words, He experiences time sequentially just like we do. It's just that He does it simultaneously with everyone who has ever lived, who is alive presently, and who has yet to live. None of this means the future is settled. None of this means we cannot make choices that impact the future.

Yes.

The reason God knows "the end from the beginning" (please insert my definition) is because the end of human history has come and gone. Time has already played out sequentially just as it always does. God knowing so doesn't make the future settled, nor does it mean we can't make choices that impact the future. Why would you think so? That is, why do you think God knowing the future like history makes it fixed, settled, or so that we can't make choices that impact the future? Do you also think it means we cannot make choices that result in an outcome different than the one that in reality has already happened? The reality is, to answer your question, time has already played out.

God didn't create sinners. The fact He knew exactly who would sin and die in the lake of fire does not mean He created sinners. Nor does it mean He is responsible for the fact they sinned and will die.

According to you, God knew exactly who might sin and die and He chose to create them anyhow. Why didn't He just choose not to create them and only create the ones He knew wouldn't sin?

I actually wrote "that would 'make' the future single-threaded." The "make" is in quotes. Please reconsider what I wrote taking that into consideration. (i.e., please consider the significance of "make" being in quotes).

Also you ignored, or passed over, the point:



Do you understand what's being said here? If so, please repeat it in your own words. I want to be clear that the point is being understood, as I've been trying to communicate this point for quite some time. Thank you.



If God knew the future to be like history, that would mean the future would be like history, which is to say, single-threaded.



That's the whole point! God wants them to choose a different path if they've chosen a poor one. So He warns them. Here's Jer. 18:



God declares the future not to demonstrate that it is settled, but for the reverse purpose! The Israelites were thinking that prophecy is unconditional, settled. They argued, "What does it matter what we do, since it's been prophecied," thinking that this meant things were settled, that the future was single-threaded, and God was telling them what would happen in the way He would if the future were settled, or single-threaded. But God explained to them that His prophecies are conditional, and He was telling them what would happen to warn them, so they would repent.



You said He's standing at the end of time, so clearly He doesn't experience time sequentially as we do, since we haven't experienced that yet. Just how do you think He got to the end?



But MM, it should be obvious that if what you are asserting were true, that would mean that could NOT be anything sequential for God! Think it through. If God were experiencing every moment in time as if it were the present, there could be nothing sequential for God. He would be experiencing it all at once! This is what "simultaneously" means.



If God knows the future to be settled, then that means it must be settled. Why? Because God can't be incorrect in what He knows. Isn't this clear?

If the future is settled, then our choices, by definition, cannot impact it.