Does Free WIll Necessitate Divine Ignorance (Uncertainty)?

[timthejewler]

One would think that freewill necessitates intervention. If God interviened he/she would cease to exist.

[ThulinMartin]

I wish i had your voice!

I agree with your conclusion.

I just wonder if you might be mistaken about the free will part.

Does your definition of God allow him to know that you where goin to make this video. To know that the very same moment he created the world?

[eyeroller700]

so the further we are from reality, the more suffering occurs, but yet in the other video you did that was about 'is God just.' you said there that creation itself is about consuming or being consumed. so if that is the reality of the material world, then why does more suffering occur when you go against the reality of such a violent world?

[gtrplayr08]

dude u sound like agent smith in the matrix.

[deeryker]

30 seconds sorry  i dont do gods

[guitarmaestro078]

Great video, I am subscribing.

[guitarmaestro078]

I like the way you defined omnipotency because it ultimately breaks one of the legs of what I call "god's tripod" (Omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence) .

Your definition of omnipotence cancels out BOTH of the other two legs because if god CANNOT know what he will do "until the intention to create arises in his mind".

I think your argument leads to a true dichotomy: Either god is omniscient and already knows what will happen and what he will decide or he is NOT and he doesnt know.

[MrAmericanAce]

In other words. Free will is a byproduct of you existing. This will demonstrate the eternal power of the creator by allowing you to choose whether or not you accept this existence. As he does not want to force it on you. But for whatever reason he deemed the very concept of you worthy to give it a shot. And see if you like it. Hence, free will.

[MrAmericanAce]

that in all of this. You never had to be in the first place. you never had to be the (To be) but it was given to you free of charge, and if you like it, stand next to the I AM , if you dont like it (being) then stand next to the (Never Was). For me personally, i look at my family, and my friends, and every single other person, like yhou guys. and i understand i never had a right to be here at all, but i am here. And ihave made the choice to like it. Does this make sense? (smoken that dank :D )

[MrAmericanAce]

Which one to stand next to. Now in this, we get to choose to stand next to the son of creation, or to the one that wants to end creation. The ultimate power of all of this, rests in the fact that if it was never to be, it wouldnt be now, therefore creation and his son are infinite, and never will be removed. It is false in itself to believe they will. That is a very vague and non entirely encompassing description of only one aspect of "God's" eternal power. The main aspect however, is

[MrAmericanAce]

And this will allow a concious aware entity, to produce a false. So there is existence, there is the son of the fact of the matter, he champions truth. There is the second place to this son, that champions false. That is what people call the devil or satan. Now, truth in and of itself is greater, it was there first, it is the direct product, the son of the existence factor. Free will designates that we as humans, have access to the truth and the false. Free will is here to let you choose

[MrAmericanAce]

To add to this. Within the realm of this existence, we can all agree, that concious entities can produce truth, or lies. God is the originator of what can be concieved of at all as true or false. Nothing could ever be true or false without his authority so to speak. The mind fuck here. Is that the very fact that things DO EXIST makes this existence alone, a TRUE FACT. God originates all and is the creator of truth. And knows that to have truth, you need the opposite (in his rules for his reason)

[MrAmericanAce]

To come to exist at all. Any thought, any molecule, any concious entity. That does exist. Came from something that defined what it is to exist in the first place.

God - To exist, out of not existing. (to be or not to be)

Jesus - The son of God. The I am , because he does (exist)

Now God is the ultimate no limit decider of this exist or not scenerio. Jesus. He is infact born of god. But he does exist. He is "I AM"

[MrAmericanAce]

I love how you dont automatically self-declare facts pertaining to this subject genre. Its all food for thought with a nice and generalized direction to it. Ive got a few thoughts on this matter holdon :)

[theawaismirza]

you are genius man

[safeteyvalve]

one word; anthropomorphism

[anglofiles87]

im not sure you have your terms straight, if you want to make a point about free will it seems like a good idea to not talk about god ( who does not, a priori, suffer from the "problem of free will". ) as he is not only omnipotent as you describe him but also omniscient ( all knowing ) and omnipresent etc. etc.

Further, your account of the tragedies of nagasaki and hiroshima makes no reference to the nature of the moral obligations surrounding the sacrifices required by an invasion.UNCLEAR

[CP91311]

Change your thoughts and you change the world.

[MaBu888]

Zonm a video from higher consciousness.

