The Instigator
johannesjones
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
draxxt
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

If God is the omnipotent and omniscient creator of the world, then complete free will is impossible

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/10/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,674 times Debate No: 5931
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

johannesjones

Pro

This is an argument that I have most come into contact with regarding Christianity, but it is also relevant in monotheism in general. Thanks to my opponent for accepting this debate, and good luck.

The God I refer to is a being, for instance, the God of the Abrahamic faiths. This argument accepts the omnipotence and omniscience of God the creator as its independent variable.

If someone knows everything, and created everything, then they know what they have created. God knows about every blade of grass and every leaf. He placed them there. He structured all the brains of every human. If a soul exists, he created every bit of it. Everything is in his knowledge, all of which he made. Therefore, nothing can be operating outside of his control. All that he made he has a plan for and nothing can divert from that plan. To divert from God's plan would be to trick the all knowing. It would be operating outside of his realm, which is the entire universe.
draxxt

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate in general. Good luck to you, may the best debator win, and please, in regards to those who will judge this debate, do so unbiased.
Now, enough of the formalities.

I negate the resolution. Be it resolved that an omnipotent omniscient creator of the world can coexist with free will.

"[11]If someone knows everything, and created everything, then they know what they have created. God knows about every blade of grass and every leaf.[11] [22]He placed them there. He structured all the brains of every human. If a soul exists, he created every bit of it. [22] [33]Everything is in his knowledge, all of which he made. Therefore, nothing can be operating outside of his control. All that he made he has a plan for and nothing can divert from that plan. To divert from God's plan would be to trick the all knowing. It would be operating outside of his realm, which is the entire universe.[33]"

I believe that was the gist of my opponent's argument. Let me break this down. As you'll see, I have placed numbers within my opponent's speech thus making it easier to break down.

11) That is an excellent point, however, just because He knows everything he created does not mean he dictates what they do. For instance, I create a toaster. If that toaster were to malfunction on it's own, is that my doing? Say I built that toaster to par but I never used it. After some time, it is unable to toast at all. Is this my fault? (And yes, I realise that's not how a toaster works, it was just a silly analogy)

22) Let us look to the Christian faith, as you have already used it as an example. The Bible speaks of us as beings of the flesh (being succeptable to sin). Since God does not cause us to sin, nor does he tempt us, we must have some free will, yes? Also, into any other monotheistic religion, there is typically an antagonist, a devil, Satan, Deceiver, or a Xenu of sorts. This being said, we are then given a choice.

33) What if it was God's will for us to have a choice? I can know a ladybug is going to move when touched but that doesn't necessarily mean I will control it. Don't get me wrong, I may choose to interfere at any time, the same goes for an omnipotent omnipresent God.

Now, with all that aside, I can get to my one and only contention not having to do with my opponent's argument...

For the most part...

My opponent argues that MAN cannot have free will whereas the resolution clearly states: "If God is the omnipotent and omniscient creator of the world, then complete free will is impossible"

I propose to you that even IF, not to contend my own contentions, man had no free will, said creator would, thereby meaning there is complete free will.

For the above reasons and refutations, I strongly urge a CON ballot.

Thanks,
-EG
Debate Round No. 1
johannesjones

Pro

Thanks to my opponent for the organization. My rebuttal:

11) If a human builds a toaster, that is one thing. If God builds a toaster, he also built its surroundings. The air, the counter top or table, the tiny hairs that land on it: all of them are his craft (repeating my earlier emphasis that God created all). The air pressure that moves the dust was also set in specific motion by him. He knows exactly how each factor will affect the toaster. Past, present and future are all apart of his omniscience. It doesn't matter if he is actively affecting the situation: he set each atom into existence at creation. He knew how each placement of each atom would affect everything. He is also constantly aware of the state of the toaster as it deteriorates.

22) My opponent made an impressive point here. I will also use Christianity as a specific example. Paul, as a Christian, states in Ephesians 1:4 that God "chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight." Humans chose God because God willed them to. As for the antagonists, the Creator has power over them. Two omnipotent beings cannot coexist in conflict. If one cannot defeat the other he is not omnipotent. As evidenced in the book of Job from the Tanakh/Old testament Satan must ask God before he tempts. God reigns supreme.

33) Humans do make choices. The word describes our courses of action whether or not the decision begins and ends with us. The ladybug analogy would lead me to the same logic as the toaster analogy.

44) I make a fourth point to further the argument. If God wills that humans make choices of complete free will beyond his control, then these choices must not have been laid down before creation. These choices must be made within the bounds of time inside of humans. If they are outside of God's reach but within his creation he is then not omnipotent.

My opponent did not accept my implication in the topic that God has complete free will. As he stated, I am arguing that God is the only possessor of complete free will.

Thanks for a quality rebuttal. Enjoy the debate.

-johannes jones
draxxt

Con

draxxt forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
johannesjones

Pro

I have no further points at the moment, so let my opponent respond and call it a completed debate.
draxxt

Con

I would like to thank My opponent for this debate. But in lieu of the fact that I cannot be on long, I cannot make a rebuttal. However, I would like to point out that my contentions not directly attacking my opponent's case have gone uncontested. My opponent failed to argue against my case other than the attacks I made on him. Therefore, as there is some question of fallibility in my opponent's case as given with my rebuttal and refutations, and my contentions have no converse so far as my opponent is concerned, I now urge the judges to vote in negation of this resolution.

Thank you.
~EG
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by draxxt 8 years ago
draxxt
I'm sorry. I don't actually own a computer so this was troublesome...
Posted by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
I'd actually say this argument is pretty weak and flawed. How about arguing that GOD himself has no free will >:D? That's a much more stronger argument.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"No, we are made with the ability to stray from what the creator wants. "

That's poor design, regardless of the other problems.

"I could know something is going to happen but if I don't intervene for what I want, that's free will."
If you know what's going to happen, that means that what's going to happen is predetermined. If something is already predetermined before someone has even been born, that means their mind had no influence on it- they had no control over it.
Posted by jjmd280 8 years ago
jjmd280
A Judeo-Christian person really cannot argue that there is free will according to their religion. If God is all-knowing, then there simply is no free will. If there is free will, then God simply is not all knowing. I think we all know how this argument goes, and if not, then simply think critically on the matter, and the logic will come to you.
Posted by draxxt 8 years ago
draxxt
No, we are made with the ability to stray from what the creator wants. I could know something is going to happen but if I don't intervene for what I want, that's free will.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"If that toaster were to malfunction on it's own, is that my doing? Say I built that toaster to par but I never used it. After some time, it is unable to toast at all. Is this my fault?"

When you consider that the "you" here is an omnipotent being, who created the capacity of the toaster to fail over time.... yes, it's your fault.

Neither the toaster in question, nor, notably, the universe, is built to the par of omnipotence :P
Posted by I-am-a-panda 8 years ago
I-am-a-panda
This will probably be taken up by someone. I only have 1 argument but not enough to base a debate on: Why would god make so many religions if he only see's one as fit to represent him??
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by johannesjones 8 years ago
johannesjones
johannesjonesdraxxtTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by KRFournier 8 years ago
KRFournier
johannesjonesdraxxtTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Vote Placed by draxxt 8 years ago
draxxt
johannesjonesdraxxtTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07