Can there be free will while God knows all things?

[person0]

26 minutes ago, CV75 said:

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."

I went back and edited my post for clarification so that it no longer says anticipate.  Feel free to review and respond accordingly.

[Rob Osborn]

2 hours ago, Person0 said:

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.

The scriptures actually states that God prophecied one of two options dependant upon mans decisions at that future date. It literally meant that either path was in fact prophesied as to actually happen. God knew that man would choose one of these options but that was as narrow as was possible for God. Why? Because it had yet to happen and it was possible that the Gentiles could have gone either route depending on their agency God had given them. This is paramount to the discussion because it means a myriad of things. The most important of which is that God makes decisions. God would not be able to make decisions if everything, including what he himself would ever say or do, was already foreknown.

[CV75]

3 hours ago, Person0 said:

I went back and edited my post for clarification so that it no longer says anticipate.  Feel free to review and respond accordingly.

This also an interesting disagreement, in your use of the word “nothing.” If referring to element, which has no agency, God does certainly know what it will do when He acts upon it. That is the nature of element. If referring to man (spirit) who has agency (and is not a thing but a who), God does not act upon us except to place us in a sphere in which we can act independently, where the relationship is one of influence and enticement, not one of acting upon us.

Knowing the future of independent agents with 100% certainty gets into trying to define omniscience, which is not a scriptural term. Plenty of scriptural references to knowing all things can be found, a phrase always used in relation to the particular matter at hand, and in the context of a testament of the faith we can have in Him on that subject. He is omniscient in relation to anything we can expect to know.

I think the usefulness of the word "omniscience" is limited by our ability to understand what it means to Him. I think compared to us, He is omniscient, but how that is -- by virtue of not being a lone god and having an exalted family order -- I think can allow a very liberal interpretation.

[person0]

50 minutes ago, CV75 said:

. . .(and is not a thing but a who) . . .

. . .but how that is -- by virtue of not being a lone god and having an exalted family order -- I think can allow a very liberal interpretation.

 

I have removed everything from your post that I agree with or agree with enough to not respond.

A who is also a thing.

@Rob Osborn The below answers you also, especially in reference to you saying  "God knew that man would choose one of these options but that was as narrow as was possible for God. Why? Because it had yet to happen. . ."

Quote

Moses 7:67
"And the Lord showed Enoch all things, even unto the end of the world; and he saw the day of the righteous, the hour of their redemption, and received a fullness of joy"

Quote

Abraham 2:8
"My name is Jehovah, and I know the end from the beginning; therefore my hand shall be over thee."

Quote

D&C 130:7
"But they reside in the presence of God, on a globe like a sea of glass and fire, where all things for their glory are manifest, past, present, and future, and are continually before the Lord."

Quote

“The same which knoweth all things, for all things are present before mine eyes.” (D&C 38:2) Not only is Jesus’ omniscience asserted, but the reason for his foreknowledge is given: he is not bound by time, and thus “all things are present” before him each moment!

- Elder Neal A. Maxwell, Ensign, December 1978

Quote

“God does not live in the dimension of time as do we. We are not only hampered by our finiteness (experiential and intellectual), but also by being in the dimension of time. Moreover, God, since ‘all things are present’ with him, is not simply predicting based solely on the past. In ways that are not clear to us, he sees rather than foresees the future, because all things are at once present before him”

- Elder Neal A. Maxwell (Things As They Really Are [1978], 29) - The Pearl of Great Price Student Manual

I'm not sure I myself can make it more clear than the scriptures and apostles of the Lord already have.

Edited March 30, 2017 by person0
Invite Rob

[Rob Osborn]

54 minutes ago, person0 said:

I have removed everything from your post that I agree with or agree with enough to not respond.

A who is also a thing.

@Rob Osborn The below answers you also, especially in reference to you saying  "God knew that man would choose one of these options but that was as narrow as was possible for God. Why? Because it had yet to happen. . ."

I'm not sure I myself can make it more clear than the scriptures and apostles of the Lord already have.

Have you read this entire post? We already covered this.

[CV75]

12 hours ago, person0 said:

I have removed everything from your post that I agree with or agree with enough to not respond.

A who is also a thing.

Are you saying that God is not omniscient by virtue of His being part of a Council and having an exalted family order, but by some other way? Are you saying that you have a very precise, scripturally-based definition of omniscience?

