Can there be free will while God knows all things?

[person0]

4 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Okay, so lets say I am at a gravel pit with billions of small but all similar rocks and I tell myself that today I am going to pick a rock from somewhere in the pit, it doesnt matter where or what rock I pick, but that the one I end up with I will then make my special rock. Now, as I wander around I may have a myriad of impulses to choose a thousand different rocks from around the pit, and so I do. Then with my chosen rocks I then reach my hand in without really noticing or caring or looking and pick one random rock. Then at this point I have the opportunity to either decide to choose it or put it back and pick another. I can do this for as many times as I want until finally I choose one.  This represents a scenerio where its almost wholly unpredictable which rock out of billions of similar rocks I will choose before ever setting foot in the gravel pit.

That is an amazingly good example!  You definitely win the award for best example to establish a concept.  True and sincere kudos to you and your excellent mind! 

That being said, I believe that if you take into account that God's omniscience would include a perfect knowledge of our height and weight and all physical attributes, add in walking patterns, mood, as well as all external factors that affect those things such as weather, other people, etc, etc, etc, then an action  which to us would be 'random' (like the one which you have very cleverly suggested), he would understand to have an actual basis which could be calculated.  That doesn't make it any less 'unpredictable' from your perspective as the human agent, but from the perspective of a truly omniscient god, it would be knowable.

[person0]

So here's a crazy thought!

What if God is not actually omniscient at all, but instead he uses a massive self building supercomputer with an ever growing number of processing cores and celestial surveillance equipment that monitors everything at all times and does all the calculations for him, and that any time he acts or teaches based on foreknowledge he is actually just using a GUI to get the knowledge he needs.  Then when he needs to show someone a vision he just gives them access to the the display screen on his supercomputer for a brief moment.  He can be god and let his PC do all the work for him!  Or is it a Mac? 

#DontDrinkCoffee

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

In the scientific community intelligence is define by the ability to learn and change behavior or outcome.  I see your definition of “unpredictable” as the opposite of what I see as intelligent.   I believe intelligence is very predictable – If I think of something as being unpredictable – I believe that to be more the definition of stupidity not intelligence. 

In general – I believe goodness, compassion, love, honor and other attributes of light and truth all to be predictable.  I also believe evil, hate, selfishness and pride also to be very predictable.  What I do not understand – is not so much your ideas of randomness but where and how you came to such conclusions.  But if I were to think of something unorganized – I would think that such would be more associated with evil or something not intelligent (stupid).  I see intelligence as something that has organization and therefore is predictable.

I see everything that exist being “governed” by law.  That which is subject to law is defined and “under” that law and thus predictable.  In the D&C we are told there is no space in which there is no Kingdom and there is no kingdom where there is no law.  I honestly believe that you think something to be random because you do not understand the law by which it is governed? 

It may be all my problem – but I do not understand how you have come to the conclusion of unpredictability. 

 

The Traveler

Just so we dont get confused, intelligence is the capacity to learn new and novel information and apply it in a constructive purposeful way. I think we both agree with that. What I am speaking of is our unique ability tgrough "choice" that makes our decisions somewhat unpredictable at times. You speak in such a way that follows a deterministic model where the past events always lead exactly to how and what the exact things happen in the present. Under this oft debated philosophy no one truly have free will but rather just the perception of such. Thus, it could be strongly argued that we cannot be blamed for any evil we committ because we were going to do it anyway no matter what. 

The ability to choose in the moment may indeed be based off of circumstance, logic, etc, and be highly predictable. But, this is not always the case. We literally can and do make random, or unpredictable choices at times, especially if its on something we dont really care about or doesnt carry with it any real signifigance. My analogy above about picking one random rock from billions is such an example because in the end the rock I end up with doesnt really matter nor has any sigifigance over any other similar rock. You could argue that there was a mechanical process involved as to why I chose a specific one but the process and mindset itself is done in such a manner to replicate unpredictability and in the end that is exactly what has happened- that end result being a rock picked through a unpredictable process controlled by my intelligence.

[Rob Osborn]

18 minutes ago, lds_person_0 said:

That is an amazingly good example!  You definitely win the award for best example to establish a concept.  True and sincere kudos to you and your excellent mind! 