[MaBu888]

ZOMG*

[MaBu888]

Zomg, as is apparent, we are human bodies that are inhabiting a heavenly body, or ought to. Though, each body has a mind, and each mind's relation to each body is nondual, then we are potentially enlightened beings that transcend and include self and other for the benefit of ALL, to be ONE. Though, concepts about one and all are abstractions, not 100 % accurate representations of the one and the all that I AM THAT I AM.

[MaBu888]

Refer to the Bible and other wisdom literature misused or not, for more information of subject. Subject dynamically takes the roll of object, but if subject blindly takes roll of object, then suffering arises, and confusions such as atomic weapons occur!!! This video is the greatest god-themed video of this year I think, or one of the greatest.

Integral awareness I bid you all :)

[CP91311]

Reality is thought, yours, mine and everyone.

[ItsJustARide314]

you are assuming said "God" is linear, something i would certainly reject when discussing of an omnipotent ALL powerful creator...

[jericomovie]

I reject linear time. So, no, I am not assuming God is linear.

[MaBu888]

Time is nonlinear at closer look. God is not separate from creation at closer look. You are and you are not at closer look. Get it?

[jfallahi]

Jerico,

If God created you, how do you know what He is like? Your arguments may be valid for other people, but you can't use the rules of a game when you're no longer playing the game - it's senseless. You are trying to take the rules of this life, the logic and reason that God gave you, and apply it to God. "if-then" means nothing outside of this world, how then can we apply it to the Unknown Essence, the Creator of all the worlds and universes?

[jericomovie]

To claim that "God exists," is to claim something of His nature. Is it not?

Further, to say that God has created me, or anyone for that matter, is to claim something more about His nature.

And to claim, as you do, that God exists outside the rules of logic is to make yet further claim about His nature.

It would seem to me, in all sincerity, that you are as comfortable supposing the details of His nature as I am.

[jfallahi]

As they say, "there is no god." The God that we conceive of, that we talk about and argue about does not exist. "...but God," Anything you conceive of is not God, "but" even though we cannot know God, we still want to and try to. The God that we think we are talking about is not God, it is "god-toJerico," or "god-to-jfallahi," in that sense there are billions of gods - thus it is said "know thyself." The god we talk about here is the god of our own creation, nothing more.

[jericomovie]

Why?

[jfallahi]

'Cause if I say "I know" when I don't, then, as you mentioned so well, we are destroying the beauty of this world. The Bomb was a symbol of someone saying, "I know" when they didn't. otherwise, how could anyone do such a thing without saying they knew it was the right thing to do. We need Beauty. The Bomb is a symbol of veils of knowledge. If we would have recognized the Beauty of the Unknown, then there would not have been be a bomb. Recognition of that Beauty unites us as one human family.

[jericomovie]

I mean to ask, why cannot we know God?

[jfallahi]

Of course it depends on your definition of God and what you mean by knowledge. But if God is the Absolute, then it is because our knowledge is relative. With all our learning we don't even have knowledge of simple causes, like why a stone falls (consider Hume's problem of Induction). Science has nothing but hypothesis. How can we know the Cause of causes? If we appeal to religion, we find no scripture claiming that we can know God directly, quite the opposite. Further we go, the less we know.

[jericomovie]

That's all very poetic, as all of your posts have been, but, what is "truth" in this relative universe of yours?

[jfallahi]

It depends on the observer, the rules of the environment, and the thing observed and it's usage. Are we men, or are we animals? It depends on who is asking and why. Is a chair a thing to sit on or the sum of wood or metal? The truth depends on the context and purpose of the subject and the object. This is relative truth. Relative truth is the truth we can talk about, absolute truth is the truth that we cannot talk about, but which we for some beautiful reason are compelled to hypothesize.

[jericomovie]

"absolute truth is the truth that we cannot talk about"

Considering that is an absolute statement, that is, a statement you assume to be true absolutely and without relativity, I'm rather confused as to your position.

[MaBu888]

"Considering that is an absolute statement, that is, a statement you assume to be true absolutely and without relativity, I'm rather confused as to your position." Something Buddha would've said. :)

[jogayot]

very nicely "ulterred".

[isismelting]

you're basal assumption is one of a false dichotomy because your basal motivation is to define yourself in such a way as to become convinced that you will never disappear.

(how many ways are there to say this, and is it worth repeating over and over again?)

[MaBu888]

The you-streme is infinite, both in its relativity and absoluteness, hence direct nonlinguistic knowledge of the nature of everything, and relative conceptualizations that in and as Supermind are free.

[dawahaddict]

Fascinating video. I think the problem is that you put God inside time, therefore presuming that God has to make an intention at some point in time, and that He does not know what he will intend in the future. There is no past present or future for God. Wouldn't you agree?