And thing is a who, maybe, for Horton… and others who cannot distinguish between people, animals and things, and thus cannot expect to define “omniscience."

Edited March 30, 2017 by CV75

[mordorbund]

On 3/28/2017 at 5:05 PM, Rob Osborn said:

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

I'm genuinely curious about you ability for randomness, so let's do this properly (any others who want to join in may also do so). For the month of April, 3 times a day (at a meal may be easiest), write down a number from 1-6. At the end of the month, we can compare that distribution and sequencing with 90 tosses of a standard die. Let's see how fine-tuned your randomizer is.

[Rob Osborn]

11 hours ago, mordorbund said:

I'm genuinely curious about you ability for randomness, so let's do this properly (any others who want to join in may also do so). For the month of April, 3 times a day (at a meal may be easiest), write down a number from 1-6. At the end of the month, we can compare that distribution and sequencing with 90 tosses of a standard die. Let's see how fine-tuned your randomizer is.

Im curious as to what criteria we are using to see if our randomizer is good enough?

[Traveler]

As this thread continues – I am becoming convinced that many are posting disjointed random thoughts that have nothing to do with anything but somehow are becoming randomly repeatedly predictable nonsense.  

 

The Traveler   

[The Folk Prophet]

3 minutes ago, Traveler said:

As this thread continues – I am becoming convinced that many are posting disjointed random thoughts that have nothing to do with anything but somehow are becoming randomly repeatedly predictable nonsense.  

 

The Traveler   

Pot...meet kettle.

[Traveler]

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Pot...meet kettle.

Pleased to meet you old friend.

 

The Traveler

[mordorbund]

2 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Im curious as to what criteria we are using to see if our randomizer is good enough?

We'll plot the distribution and can compare it against random die tosses. How would you test randomness?

[Rob Osborn]

3 hours ago, mordorbund said:

We'll plot the distribution and can compare it against random die tosses. How would you test randomness?

Perhaps it would require a third party to try to decipher from multiple groups of sets of both and see if they can figure out which ones were the dice and which ones were the generated numbers from our minds.

[person0]

17 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Perhaps it would require a third party to try to decipher from multiple groups of sets of both and see if they can figure out which ones were the dice and which ones were the generated numbers from our minds.

I volunteer as the third party.  You send data to @mordorbund, he does his dice throws and sends me a spreadsheet with both data sets without identifying either one, then I will decide which one I think is random and which is hand written.  I will then post it here and you each can verify the information matches what you provided and there was no fishy business.  Solved!

[Rob Osborn]

So, last night I got bored and decided to roll the dice a hundred times and write it down. I then did my own set coming up with random numbers as a simulation. Afterwards I was comparing the two and noticed that with the dice there was a higher percentage of 4's and 2's, even runs of them several times. Then I noticed my own set and noticed the same thing but with 1's and 5's. If I were to take sets of tens and mix them together it is impossible to tell which ones were mine and which ones were the dice. Im not sure what I am trying to prove though after I got to thinking about it because whether I use the dice or my own mind its the same random result I am controlling. Similar to a Turing test, the outcome is not predictable if it comes from the dice or our mind, both are capable of truly generating random unpredictable results.

[Traveler]

 

I am wondering if there are points with which we can agree.  I will make a list of what I think we can have agreement.

#1. Every individual that comes to mortality – comes with a plan and that plan fits with and is part of the Plan of Salvation.

#2. There is nothing that can happen pertaining to any individual’s salvation that G-d has not foreseen and planned for.

#3. Nothing of critical importance to any individual is left to chance or is possible to “blind side” G-d.

#4. There are some individuals that do not experience any agency or free will during their mortal experience.  Thus, it is not critical nor necessary for a person to have agency or free will, explicit to mortal life, in order to meet the all the possible and necessary criteria of agency and free will from an eternal perspective.

#5. There is nothing a person can do during their mortal experience that is not covered by the atoning sacrifice of Christ and therefore cannot be forgiven if and when a person repents – up to what is called “The Final Judgement”.

#6. No one will be judged for any random acts – only those they are responsible for; through their agency.

#7. Agency is not random but must be conceived and planned to completion.  That which is not planned, by definition, is the loss of agency.

#8. No one will be randomly forgiven or randomly receive any kingdom of glory.

 

The Traveler

[Rob Osborn]

22 hours ago, Traveler said:

 

I am wondering if there are points with which we can agree.  I will make a list of what I think we can have agreement.

