Question for Christians about Judas

[velkyn]

Keep in mind that Judas was predestined just as Jesus being born at this time was predestined. Jesus chose Judas knowing his purpose; that prior to Satan entering Judas, his sins were really not much different than the other apostles. Many of our perceptions of the Creator and His Plan come from our religious traditions and not from the Scriptures. Judas fulfilled his purpose for being born, and when we get to that grand banquet, he will have "returned to his own place." (Acts 1:25)

gee, there goes SC's free will.

[riley2112]

Keep in mind that Judas was predestined just as Jesus being born at this time was predestined. Jesus chose Judas knowing his purpose; that prior to Satan entering Judas, his sins were really not much different than the other apostles. Many of our perceptions of the Creator and His Plan come from our religious traditions and not from the Scriptures. Judas fulfilled his purpose for being born, and when we get to that grand banquet, he will have "returned to his own place." (Acts 1:25)

gee, there goes SC's free will.

I sometimes wonder about the free will thing, I mean it seems like it should work , but as you point out sometimes it doesn't , That is why I have problems with the Bible. It says one thing and then says something else. What is a person to believe? 

[velkyn]

Keep in mind that Judas was predestined just as Jesus being born at this time was predestined. Jesus chose Judas knowing his purpose; that prior to Satan entering Judas, his sins were really not much different than the other apostles. Many of our perceptions of the Creator and His Plan come from our religious traditions and not from the Scriptures. Judas fulfilled his purpose for being born, and when we get to that grand banquet, he will have "returned to his own place." (Acts 1:25)

gee, there goes SC's free will.

I sometimes wonder about the free will thing, I mean it seems like it should work , but as you point out sometimes it doesn't , That is why I have problems with the Bible. It says one thing and then says something else. What is a person to believe? 

we think and act as if we have free will.  It's how humans are, though we do know to self-edit since we know we can't stand inside a nuclear reactor and not die horribly.  A concept of total free will, of course is false in a strict sense since physics prevents us from doing "anything".  We aren't omnipotent nor omniscient.   The bible never says we have free will. It always says that god has absolute control.  Many Christians invoke "free will" because it is an attempt to excuse this god and is generally applied to the problem of evil.  Unforunately, if we take the bible as an accurate depiction of this god and its desires, this invocation fails miserably.  It takes Christians making up things extra-bibically, claiming they got more info from this god, to make it work.  Of course, Christians all claim that they have some lock on what this god really is saying and of course can't support that any more than the next theist.   You've hit the major problem with using a badly compiled book based on a primitive belief system that has no evidence for it.   One can believe in a "god" making it vague enough. But when yuo start adding attributes claimed as "true" then it fails.
 

[kaziglu bey]

I sometimes wonder about the free will thing, I mean it seems like it should work , but as you point out sometimes it doesn't , That is why I have problems with the Bible. It says one thing and then says something else. What is a person to believe? 

And then all of the thousands of denominations of Christian followers say something else yet still. Some of it is cut and pasted from the Bible, but ignores things that are inconvenient to them (typically referred to as the Old Testament). One could hold any variety of completely batshit insane ideas, and likely find a verse in the Bible to justify it.

[Hatter23]

I sometimes wonder about the free will thing, I mean it seems like it should work , but as you point out sometimes it doesn't , That is why I have problems with the Bible. It says one thing and then says something else. What is a person to believe? 

Have you ever read the original, unabridged Grimm's fairietales? It includes multiple version of several well known tales; What is a person to believe? Even scholasticly speaking, which is the original, or the widest told?

[riley2112]

Keep in mind that Judas was predestined just as Jesus being born at this time was predestined. Jesus chose Judas knowing his purpose; that prior to Satan entering Judas, his sins were really not much different than the other apostles. Many of our perceptions of the Creator and His Plan come from our religious traditions and not from the Scriptures. Judas fulfilled his purpose for being born, and when we get to that grand banquet, he will have "returned to his own place." (Acts 1:25)

It would seem that free will would contradict God's omniscience. gee, there goes SC's free will.