That being said, I believe that if you take into account that God's omniscience would include a perfect knowledge of our height and weight and all physical attributes, add in walking patterns, mood, as well as all external factors that affect those things such as weather, other people, etc, etc, etc, then an action  which to us would be 'random' (like the one which you have very cleverly suggested), he would understand to have an actual basis which could be calculated.  That doesn't make it any less 'unpredictable' from your perspective as the human agent, but from the perspective of a truly omniscient god, it would be knowable.

Picking random rocks the way I described is not something that can be calculated with exact precision. Why? Because we have agency which is that power of operation to act for ourselves. There really isnt an exact mechanism in place that runs or predetermines our actions until the moment arrives and then we choose. I look at those choices kind of like as percentages or odds. It may be calculated which decisions I may be more likely to choose but it isnt absolute. As we go from trivial things that dont matter to areas that do matter those odds move drastically from unpredictable towards a predictable, rational logical prediction. 

Going back to the gravel pit scenerio, if is is strongly argued that God could exactly pick which rock I end up with then one has to also state that "choice" itself follows a perfect set of equations that can never be wrong. If this is the case then our perception of "choice" isnt really choice at all but instead a mathematicsl algorithm based solely on past events. Under this premise, we dont really have agency but instead are only acted upon by circumstance we have no controll over. It literally would mean our life is just an illusion to something thats already played out and set in stone.

[mordorbund]

For what it's worth, people are really rotten at being random. Be random and pick a number from 1 to 20 (inclusive). It most likely was not 1, 10, or 20, and was probably prime (17 or 7?). Randomly call out heads or tails 200 times. Were you really "random", or did you get uncomfortable calling out "heads" more than 5 times? (for more papers, see here).

Your inability to be truly random keeps Madison Avenue in business.

[JohnsonJones]

41 minutes ago, lds_person_0 said:

So here's a crazy thought!

What if God is not actually omniscient at all, but instead he uses a massive self building supercomputer with an ever growing number of processing cores and celestial surveillance equipment that monitors everything at all times and does all the calculations for him, and that any time he acts or teaches based on foreknowledge he is actually just using a GUI to get the knowledge he needs.  Then when he needs to show someone a vision he just gives them access to the the display screen on his supercomputer for a brief moment.  He can be god and let his PC do all the work for him!  Or is it a Mac? 

#DontDrinkCoffee

That's a cool thought.

Related but different.   It could be he knows everything, but not necessarily everything.  AKA...I am a historian.  If I were to refer to me in that way, it would be if I knew every single detail that occurred in history.  I knew it like the back of my hand (figure of speech).  However, despite knowing everything, and though I could make an educated guess that probably would be correct based upon what's happened historically and based upon what people have done in the past, I do NOT actually know (though I might be able to predict with 99.99% accuracy) what exactly will happen tomorrow.

[person0]

13 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Picking random rocks the way I described is not something that can be calculated with exact precision. Why? Because we have agency which is that power of operation to act for ourselves. There really isnt an exact mechanism in place that runs or predetermines our actions until the moment arrives and then we choose. I look at those choices kind of like as percentages or odds. It may be calculated which decisions I may be more likely to choose but it isnt absolute. As we go from trivial things that dont matter to areas that do matter those odds move drastically from unpredictable towards a predictable, rational logical prediction. 

Going back to the gravel pit scenerio, if is is strongly argued that God could exactly pick which rock I end up with then one has to also state that "choice" itself follows a perfect set of equations that can never be wrong. If this is the case then our perception of "choice" isnt really choice at all but instead a mathematicsl algorithm based solely on past events. Under this premise, we dont really have agency but instead are only acted upon by circumstance we have no controll over. It literally would mean our life is just an illusion to something thats already played out and set in stone.

Once again, I applaud your reasoning.  It is very compelling, and I can certainly understand your perspective, however, I do not believe the fact that our actions can be determined based on known information to mean determination of our actions has occurred.  Just because it is knowable and exactly predictable does not mean it is required.  You do have the choice, God knows what choice you will make, you do not yet know what choice you will make, but you are still the one who makes it and God is still the one who already knows it in advance.

Some have postulated that God could have told us before coming to earth who would make it and who would not.  I believe that in his omniscience this is true.  That being said, if he did not give us the option to choose it ourselves and know for ourselves that it is what we would do he could not justly assign us to our eternal destination (obviously there are other topics inherent in this example but I am ignoring them since they don't pertain to the discussion).

