Free will contradicts theism

Author: Benjamin

Posts

Total: 103
Topic's author
#1
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 93
Posts: 828
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
Free will contradicts theism because a creator God necesarily prohibits free will.



P1: An omniscient God knows the complete history of every possible universe; (by necesity including all choices made every universe)

P2: A creator God decided which of the possible universes to create

C: God literally decided how history would turn out and what choices people would make






There is no way around this conclusion. God decided to create a universe where Adam and Eve would eat from the fruit of knowledge. God decided that Adam and Eve would sin, because literally nothing is outside his controll. By definition, nothing happens that conflict with God's decisions. Adam and Eve did not have free will; their choice was no more free than a clock is to show the correct time or not. The creator of the watch is responsible for the watch dysfunctioning, not the watch istself. Blaming a human for a crime is like blaming a gun for a murder --- sure it was the gun who shot the bullet, but the gun was controlled by someone else. This is just an analogy of course, but the point is important. 


The problem of evil is so often dismissed without further elaboration by pointing to free will, and that humans (and/or demons), not God, cause evil and suffering in this world. When used to solve the problem of evil free will is nothing short of magic being invoked to dodge the disturbing implications of God's magic.


If we remove the "magic" from the equation we can confidently say that all humans have choice --- but that CHOISE IS NOT FREE FROM EXTERNAL CONTROLL AND CAUSALITY
#2
Bones
Bones's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 965
3
7
9
Bones's avatar
Bones
3
7
9
Theists will reply that God is outside of time. 
#3
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Benjamin
This generic topic gets confused by the fact that man's choices and actions are distinct from the knowledge of God vs this made up term that forces you to believe something that is not possible. There are no "decisions" God makes or predetermined knowledge God has in relation to what you decide to do, period the end. It's plain stupid theology and it should be as clear as day. People get hung up on this idea that God "has" to be omniscient, sorry but God does not have to be anything you assume, and yet God is still God, even if the term omniscience has no solid relevance to the attributes of the Creator.

The dynamics of creatures own will is far too complex and spontaneous to be anything of a predetermined condition, unless you want to prove that every time a rabbit shits or chooses to eat a blade of grass God has already established that it would lol? did God plan out every time you would have to tie your shoe or choose which food you want to eat? this is exactly the kind of BS you have to accept if you really believe that man's actions were decided or predetermined.

It's not that complicated, God creates a world and an environment where creatures are free to go about choosing and reacting to their circumstances, desires and needs and those factors aren't controlled they are a unique and spontaneous event.
There are no middle grounds here, if you take the assumption that everything is already known or decided then you have to believe God is something other than what is even possible, that an absurdity is somehow rational. If God "decided" every time you would have to sneeze then God also decided every time a draft of wind would occur, decided and knew every time a piece of dust would land on your forehead.
That is ridiculous, there is no system or perfect knowledge that could ever predetermine such random occurrences within a world so vast and unpredictable. There are however, many things God should and would know just creating an entire universe. And those are things we could rationally discuss and easily make sense of. But mans will is as unpredictable as the wind blowing in any one direction, even if there are factors involved that would sway his decisions.

I like to compare your little reality that God enjoys observing to that of any pet you ever owned. You can create an environment and a home so precise and fitting for that little pet, and despite the reality that you provide food, monitor and create the very setting it lives under....you enjoy the reality that everything that pet does is completely fresh, unique and spontaneous, even though you created its very environment, and that pet sees you as its master.
Imagine if you somehow knew and planned everything it would choose and decide, every time it would get hungry, every time it would move or need care before you brought it into your reality. What kind of creation would that be? what kind of reason would you even have to want to experience such insanity? that would ruin the very purpose of the special nature of will vs God's knowledge. God is a Creator of life, not a Puppet Master. Life is as spontaneous a thing as anything you could possibly imagine because of the dynamics that are involved in any single choice, reaction or event that pertains to any circumstance and the infinite possibilities that could result in any scenario.


#4
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,343
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Benjamin
Those of the Reformed faith hold to what is cause first and second causes. 