#1. Every individual that comes to mortality – comes with a plan and that plan fits with and is part of the Plan of Salvation.

#2. There is nothing that can happen pertaining to any individual’s salvation that G-d has not foreseen and planned for.

#3. Nothing of critical importance to any individual is left to chance or is possible to “blind side” G-d.

#4. There are some individuals that do not experience any agency or free will during their mortal experience.  Thus, it is not critical nor necessary for a person to have agency or free will, explicit to mortal life, in order to meet the all the possible and necessary criteria of agency and free will from an eternal perspective.

#5. There is nothing a person can do during their mortal experience that is not covered by the atoning sacrifice of Christ and therefore cannot be forgiven if and when a person repents – up to what is called “The Final Judgement”.

#6. No one will be judged for any random acts – only those they are responsible for; through their agency.

#7. Agency is not random but must be conceived and planned to completion.  That which is not planned, by definition, is the loss of agency.

#8. No one will be randomly forgiven or randomly receive any kingdom of glory.

 

The Traveler

#1. Not sure I quite agree in every case. A crack baby born that has severe handicaps and only lives two weeks could hardly be described as having a plan.

#2. There certainly arent new sins, we just keep repeating the same ones.

#3. I agree.

#4. Like in a child who dies shortly after birth, I agree.

#5. There are unpardonable sins for which there is no forgiveness in the world or out of the world.

#6. I agree, random acts are like choosing which ice cream when you cant decide.

#7. Agency isnt random, but the use of it can sometimes produce unpredictable outcomes.

#8. I agree.

[The Folk Prophet]

10 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

#1. Not sure I quite agree in every case. A crack baby born that has severe handicaps and only lives two weeks could hardly be described as having a plan.

Wouldn't the plan be to gain a mortal body and be saved to the Celestial Kingdom...per, you know...God's plan?

[Rob Osborn]

16 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Wouldn't the plan be to gain a mortal body and be saved to the Celestial Kingdom...per, you know...God's plan?

Except that they would never get that opportunity to accept Christ  in mortality. In the millennium all will have that chance.

[The Folk Prophet]

3 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Except that they would never get that opportunity to accept Christ  in mortality. In the millennium all will have that chance.

That is not doctrinal.

[Rob Osborn]

7 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

That is not doctrinal.

Well, you have truth and you have "doctrine". Sometimes they go hand in hand, other times they are at odds with each other. For example Jesus commanded all to be baptized. Now of course infants dont get baptized. But, during the millennium everyone willl have that opportunity as adults to obey all the commandments of Christ.

[Rob Osborn]

Have you ever wondered why we do not do ordinance work by proxy in the temples for children who died before becoming accountable? Its because they themselves will do their own ordinances during the millennium when they are alive as adults.

[person0]

13 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Well, you have truth and you have "doctrine". Sometimes they go hand in hand, other times they are at odds with each other. For example Jesus commanded all to be baptized. Now of course infants dont get baptized. But, during the millennium everyone willl have that opportunity as adults to obey all the commandments of Christ.

During the millennium they would be resurrected beings, they would not be brought back to mortality, but to immortality.  Based on my understanding, once your spirit is eternally sealed into your immortal resurrected body you can not experience further progression pertaining to the commandments given to men on earth.  This is why all temple work, etc, will be done for every person prior to them being called forth into resurrection, this is partly why it will take 1000 years.

Christ said that all men are commanded to be baptized.  His prophets expanded to clarify that infants need no baptism, this is interpreted to be ever and not exclusionary.

Quote

D&C 1:38 '. . .whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same."

 

Edited April 3, 2017 by person0

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

But, during the millennium everyone willl have that opportunity as adults to obey all the commandments of Christ.

Source?

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, person0 said:

During the millennium they would be resurrected beings, they would not be brought back to mortality, but to immortality.  Based on my understanding, once your spirit is eternally sealed into your immortal resurrected body you can not experience further progression pertaining to the commandments given to men on earth.  This is why all temple work, etc, will be done for every person prior to them being called forth into resurrection, this is partly why it will take 1000 years.

Christ said that all men are commanded to be baptized.  His prophets expanded to clarify that infants need no baptism, this is interpreted to be ever and not exclusionary.

 

So, infants will be resurrected ss infants, never able to grow or progress eh?

Why was Christ baptized?