I sometimes wonder about the free will thing, I mean it seems like it should work , but as you point out sometimes it doesn't , That is why I have problems with the Bible. It says one thing and then says something else. What is a person to believe? 

we think and act as if we have free will.  It's how humans are, though we do know to self-edit since we know we can't stand inside a nuclear reactor and not die horribly.  A concept of total free will, of course is false in a strict sense since physics prevents us from doing "anything".  We aren't omnipotent nor omniscient.   The bible never says we have free will. It always says that god has absolute control.  Many Christians invoke "free will" because it is an attempt to excuse this god and is generally applied to the problem of evil.  Unforunately, if we take the bible as an accurate depiction of this god and its desires, this invocation fails miserably.  It takes Christians making up things extra-bibically, claiming they got more info from this god, to make it work.  Of course, Christians all claim that they have some lock on what this god really is saying and of course can't support that any more than the next theist.   You've hit the major problem with using a badly compiled book based on a primitive belief system that has no evidence for it.   One can believe in a "god" making it vague enough. But when yuo start adding attributes claimed as "true" then it fails.
 

If Judas could have chosen not to betray Jesus, how could God know what Judas would do before he did it? If free will actually existed, then nothing about Judas's decision could be known until it happened, not even by God. God could, at the very most, know the consequences of every decision Judas (or you, or me, or anyone) could make, but he could not possibly know which decision, exactly, he would take until he took it. Therefore, God can not be omniscient, or we can not have free will. Funny how things work out once you start really thinking about them.
So I am beginning to agree with some of your conclusions. Incidentally, even in a Universe without God, free will is still meaningless and is nothing more than an illusion based on our limited perceptions of the workings of the Universe. If the Universe was suddenly reset to its initial condition, or a duplicate Universe was made with the same blueprints, everything would happen in exactly the same way, including every decision every person makes. Everything is determined.
 Does that make any sense

[velkyn]

If Judas could have chosen not to betray Jesus, how could God know what Judas would do before he did it? If free will actually existed, then nothing about Judas's decision could be known until it happened, not even by God. God could, at the very most, know the consequences of every decision Judas (or you, or me, or anyone) could make, but he could not possibly know which decision, exactly, he would take until he took it. Therefore, God can not be omniscient, or we can not have free will. Funny how things work out once you start really thinking about them.

well, first Riley, it is a story   Yes, if one goes with Judas being predestined since God already knows what will happen, then yes there is a problem.  SC tries to get around this by saying “well, it would have been done somehow” but ignores the prophecies that are inconvenient for him.  This variations between Christians and how they all claim to know the “truth” about what God “really” meant is part of why I find belief in any version of theism ridiculous.  You’ve got it, the problem of omniscience and free will.

So I am beginning to agree with some of your conclusions. Incidentally, even in a Universe without God, free will is still meaningless and is nothing more than an illusion based on our limited perceptions of the workings of the Universe. If the Universe was suddenly reset to its initial condition, or a duplicate Universe was made with the same blueprints, everything would happen in exactly the same way, including every decision every person makes. Everything is determined.
 Does that make any sense

  That’s pretty much how I see it.  I just go on with my human flawed brain and make the decisions I do, for whatever reason, but I do try to make all of them with as much objectivity and facts as possible.  I know I’ll sometimes fail, but I also often be right.  Now, after a “reset”,  I do think that there is some changes possible *if* some of the thoughts about quantum theory are right.

[riley2112]

Of course you could look at it this way also,would predicting the future robs those who's future you predict of free will. They still choose to do something, its just that the predictor already knows what they will choose.
You could toss this around so many different ways.

[monkeymind]

Well Yaway doesn't have free will:

Free Will and Omniscience

The two are mutually exclusive. If God has free will, He can make choices. If He can make choices, then He is not all knowing.  God can never choose if He is all knowing because there is nothing to choose from. God already knows everything that He will ever do, so there can be no choice. If He changes His mind, then God was wrong about His previous choice, so He is not all knowing. If He knew He would change His mind then there was no choice at all, so He does not have free will.

If God does not have free will, He cannot change His mind and He can not make choices. In this case, He is not omnipotent. If God is not all powerful, then He can not do all things, such as create a two-legged tripod, or microwave a burrito too hot for God to eat. Well, of course not. That wouldn’t make sense, would it?

[riley2112]

Well Yaway doesn't have free will:

Free Will and Omniscience

The two are mutually exclusive. If God has free will, He can make choices. If He can make choices, then He is not all knowing.  God can never choose if He is all knowing because there is nothing to choose from. God already knows everything that He will ever do, so there can be no choice. If He changes His mind, then God was wrong about His previous choice, so He is not all knowing. If He knew He would change His mind then there was no choice at all, so He does not have free will.