Just because it is already known, does not alter whether or not we ourselves made the choice.  That being said, in reality it doesn't matter who is right.  At the end of the day what matters is if we choose to believe in determinism (pre-destination) and use it as an excuse to commit sin.  I do not believe in determinism, but I do believe God knows my every move before I make it, because he knows me and everything around me to perfection.  How, I cannot say, but I hope to learn from him one day!

[CV75]

1 hour ago, lds_person_0 said:

God expects us to respond, but he already knows exactly how we will respond.  God's knowledge is perfect and as a result his faith is dormant in all things:

  If God is able to show Moses, Nephi, John, and others, a true and exact vision of future events, how can this be done if he doesn't already know 100% what will happen?  He does know, but the fact that he has this knowledge has no bearing on the reality that we are still the ones who make the choice.

God also has perfect faith in addition to perfect knowledge (from Lectures on Faith, 1: 12-15): "And as faith is the moving cause of all action in temporal concerns, so it is in spiritual; for the Savior has said, and that truly, that he that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved. (Mark 16:16) As we receive by faith, all temporal blessings that we do receive, so we, in like manner, receive by faith all spiritual blessings, that we do receive. But faith is not only the principle of action, but of power, also, in all intelligent beings, whether in heaven, or on earth. …By this we understand that the principle of power, which existed in the bosom of God, by which the worlds were framed, was faith; and that it is by reason of this principle of power, existing in the Deity, that all created things exist—so that all things in heaven, on earth, or under the earth, exist by reason of faith, as it existed in HIM."

I think it is good to look at this in terms of perfect faith in what and perfect knowledge of what.

The Lord is not typically showing the prophets "a true and exact vision of future events." He is showing them something, that is for sure. It is more a plan or a blueprint for action. As long as the prophets and the saints exercise faith as a principle of action and power, these prophecies come and shall come to pass. The alternatives and failures of course are not always shown, or if they are, written down.

Some of these things are the reflection of the Lord's faith, such as the hoped-for outcome of the various grafts and transplants in Jacob 5; outcomes that are dependent on the faith and agency of the people. Others are reflections of His knowledge, such as visions of His Second Coming: He knows what He is going to do, and when, even if He holds some conditionality to it. Others are common sense, such as the prophesies of the Great Apostasy. Most of the prophecies have multiple means of fulfillment, and there may be several plans in place for realizing them. All we hear or know about are the successful ones.

[person0]

@CV75

Quote

Moses 1:8
And it came to pass that Moses looked, and beheld the world upon which he was created; and Moses beheld the world and the ends thereof, and all the children of men which are, and which were created; of the same he greatly marveled and wondered.

Moses 1:35
But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them.

Seems like some exactness in the vision from my understanding.  As to the rest I will let the prophets do the talking:

Quote

Without the knowledge of all things God would not be able to save any portion of his creatures; for it is by reason of the knowledge which he has of all things, from the beginning to the end, that enables him to give that understanding to his creatures by which they are made partakers of eternal life; and if it were not for the idea existing in the minds of men that God had all knowledge it would be impossible for them to exercise faith in him” (Lectures on Faith [1985], 51–52; see also D&C 88:41; 93:8–36)

Quote

God’s foreknowledge of all things does not hinder or limit our freedom to choose good or evil. - Pearl of Great Price Student Manual

Quote

“. . . the absurd conclusion that the mere knowledge of coming events must act as a determining influence in bringing about those occurrences. God’s knowledge of spiritual and of human nature enables Him to conclude with certainty as to the actions of any of His children under given conditions; yet that knowledge is not of compelling force upon the creature” (The Articles of Faith, 12th ed., [1924], 191)

Mic Drop . . . 

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, mordorbund said:

For what it's worth, people are really rotten at being random. Be random and pick a number from 1 to 20 (inclusive). It most likely was not 1, 10, or 20, and was probably prime (17 or 7?). Randomly call out heads or tails 200 times. Were you really "random", or did you get uncomfortable calling out "heads" more than 5 times? (for more papers, see here).

Your inability to be truly random keeps Madison Avenue in business.

Ive chosen a number randomly between 1-100. Prove me wrong, what number am I thinking of?

[person0]

1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said:

Ive chosen a number randomly between 1-100. Prove me wrong, what number am I thinking of?

I have chosen a specific number (not random at all) between 1 and 100.  Of which number am I thinking?

See how you didn't disprove his assertion in any way?

