Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ssc-vax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!david From: david@ssc-vax.UUCP (David Norris) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: YAOFW (Yet another Omni/Free Will) Message-ID: <858@ssc-vax.UUCP> Date: Sat, 3-Mar-84 02:21:11 EST Article-I.D.: ssc-vax.858 Posted: Sat Mar 3 02:21:11 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 28-Feb-84 15:41:45 EST Organization: Boeing Aerospace, Seattle Lines: 50 >> "But I think my original point still holds up. God, being omniscient, knows >> that we are going to disobey the law of jurisprudence tomorrow and fall on >> our butt. It does not follow that He *makes* it happen, because watching >> someone do something is not the same as making them do it." > I agree Dave. Darrell, you are forgetting yourself. This is net.religion. You are not supposed to agree with anyone here. :-) > I think I finally am beginning to realize why Dave and I disagree on this > subject. Dave misunderstands my position. I am not saying it is God's > fault if we fall tomorrow. I said in my letter to Dave that while we may > not be constrained to do God's will, we nevertheless have no choice in the > matter of whether we fall tomorrow. > Please understand, Dave. I am not blaming God for MAKING me fall tomorrow. > I am only stating that if God, an omniscient being, KNOWS I'm going to fall > then that is exactly what will happen and I don't have any choice about it. As I said in an earlier article to Jon White, this device can be used independently of God by asking yourself if the future yet "exists" (I use that term loosely). Yet, there remains the task of showing why you do not have any choice in the matter. No logical connection between the two has not yet been made. > ..... but it is predetermined where it will land and it has NO choice in the > matter. We are like that ball. God may not FORCE us to do what we do, but > we nonetheless don't have any say in the matter ourselves, assuming the > omniscience of God. Analogies serve to illustrate. I could carry your example out, and also demonstrate that the ball is going to follow along that same path whether anybody is watching it or not (i.e., God isn't looking, so it "sneaks" a quick right-hand turn??). But I think this is a mis-use of analogy. Metaphors are a poor proof. A cannon ball doesn't have the ability to change course, even if it had the free will to do so. Also, the cannon ball simply obeys a natural law that man himself must obey. We cannot decide to turn back after we have jumped over a cliff (note here that this implies we do not have free will independently of the omniscience or even existence of God). Don't misunderstand; analogies have their legitimate uses. But even the best analogy must be followed by evidence. What needs to be done is to logically show how God's foreknowledge renders man choiceless. I contend that this is not QED. -- David Norris :-) -- uw-beaver!ssc-vax!david