If God does not have free will, He cannot change His mind and He can not make choices. In this case, He is not omnipotent. If God is not all powerful, then He can not do all things, such as create a two-legged tripod, or microwave a burrito too hot for God to eat. Well, of course not. That wouldn’t make sense, would it?

I think Christians believe God can do anything that can be done. A two legged tripod by definition can not be.

[monkeymind]

 Sounds like we agree then?

[velkyn]

Of course you could look at it this way also,would predicting the future robs those who's future you predict of free will. They still choose to do something, its just that the predictor already knows what they will choose.
You could toss this around so many different ways.

and that would also support that there is no free will.  If the predictor is *always* right, they could not chose to do something else other than that.  There is something, in this example, that holds both actions in place as inevitable.   

[riley2112]

Sounds like we agree then?

[riley2112]

Of course you could look at it this way also,would predicting the future robs those who's future you predict of free will. They still choose to do something, its just that the predictor already knows what they will choose.
You could toss this around so many different ways.

and that would also support that there is no free will.  If the predictor is *always* right, they could not chose to do something else other than that.  There is something, in this example, that holds both actions in place as inevitable.

If an outside person sees the future while the chooser does not, then the chooser still has free will.

Also, if the choose knows his own future, he also still has free will. If he sees his future and sees the outcome of a choice, he can then choose differently in the present (there are like 200 timetravel movies with that theme).

[monkeymind]

(Reporter interviewing someone in the future.)

So, how do you like the future?
Well, the future  is not here yet!
Firesign Theater

[Avatar Of Belial]

If an outside person sees the future while the chooser does not, then the chooser still has free will.

But the outside person would know that that future is the only possible future. The Chooser would never be able to choose differently from that future.

Also, if the choose knows his own future, he also still has free will. If he sees his future and sees the outcome of a choice, he can then choose differently in the present (there are like 200 timetravel movies with that theme).

But if he chooses differently from what he saw, then he never actually saw the future, did he?

[velkyn]

If an outside person sees the future while the chooser does not, then the chooser still has free will.

  How?  Can you tell me how he can change his mind and how this would affect the observer? 

[/quote]Also, if the choose knows his own future, he also still has free will. If he sees his future and sees the outcome of a choice, he can then choose differently in the present (there are like 200 timetravel movies with that theme).
[/quote]Again, how can he change his mind if he knows how it will come out?   And you are basing your claims on science fiction?     I'm quite a science fiction nerd, and I've seen just as many time travel movies, books, etc, where the operant cant change what happens. 

[riley2112]

If an outside person sees the future while the chooser does not, then the chooser still has free will.

But the outside person would know that that future is the only possible future. The Chooser would never be able to choose differently from that future.

Also, if the choose knows his own future, he also still has free will. If he sees his future and sees the outcome of a choice, he can then choose differently in the present (there are like 200 timetravel movies with that theme).

But if he chooses differently from what he saw, then he never actually saw the future, did he?

But see, you didn't see the future as it must be, you saw it as what the current chain of events dictated it would be. If you altered just one link in the chain of events, it would no longer lead to that future. Knowing the future gives you the ability to alter the chain.

[riley2112]

If an outside person sees the future while the chooser does not, then the chooser still has free will.

  How?  Can you tell me how he can change his mind and how this would affect the observer? 

Also, if the choose knows his own future, he also still has free will. If he sees his future and sees the outcome of a choice, he can then choose differently in the present (there are like 200 timetravel movies with that theme).
[/quote]Again, how can he change his mind if he knows how it will come out?   And you are basing your claims on science fiction?     I'm quite a science fiction nerd, and I've seen just as many time travel movies, books, etc, where the operant cant change what happens.
[/quote] I too am a science fiction nerd, As Yoda said "Always in motion the future is." (don't ask me why I'm throwing around Star Wars quotes). If you foresee your death happening a certain way, but you don't follow the chain of events that must take place for you to die at that point, then you won't die in that way. Granted, you could be struck by lightening in London at 6:31, but that would be a different death than what you foresaw.