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, lds_person_0 said:

Once again, I applaud your reasoning.  It is very compelling, and I can certainly understand your perspective, however, I do not believe the fact that our actions can be determined based on known information to mean determination of our actions has occurred.  Just because it is knowable and exactly predictable does not mean it is required.  You do have the choice, God knows what choice you will make, you do not yet know what choice you will make, but you are still the one who makes it and God is still the one who already knows it in advance.

Some have postulated that God could have told us before coming to earth who would make it and who would not.  I believe that in his omniscience this is true.  That being said, if he did not give us the option to choose it ourselves and know for ourselves that it is what we would do he could not justly assign us to our eternal destination (obviously there are other topics inherent in this example but I am ignoring them since they don't pertain to the discussion).

Just because it is already known, does not alter whether or not we ourselves made the choice.  That being said, in reality it doesn't matter who is right.  At the end of the day what matters is if we choose to believe in determinism (pre-destination) and use it as an excuse to commit sin.  I do not believe in determinism, but I do believe God knows my every move before I make it, because he knows me and everything around me to perfection.  How, I cannot say, but I hope to learn from him one day!

Earlier in this post I quoted scripture that was actually prophecy of the Father where he detailed two different paths of the future for our generation based on our future decisions. On each different path he prophesied that depending on what we would choose at that future date we would either be blessed or cursed. So, either God does know everything and lies, or he only knows what is possible to know. 

[Rob Osborn]

2 minutes ago, lds_person_0 said:

I have chosen a specific number (not random at all) between 1 and 100.  Of which number am I thinking?

See how you didn't disprove his assertion in any way?

My point is to show that human intelligence actually can generate unpredictable choices.

[person0]

4 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Earlier in this post I quoted scripture that was actually prophecy of the Father where he detailed two different paths of the future for our generation based on our future decisions. On each different path he prophesied that depending on what we would choose at that future date we would either be blessed or cursed. So, either God does know everything and lies, or he only knows what is possible to know. 

So because God has a perfect knowledge of what would happen as the result of two different choices, but also at the same time already knows which choice his children would make you are saying he is a liar just because he didn't straight up tell us which one we were going to pick?

That doesn't seem like a reasonable conclusion to me.

[CV75]

4 hours ago, lds_person_0 said:

@CV75

Seems like some exactness in the vision from my understanding.  As to the rest I will let the prophets do the talking:

Mic Drop . . . 

Moses 1: 8 and 35 are not exact all, but two verses greatly summarizing what Moses “saw”: the world and the ends thereof and all of God’s children relating to it. This is certainly not “all things,” except as far as Moses and the rest of us might be concerned. The “account” in verse 35 is the Genesis story, not the most exact and complete record, which ends with Chapter 5.

Note the subtle difference between the “knowledge of all things” and “all knowledge.”

In the Lectures on Faith quote, “the knowledge of all things” is qualified as the knowledge “that enables him to give that understanding to his creatures by which they are made partakers of eternal life.” God is able to save all His creatures by giving us that same knowledge, which is of all things in relation to what we need to do to gain exaltation. Abraham 3:17-19 asserts as much.

For this reason, the The Articles of Faith quote also qualifies God’s knowledge as the “knowledge of spiritual and of human nature,” and it is this kind of knowledge that “enables Him to conclude with certainty as to the actions of any of His children under given conditions… [conditions that He has placed them in].

The student manual refers to foreknowledge, which is not omniscience and which could be construed to be a much a form of faith as it is a form of knowledge, as I described above.

[person0]

12 minutes ago, CV75 said:

. . . except as far as Moses and the rest of us might be concerned. . .

Thank you for admitting/acknowledging it.

15 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Note the subtle difference between the “knowledge of all things” and “all knowledge.

". . . knowledge which he has of all things, from the beginning to the end. . ."

18 minutes ago, CV75 said:

. . . under given conditions… [conditions that He has placed them in].

Does it matter who placed them?  Also the concept of "given conditions" is used in maths and sciences universally for scenarios such as, "If A and B then C", etc.

21 minutes ago, CV75 said:

The student manual refers to foreknowledge, which is not omniscience and which could be construed to be a much a form of faith as it is a form of knowledge, as I described above.

Knowledge is knowledge, faith is faith, they work together but are not the same.  It doesn't matter that foreknowledge is related to faith, the only reason it is related is solely because the event has not yet happened, you act as though the foreknowledge could somehow change because someone does something that God didn't anticipate, that is false.