God is the first cause of all things.  He is the author of life. 

A "second cause" is simply "a cause caused by something else." This expression is used in theology to distinguish between God as the ultimate cause of everything that comes to pass and the myriad smaller causes we see at work in the world. Chapter 5.2, 5.3 - Reformation 21

Second causes are the book of life where people and things make choices and are responsible themselves for them.

It is just that in the reality of life - that God is not only the author of life - he is an active participant within it as well.  

Hence God did order from all eternity as the author of all - that humanity would sin.  This was the first cause. And everything in relation to this primary cause is not sinful. 

Yet, humanity is himself totally and absolute responsible for all that he chooses to do or not do.  

Zeno the philosopher touched on this paradox when he talked about arrows.  An arrow can only be where it is - it cannot be where it is not. Since it cannot be where it is not it must be where it is.  So then how does an arrow fly from one end of the room to the other? For it must move from where it is - to where it is not.  But since it cannot actually be where it is not, then it must remain where it is. How then can it move? Zeno's paradox established that nothing at any time can actually move. And that is impossible to actually move.   And yet - we all know that arrows fly and things move.   The question is how - does it do it logically? 

The answer is - within the realms of first and second causes.  
Topic's author
#5
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 93
Posts: 828
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@EtrnlVw
Your argument is that our world is too complex for God to have precise foreknowledge about it. Essentially you are saying that God isn't smart enough to predict the future, he has to observe events to know their outcome. 

The fine-turning argument shows that a creator would necesarily be intelligent enough to produce a desired outcome by tinkering with the starting conditions. If God created a universe suitable for life on the first try then he definately decided how history should look like. 


Humans can sometimes predict the actions of others given different situations; and the scientific field of biology is begining to understand our behavior. Humans being too unpredictable for an omniscient omnipotent God is a preposterous claim. 
Topic's author
#6
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 93
Posts: 828
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@Bones
God causing our universe definitively puts him BEFORE our universe. He doesn't need to be inside our universe's temporal dimension for my argument to be valid.
#7
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,323
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Bones
Theists will reply that God is outside of time. .....

......and that he  knows everything before it will happen.

"For whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything." (1 John 3:20)

"Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O Lord, you know it altogether." (Psalm 139:4)








#8
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,323
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Benjamin
Free will 

Hardly free will if it comes with a death threat is it?
#9
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,144
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

Make your gift today to help Shriners Hospitals for Children® provide life-changing care to our children who need your help.
Topic's author
#10
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 93
Posts: 828
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@Tradesecret
First and second cause is not the apropriate distinction here. We blame the responsible person for murder, even though it was the bullet who killed the victim and the gun which sent the bullet flying. When we asign guilt for tragic events we trace the causal chain back to the first moral creature that would be aware of what they're doing. We blame Hitler for Holocaust as a whole even though SS officers clearly made a choice that wasn't controlled solely by Hitler. If, however, Hitler was a robot programmed to what he did by someone who knew the eventual outcome; then we would obviously place the guilt of Holocaust on the creator of Hitler, and view Hitler as the tool.

Similarly, the world being "evil" is caused by a lot of unfortunate events, but only God is responsible. He chose to create a world that would be evil. He specifically put a tree in the garden of eden when he knew that Adam and Eve would eat of it. God bears the ultimate responsibility for how the world turned out.