[velkyn]

I too am a science fiction nerd, As Yoda said "Always in motion the future is." (don't ask me why I'm throwing around Star Wars quotes). If you foresee your death happening a certain way, but you don't follow the chain of events that must take place for you to die at that point, then you won't die in that way. Granted, you could be struck by lightening in London at 6:31, but that would be a different death than what you foresaw.

so we just have to determine how time works.  NO problem  

But see, you didn't see the future as it must be, you saw it as what the current chain of events dictated it would be. If you altered just one link in the chain of events, it would no longer lead to that future. Knowing the future gives you the ability to alter the chain.

not according to some versions of how time works.  Most, using the idea of paradox, postulate that you cannot change things e.g. you cannot kill your own grandfather.

[riley2112]

I too am a science fiction nerd, As Yoda said "Always in motion the future is." (don't ask me why I'm throwing around Star Wars quotes). If you foresee your death happening a certain way, but you don't follow the chain of events that must take place for you to die at that point, then you won't die in that way. Granted, you could be struck by lightening in London at 6:31, but that would be a different death than what you foresaw.

so we just have to determine how time works.  NO problem  

But see, you didn't see the future as it must be, you saw it as what the current chain of events dictated it would be. If you altered just one link in the chain of events, it would no longer lead to that future. Knowing the future gives you the ability to alter the chain.

not according to some versions of how time works.  Most, using the idea of paradox, postulate that you cannot change things e.g. you cannot kill your own grandfather.

So even if I want to kill my Grandfather I can't? One more mark against free will.

[Avatar Of Belial]

But see, you didn't see the future as it must be, you saw it as what the current chain of events dictated it would be. If you altered just one link in the chain of events, it would no longer lead to that future. Knowing the future gives you the ability to alter the chain.

Except it is no longer (and likely never was) the future.

If it doesn't happen, it isn't the future. You were likely destined to see what you thought was the future, but then you would have automatically been destined to choose differently from what you saw, thus it could never have been what current chain of events were leading up to because the current chain of events includes the very cause[1] and effect[2] that lead to that so-called "future" not happening.


EDIT: In other words: You cannot actually see the future unless you also cannot (or will not) change it, otherwise it wouldn't actually be the future.

1.	seeing the "future"
2.	picking something that avoids that "future"

[riley2112]

But see, you didn't see the future as it must be, you saw it as what the current chain of events dictated it would be. If you altered just one link in the chain of events, it would no longer lead to that future. Knowing the future gives you the ability to alter the chain.

Except it is no longer (and likely never was) the future.

If it doesn't happen, it isn't the future. You were likely destined to see what you thought was the future, but then you would have automatically been destined to choose differently from what you saw, thus it could never have been what current chain of events were leading up to because the current chain of events includes the very cause[1] and effect[2] that lead to that so-called "future" not happening.


EDIT: In other words: You cannot actually see the future unless you also cannot (or will not) change it, otherwise it wouldn't actually be the future.

1.	seeing the "future"
2.	picking something that avoids that "future"

You really know how to take the wind out of my sails.

[velkyn]

You really know how to take the wind out of my sails.

ah, cheer up Riley, you can think about multiple universes and really get confused   

[riley2112]

You really know how to take the wind out of my sails.

ah, cheer up Riley, you can think about multiple universes and really get confused 

confused, what I do best.

[riley2112]

If an outside person sees the future while the chooser does not, then the chooser still has free will.

But the outside person would know that that future is the only possible future. The Chooser would never be able to choose differently from that future.

Also, if the choose knows his own future, he also still has free will. If he sees his future and sees the outcome of a choice, he can then choose differently in the present (there are like 200 timetravel movies with that theme).

But if he chooses differently from what he saw, then he never actually saw the future, did he?

Ok, what about this, The future he saw is neither true nor false. It is simply what is going to happen unless something is altered.

[Avatar Of Belial]

Ok, what about this, The future he saw is neither true nor false. It is simply what is going to happen unless something is altered.

That... doesn't actually change the scenario.

What he saw is not, and cannot be the future unless he is unable (or simply does nothing) to change it. But his "choice" is a direct consequence of what he saw, both of which are already a part of the chain of events leading to the actual future.

If it doesn't happen, then it isn't a "false future", it just plain isn't a future.

confused, what I do best.

We're talking about (essentially) time travel. If you aren't confused, you're doing it wrong.

[velkyn]

you might like this link, Riley: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_paradox 

[riley2112]

you might like this link, Riley: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_paradox

Thanks , I will check it out.