God's faith is dormant, its on the back-burner, it is second nature like breathing, he doesn't have to exercise faith the way we do, he has all knowledge and knowledge of all things, his knowledge is what causes his faith to be dormant.  The scriptures and modern prophets agree with me, I believe some people don't want to accept this truth because they interpret it to mean that there would be no real choice if all choices are known in advance, that is false, that is what Talmage himself said.  Lawyering of words makes it easy to fit scriptures and statements to a particular belief.

[Rob Osborn]

16 hours ago, Person0 said:

So because God has a perfect knowledge of what would happen as the result of two different choices, but also at the same time already knows which choice his children would make you are saying he is a liar just because he didn't straight up tell us which one we were going to pick?

That doesn't seem like a reasonable conclusion to me.

God cannot lie. So, because of that fact, his prophecy is true that each separate outcome is possible and is not set in stone. If God already knew there was only one path we would follow, it would be dishonest for him to say otherwise. Why? Because his honesty is perfect. 

[person0]

29 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

God cannot lie. So, because of that fact, his prophecy is true that each separate outcome is possible and is not set in stone. If God already knew there was only one path we would follow, it would be dishonest for him to say otherwise. Why? Because his honesty is perfect. 

I don't think we will come to a resolution on this.  I will give you an example to illustrate my point and then I hope to be done even if you continue to disagree.

Assume I have a bowl of orange cream ice-cream and a chocolate brownie and I place them on my dining room table.  The ice cream has a strong laxative mixed into it and I already know about it.  If I invite my daughter into the room and tell her she can have whichever dessert she wants, she has to eat one of them, but that she should eat the brownie because if she does she will feel well but if she eats the ice cream she will get diarrhea.  I can tell you with certainty that she will eat the ice cream, because my daughter hates brownies with a passion.  She will then get diarrhea.

In this example, if she would have eaten the brownie she would have remained well, that is a fact, but it does not change the fact that I knew she would not do it, and it does not make me a liar for telling her the result of both options even when I knew one of the outcomes would happen.

Extrapolate this example to Heavenly Father who has perfect knowledge of everything.  I think its pretty obvious he's not lying just because he provides us with multiple outcomes already knowing which one we will choose.

To even further prove the point, think about Adam and Eve and the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  God gave them a choice and he and they were aware of the outcome of both choices. However, he still already knew what their choice would end up being.  It doesn't change the fact that they could have made the other choice, and it doesn't change anything that God already knew they wouldn't make the other choice.

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, lds_person_0 said:

I don't think we will come to a resolution on this.  I will give you an example to illustrate my point and then I hope to be done even if you continue to disagree.

Assume I have a bowl of orange cream ice-cream and a chocolate brownie and I place them on my dining room table.  The ice cream has a strong laxative mixed into it and I already know about it.  If I invite my daughter into the room and tell her she can have whichever dessert she wants, she has to eat one of them, but that she should eat the brownie because if she does she will feel well but if she eats the ice cream she will get diarrhea.  I can tell you with certainty that she will eat the ice cream, because my daughter hates brownies with a passion.  She will then get diarrhea.

In this example, if she would have eaten the brownie she would have remained well, that is a fact, but it does not change the fact that I knew she would not do it, and it does not make me a liar for telling her the result of both options even when I knew one of the outcomes would happen.

Extrapolate this example to Heavenly Father who has perfect knowledge of everything.  I think its pretty obvious he's not lying just because he provides us with multiple outcomes already knowing which one we will choose.

To even further prove the point, think about Adam and Eve and the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  God gave them a choice and he and they were aware of the outcome of both choices. However, he still already knew what their choice would end up being.  It doesn't change the fact that they could have made the other choice, and it doesn't change anything that God already knew they wouldn't make the other choice.

We cannot assume that God already knew which path the Gentiles would choose two thousand years in advance at and around the time of Joseph Smith. Its not fair for us to read something into the text thst isnt there. If God gives two alternate paths then we must assume that both were available and that realistically the Gentiles could of picked either one or the other and God knew this and planned accordingly and then it was up to the Gentiles to choose of the which exact choice wasnt foreknown in advance. This is what the text implies and we have some duty to read it like this and not try to read something else into the text.

The garden of Eden was different in that it was known by God what was going to happen and he didnt give them an either/or scenerio. He told them the end results of their choice and let them choose on their own.