And no, this doesn't mean Hitler wasn't evil --- just that God already decided that he would be.
#11
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
If you're not a theist then does it really matter if Free Will is contradicted by theism or not. No one's forcing you to live with the concept of free will or lack of free will. I don't understand why you even need to bring up another thread about free will when we already have about 50 of them when it doesn't affect you in any way shape or form. And atheists have already decided what theists are thinking so why even ask. 
Topic's author
#12
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 93
Posts: 828
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Your shut-up arguments are all irrelevant to the topic at hand. Also, nobody choses what to believe, one is convinced by flawed/valid reasoning and experience. 
#13
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 565
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Benjamin
A counterpoint is that God may not be the core of reality, instead God is the apex hijacker of what would otherwise be total random variation. In other words, it is possible that the core of reality is random and that God was randomly generated, controlling the majority of the random variation but leaving a minority of variable totally, genuinely random (could even be nearly 50/50 split).
#14
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Benjamin
Come up with an original topic. 
#15
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,551
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@RationalMadman
A counterpoint is that God may not be the core of reality, instead God is the apex hijacker of what would otherwise be total random variation. In other words, it is possible that the core of reality is random and that God was randomly generated, controlling the majority of the random variation but leaving a minority of variable totally, genuinely random (could even be nearly 50/50 split).
DEMIURGE
#16
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,551
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Benjamin
nobody choses what to believe, one is convinced by flawed/valid reasoning and experience. 
100% THIS
#17
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 565
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@3RU7AL
Yes actually, I would regard the only god I think is (or can be) real as a demiurge type god.
#18
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,323
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Benjamin
And no, this doesn't mean Hitler wasn't evil --- just that God already decided that he would be.

Acts 17:24 God, who made the world and everything in it....

Isaiah 45:7 7I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Colossians1:16 - For by him were all things created...



#19
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,323
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Come up with an original topic. 

 I so dearly wish you would , Witch.

  Of your own  32 threads in this forum you have 11 threads  in the religion forum, you haven't once created an "original topic" concerning your own Pagan religion or Pagan gods  that you say are from "other worlds" and are older than Christian god. Now wouldn't that be "original", Witch?   In fact I don't believe anyone has created a thread on Witches or Pagan cults or their mystery schools.

I think it would make for interesting reading and discussion.

Here's' your chance to be the first and "original". 
#20
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Op is correct. All theists pretty much agree with op. Op, do you refuse to believe in God, merely because you fear the truth, that you have no free will?
Topic's author
#21
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 93
Posts: 828
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@RationalMadman
@3RU7AL
Deliberate creation ex-nihilo is the idea in theism that contradicts free will. Deimurg, if I understand you correctly, is a sentient intelligent being coming into existence by chance and subsequently expanding its controll of the world in which it lives --- yet without ever being able to break the laws that controlled the randomness in the first place. Deimurg is the personification of humanity. Deimurg is conquering the natural world and ruling it with an iron fist. Deimurg uses intelligence and planning to do that which pure randomness could not create. Deimurg can only speculate about a higher being creating the randomness, as it understands the concept of simulation --- how a small portion of a higher universe could be dedicated to hosting and creating new worlds, virtual worlds.


Most importantly, a Deimurg isn't fully in controll and doesn't know everything --- its subject enjoy some form of autonomy. Deimurg can't be blamed for all that happens.

But God can. Whatever happens would be directly controlled by him. Everything in our world would be his work, including evil.

#22
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Well it's probably been addressed in one of these various posts here: https://www.debateart.com/search?type=forum-topics&search_term=Free+will

Many polytheist traditions have fates, or a concept of fate, usually consisting of three female entities that control and guide people's lives. So could we please quit saying theists and say monotheist because if we're going to sit around and talk about crap we should at least be accurate about it. But I know every time I bring up being accurate about various theological concepts people say it really doesn't matter because basically only the monotheist count. But again if you're going to talk about the world of Harry Potter and you bring up Luke Skywalker you're going to look like an idiot. Fiction or not being accurate and what you're talking about matters.
#23
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,323
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Come up with an original topic. 

 I so dearly wish you would , Witch.

  Of your own  32 threads in this forum you have 11 threads  in the religion forum, you haven't once created an "original topic" concerning your own Pagan religion or Pagan gods  that you say are from "other worlds" and are older than Christian god. Now wouldn't that be "original", Witch?   In fact I don't believe anyone has created a thread on Witches or Pagan cults or their mystery schools.

I think it would make for interesting reading and discussion.

Here's' your chance to be the first and "original". 

[....] So could we please quit saying theists and say monotheist because if we're going to sit around and talk about crap we should at least be accurate about it. But I know every time I bring up being accurate about various theological concepts people say it really doesn't matter because basically only the monotheist count. [.....]