[jericomovie]

I would reject the notion of time as you present it. I discussed something similar with moyga, another viewer. You can find the exchange in the comments, if you like, and offer further thoughts there.

[D4Shawn]

A more important question would be:

Do invisible magic dragons fart fairy dust?

[jericomovie]

Always the charmer, Shawn.

You might be interested in my video on free will, if you haven't seen it already.

[Geodextro]

Im having trouble understanding what your idea is of the nature of God, how would you say he exists? As a physical being, a omnipresent conscience, or simply a force in the universe? I subscribe the the last, but am open to discussion and really respect your thoughts - from this video it makes it sound as if he is one of the first two - im interested though what are you thoughts?

[jericomovie]

I don't really know.

[MaBu888]

God is the I AM. "I AM THAT I AM" - Jesus H Christ, but not as the limited ego identinty that exists only as an artifact of spacetime, say, like a rock, but as a common identity, what one Japanese Zen master called absolute subjectivity - one perspective of I. There is only one true self/God, but one and the all are so integrated dynamically 'in the end', perhaps, that it matterz infinitely, if you get my metaphor. Form, anyway, is emptiness, and emptiness is form.

[prankmypants]

for the purpose of my point i was generalising the same as you postulated with regards to bad things happening. eg bombs, war

but good and evil is just a measurment from a perspective i know.

Everyone has a responsibility to ensure the future. Each survives in their own way. Some take responsibility, others use a lack of it to explain their actions. We must all do the best we can and act as non destructively as possible if we are to survive. Even the ignorant ones who dont care know this.

[prankmypants]

so by your own argument, isnt it in gods plan for the evil to happen as we cannot change that. which in turn then makes god evil as we seem to be running this rat race as some sort of experiment / amusement

[moyga]

Also, If God is omniscient and creates us individually, then humans do not have free will,

because as he purposefully creates us, he already knows everything we will ever do, therefore synonymously creating out future as he creates us, meaning every event would be preordained purposefully by him, including the 'immoral actions' of any individual.

Is that not true?

[jericomovie]

This argument assumes that is not true.

Omniscience is to know everything. Knowledge comes from what exists. Hence, what is created is known. To say God knows what he will do is to assume God exists on a determined path, since it is only from a created, determined path that his action would be knowable. But a determined path for God violates omnipotence. Hence, the necessity for divine uncertainty is supposed here.

[moyga]

But if God does not know his future, which would run along a determined path if it was known, then he does not know everything, and is therefore not actually omniscient, right?

Isn't what your saying implicating that omniscience and omnipotence contradict each other? It seems so to me.

You say that God cannot know what does not exist, but the future does exist for him because he transcends time, so his future creations, would exist and he would know them infinitely forward in time. Right?

[jericomovie]

He remains omniscient in that he knows all as it exists, being the basis of what exists. The undetermined future of an omnipotent being is known only in possibilities, but not in actuality, since omnipotence is not subject to determined reality.

Second, I don't really know if "God transcends time." What's this all about? You might have to educate me on the nature of time...

[moyga]

Hmm. I just thought that most of the monotheistic religions believed that God transcended time. The reason i thought that is because in most of the arguments i have seen for Gods existence, they talk about him creating time and space, and there for, being outside of and above them. I mean if God is stuck in the present that might compromise his omnipotence mightn't it?

[jericomovie]

Perhaps,

but if the past is replaced by the present, and the future is yet to be conceived, you have alpha, omega, and the creator. How would you suppose that might compromise his omnipotence?

That's why I ask about the nature of time, you see. Time is creation itself, it would seem to me, and not some linear concept that supposes the past still somehow exists, or that the future has already happened. Time in that sense is just a strategy of human knowledge, not a reality.

[moyga]

hmmm interesting.

I thought it might compromise his omnipotence in the sense that, it would mean that God could not travel forward or backward in time.. which he would not have to do if he transcended time.

I know you said that you don't think the past still exists outside of our memories of it..

but from what I've read, scientists have discovered a lot about time, especially in relation to light, and bending it, and being able to send objects through it, into the past, by slowing it.

[jericomovie]

Slowing the rate at which something occurs, such as the speed of light, would not necessarily infer that the past still exists in the present. It would rather infer that something occurred at a slower rate compared to the rest of the world. In that, it is not the past existing in the present, but the present containing two rates of time. Mind-blowing, I admit, but permissible to what I'm arguing here.