Edited March 29, 2017 by Rob Osborn

[person0]

17 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

. . . realistically the Gentiles could of picked either one or the other and God knew this. . .

You are assuming my statement disagree's with this, but it does not.  The fact that God already knew the choice they would make, does not mean they did not have a real choice.  It appears you have difficulty accepting the idea that if God knows with certainty something is going to happen, that thing is not 'pre-destined' simply because he knows it will occur.  Modern prophets have also testified of such.  You are disproving your interpretation of the doctrine rather than the doctrine itself.

[CV75]

15 hours ago, lds_person_0 said:

Thank you for admitting/acknowledging it.

". . . knowledge which he has of all things, from the beginning to the end. . ."

Does it matter who placed them?  Also the concept of "given conditions" is used in maths and sciences universally for scenarios such as, "If A and B then C", etc.

Knowledge is knowledge, faith is faith, they work together but are not the same.  It doesn't matter that foreknowledge is related to faith, the only reason it is related is solely because the event has not yet happened, you act as though the foreknowledge could somehow change because someone does something that God didn't anticipate, that is false.

God's faith is dormant, its on the back-burner, it is second nature like breathing, he doesn't have to exercise faith the way we do, he has all knowledge and knowledge of all things, his knowledge is what causes his faith to be dormant.  The scriptures and modern prophets agree with me, I believe some people don't want to accept this truth because they interpret it to mean that there would be no real choice if all choices are known in advance, that is false, that is what Talmage himself said.  Lawyering of words makes it easy to fit scriptures and statements to a particular belief.

Yes, it matters that it is God who places intelligence in the sphere in which it acts independently, as truth. It also explains why the omniscience of God – however you might try to explain it – is not relevant to our agency: He gave it to us for the purpose of our acting independently according to the enticements with which we choose to accord in any given sphere in which He has placed us.

I don’t think the The Articles of Faith is discussing mathematics, but God certainly establishes the law for every kingdom (sphere), and “and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions” that He has established.

Thank you for acknowledging that foreknowledge is related to faith because the event has not happened. So of course, God’s foreknowledge would not change just because someone does something He did not anticipate, other than to at some point be replaced with knowledge. He is amazingly disciplined not to intervene with or recall the independence He has granted His children, and to organize the spheres in which He places us to act, and when He does that, and so forth.

God’s faith is as conditionally dormant as the faith described in Alma 32. As indicated in the quote above, He exercises it on a regular basis: “the principle of power, which existed in the bosom of God, by which the worlds were framed, was faith.”

Evidently you have misunderstood my posts.

[person0]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

. . .God’s foreknowledge would not change just because someone does something He did not anticipate, other than to at some point be replaced with knowledge. . .

This is the only portion of your previous statement with which I disagree.  Nothing within God's stewardship will ever do anything that God did not already know with 100% certainty they would do.

Edited March 29, 2017 by Person0
Clarification

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, lds_person_0 said:

You are assuming my statement disagree's with this, but it does not.  The fact that God already knew the choice they would make, does not mean they did not have a real choice.  It appears you have difficulty accepting the idea that if God knows with certainty something is going to happen, that thing is not 'pre-destined' simply because he knows it will occur.  Modern prophets have also testified of such.  You are disproving your interpretation of the doctrine rather than the doctrine itself.

Its conjecture for you to say its a fact that God already knew the choice they would make. The scriptures state otherwise.

[person0]

6 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Its conjecture for you to say its a fact that God already knew the choice they would make. The scriptures state otherwise.

No they don't.   The scriptures don't say anything about whether or not God knew what they would do, they just indicate that the people had a choice.  You contend that if God knew what they would do that they did not actually have a choice, the premise itself is incorrect.  Once again, you are attempting to disprove your interpretation rather than the reality.

Man is able to act contrary to the will of God.  God will always know with certainty which actions a man will make.  These two things are not contradictory.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Person0 said:

This is the only portion of your previous statement with which I disagree.  Nothing within God's stewardship will ever do anything that God did not anticipate.

Perhaps you disagree because you have been equating anticipation with omniscience, and the two are not the same.

Through the Atonement of His Son, God anticipates the exaltation of His children. It is clear that some of His children do things contrary to that, or contrary to His anticipation. At teh same time and in the same way, according to the requisite opposition, He anticipates our sins and failures also, which is why He ordained the Atonement in our behalf.

So God’s "anticipation" would not change just because someone does something He did not "foreknow."