That is no excuse for not creating your own "accurate" and "ORIGINAL" thread concerning your own Pagan beliefs in your "otherworldly" gods.



Well it's probably been addressed in one of these various posts here: https://www.debateart.com/search?type=forum-topics&search_term=Free+will

And this is more reason for you to create your own "original " and "accurate" thread concerning your own otherworldly and ancient Pagan gods.

So can we except something "original" from you, Witch?
Topic's author
#24
Benjamin
Benjamin's avatar
Debates: 93
Posts: 828
4
7
10
Benjamin's avatar
Benjamin
4
7
10
-->
@Wylted
@3RU7AL
do you refuse to believe in God, merely because you fear the truth, that you have no free will?
I do not want to sound condescending, but that is a stupid question based on an absurd premise. We humans don't fear the truth, we fear everything but the truth. No matter your intentions or values, you need to know the truth in order to plan ahead and make decisions. Lies, deception and illusions are intrinsically scary to us because misunderstandings have grave consequences. When you act on flawed information or false assumptions you make mistakes. Every mistake is made because of overlooked or unknown factors thwarting the plan. Plane crashes are mistakes, but 9/11 was a success, a deliberate terrorist attack. These terrorists had violent intentions and (to most) alien values; and yet they still valued accurate information --- that enabling them to succeed.


Religion loves accusing nonbelievers of not valuing the truth. Instead of admitting their failure to convince others, they claim that people chose to blind themselves. Those that remain unconvinced are not legitimately in need of better arguments, they are just commiting the fallacy of emotion. "You fear the truth", "you hate God", "You just want to sin", are just the most obvious examples. This accusation is far worse than the standard "the devil blinds you", as it places the blame on every nonbeliever. Whats funny is that RELIGION more than anything manipulates emotions to convince and controll people. This blatant double standard is a staple of intelectual dishonesty in religious discourse. 


So no, my disbelief in theism is not caused by fear of determinism. If anything, my emotions and existential dreads drive me towards religion. To live forever in heaven is absolutely preferable to living in hell. If I though theism was true then I would not be an atheist. The notion that everyone secretly shares your religious beliefs is notoriously fallacious. Even more ridiculous is the implied fantasy power of beliefs. Me not believing in theism doesn't magically make God disappear; and I can't reclaim free will by simply believing I have it. The truth is unaffected by belief, and the vast majority of rational people know this.



Your question frames me as willingly delusional. Read it again with my critique in mind, and you will agree:
do you refuse to believe in God, merely because you fear the truth, that you have no free will?
I don't refuse to believe in theism for emotional reasons. I was raised a Christian. Theism has just spectacularly failed to convince my newly matured and educated self.
#25
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,323
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Benjamin

A+1
#26
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Benjamin
I WAS SPEAKInG OF YOUR PERSONAL REASONS. Most other atheists, don't believe because of a lack of evidence. As you stated in the opt in a roundabout way, you don't believe because you like the ideal of free will. 

When I was an atheist. I simply did not believe, because there was a lack of evidence. Most atheists are that way. 

You however are unique. 
#27
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@Benjamin
Your mind is in the right place but i would say this contradicts Abrahamic religions more than "theism"  in general. If a human makes a movie, that movie plays out as what it is... fantasy, drama, horror, whatever. If all if this is hard determinism happening in the mind of a god... than that's what it is, an ultimate movie. Therefore, we don't know if their is free will, other than free will in a god that is everything and that everything playing out like a movie. Good and evil are defined in the movie, just like hero vs. protagonist.. but outside of the movie, they're both enjoyed.
#28
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,551
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Outplayz
how can an omniscient god have free will ?
#29
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
That's very complicated lol. I imagine it would be some kind of paradox. I believe it would be both, free will but ultimately determined. If it had only free will, wouldn't it be infinitely alone? Unless other gods also exist, but then i believe that would result in the same outcome in the end. It's hard to imagine bc we are trying to define how an immortal infinitely powerful consciousness would act... i believe there are too many (infinite) possibilities to fully imagine. 
#30
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
Also, maybe free will should be defined more in degrees rather than one or the other.