This is all "by the seat of my pants," so I might be missing something.

[moyga]

Very interesting. No by all means, i appreciate you discussing this with me using kind of, 'A priori' reasoning.

I am trying to remember the logic they had behind the time traveling thing so i can explain it to you.. but i cant really remember how they explained the logic of how it was possible so i cant help for now.

But hopefully at least some of the things i brought up were slightly interesting and will help you further your thoughts. Peace.

[dawahaddict]

Even still, it's a strategy that God created for us. I would agree that the past does not still exist, and that the future does not yet exist, but this does not prevent God from having full knowledge of it. Hmm. Maybe our concept of past present and future is attached to knowledge and the lack thereof, which isn't an issue for God, thus making the concept of time totally meaningless for Him. I'm just thinking out loud. This is healthy. This is why I subscribed :-)

[jericomovie]

Knowledge comes from what exists, and I should add, what has existed. God knows all possibilities of the future, but no actualities of the future because the present moment is decided freely. Further, God is under no obligation to create a present moment, so, there is nothing to know, even for God to know, beyond this moment.

[dawahaddict]

So how can there be more than one possible future?

[jericomovie]

Does God create reality?

Is God omnipotent?

If yes to both, then any future reality is infinite in possibility.

[dawahaddict]

That is true only if the "future reality" has yet to be created. I'm saying that "reality" or "creation" has already been fully created, and it's just unfolding for us, not God. For God, it's all one thing (of course I know this is something you may contest), and if that is the case, then while any future COULD HAVE BEEN possible, only one future is possible, because just the one future was created.

[rainydays137]

How can there be even one possible future? You are trying to quantifying the inherently unknown and uncertain. You might as well start making statements about the afterlife. Though of course that really depends on the nature of time itself, which is really what you are asking, and any statement about that would be a largely baseless belief since our knowledge on the topic is too incomplete for something more substantial.

[dawahaddict]

It is not unknown or uncertain to God. God is All-Knowing, so He knows what will come in the future.

[dawahaddict]

Free will is a funny term because people use it to mean so many things. I would suggest that the only free will humans have is the freedom of choice or freedom of intention. We have the freedom to intend to head to CVS for bandaids, but we do no have the ability to get there. If God does not will for us to make it to CVS, we can be hit by a bus, or CVS can be closed, forcing you to turn around and go to Walgreens. We do not have the power to make it happen. Similarly, with a moral issue...

[dawahaddict]

... you may intend to bring a sandwich to the homeless guy who hangs out in front of your building, but when you get downstairs he isn't there. Still, your intention was to feed someone who was hungry. So, ultimately, your moral responsibility has less to do with successfully performing an action as it has to do with making the intention in the first place. That's all we can do. God knows best.

[jericomovie]

you might be interested in my most recent blog post. it discusses just that, among other things. the comments on the blog allow for more typing too, if you feel like you have a lot to say and are annoyed with youtube comment restrictions.

[moyga]

How can God have both free will and be omniscient. If he knows everything, he would always know everything he was ever going to do. At first thought, this would seem to allow him to deviate from what he knows of his own future, but he would always know ahead of time every deviation he would/could ever make, ultimately trapped in his own knowledge... and he is supposed to transcend time.

The idea of omniscience is full of paradoxes.

[dawahaddict]

First of all, there is no past or future for God because, like you said at the end, God transcends time. Secondly, God's self-knowledge does not limit Him. Also, there is a significant difference between God being able to do anything and God doing whatever He wills. He may limit Himself in certain ways, for example, that He would never will to no longer be God. This is not however a true limit on His power, because He Himself is placing that limit there.

[jedimasterbooboo]

exciting about finding you Subbed. Thanks for this great video.

[0ThouArtThat0]

This is brilliant. I'm going to try to post a response.

[ThePointlessPoint]

I have no need of points.

[jericomovie]

hahaha, I see that.

[HaleyMary]

Great vid. Hiroshima, the bomb dropped, so tragic. :(

So, does that mean that God is like people in a way? I've always wondered how is it that a so called perfect being create an imperfect civilization of people, unless God doesn't exist or that God is imperfect itself.

[jericomovie]

The argument here suggests that the uncertainty that comes with the nature of free will is shared between God and man, giving man significant responsibility for his actions where contemporary theology would have us curl passively in, as they might say, "His Glory."

[L1NK666XL1NK666]

0 views 0 comments.... i call that POPTOWN! Great vid as always.

[jericomovie]

To you I bequeath a smoke and a pancake.

...oh and, uh, 5 points. :)