Humor will not be tolerated!! -Portia

Dear Tao,

You just became my favorite writer of all time. Well reasoned and thought-out presentations of current fields of thought. And the hypercube at the end was the perfect icing on the cake. Just thought you should know.

A Mom

I haven't read it yet, but I have already marked it as a favorite.

Fredjikrang wrote:I haven't read it yet, but I have already marked it as a favorite.

That's omniscient foreknowledge right there!!

I've always been of the opinion that God knows each of us so well that he also knows exactly how we will behave and react in any situation.

361 wrote:I've always been of the opinion that God knows each of us so well that he also knows exactly how we will behave and react in any situation.

Yeah, that's a common explanation, but not everyone thinks it really covers the bases. (For one thing, it doesn't account for God having foreknowledge of truly accidental occurrences.)

Katya wrote:

361 wrote:I've always been of the opinion that God knows each of us so well that he also knows exactly how we will behave and react in any situation.

Yeah, that's a common explanation, but not everyone thinks it really covers the bases. (For one thing, it doesn't account for God having foreknowledge of truly accidental occurrences.)

Could it be a combination of God knowing us extremely well, but also is able to view events simultaneously? For example, God sees that Martin Harris loses the 116 pages and then tellsNephi to make a smaller, more doctrinal set? That he could when a major snowstorm is or whatever and advise us to avoid it.

Ha! This is totally talked about in D&C 10. I know this because I have been studying for my D&C test for three hours straight now. I wonder how much longer it will take me to be finished...

Katya wrote:

361 wrote:I've always been of the opinion that God knows each of us so well that he also knows exactly how we will behave and react in any situation.

Yeah, that's a common explanation, but not everyone thinks it really covers the bases. (For one thing, it doesn't account for God having foreknowledge of truly accidental occurrences.)

Sure it does... Wouldn't God know you well enough to know when you would mis-judge a situation and have an accident? In any case... It doesn't matter... God may exist outside of time and be able to view everything from the beginning to the end simultaneously... or not... doesn't matter but it's still fun to speculate so long as you don't confuse speculation with doctrine and don't get into arguments about things that don't matter.

Also interesting is the impact of quantum mechanics and extra dimensions... Here's a pretty layman explanation of the power a super-dimensional being might have on lesser dimensions...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWyTxCsIXE4

So after watching that you should understand how a 3-dimensional being would comprehend and have seemingly limitless power over a 2-dimensional world...

So if God is a 4-dimensional (or higher) being, He would similarly have just as much power over a 3-dimensional world as a 3-dimensional being has over a 2-dimensional world.

It would also explain how God can see all things on Earth as explained in Revelation (the Earth being compared with a glass ball in the Lord's sight...)

Although this is all speculation... I find it interesting because it meshes with doctrine so well.

Nanti-SARRMM wrote:

Katya wrote:

361 wrote:I've always been of the opinion that God knows each of us so well that he also knows exactly how we will behave and react in any situation.

Yeah, that's a common explanation, but not everyone thinks it really covers the bases. (For one thing, it doesn't account for God having foreknowledge of truly accidental occurrences.)

Could it be a combination of God knowing us extremely well, but also is able to view events simultaneously? For example, God sees that Martin Harris loses the 116 pages and then tellsNephi to make a smaller, more doctrinal set? That he could when a major snowstorm is or whatever and advise us to avoid it.

The problem with the simultaneous vision theory is that it gets rid of free will. If God can see THE future at the same time He can see the past, that implies there's only one future out there, and that means I don't actually have a choice in any given matter, any more than a bowling ball has a choice about crashing to the ground if you drop it from a second storey window.

Katya wrote: The problem with the simultaneous vision theory is that it gets rid of free will. If God can see THE future at the same time He can see the past, that implies there's only one future out there, and that means I don't actually have a choice in any given matter, any more than a bowling ball has a choice about crashing to the ground if you drop it from a second story window.

So because God may be able to see all at the same time, it takes away our ability to choose?

I don't think it is a matter of destiny and having no choice in the matter, I think he can see all futures, see all possible outcomes based on our choices. I don't think there is just one future out there, just that God can see the most probable outcome. I think that if there were going to be one future set absolutely in stone, God would have a more direct influence on the events of the world today, but doing that, would take away our agency.

I think I need to read D&C 10 again...

Nanti-SARRMM wrote:

Katya wrote: The problem with the simultaneous vision theory is that it gets rid of free will. If God can see THE future at the same time He can see the past, that implies there's only one future out there, and that means I don't actually have a choice in any given matter, any more than a bowling ball has a choice about crashing to the ground if you drop it from a second story window.

So because God may be able to see all at the same time, it takes away our ability to choose?

I don't think it is a matter of destiny and having no choice in the matter, I think he can see all futures, see all possible outcomes based on our choices. I don't think there is just one future out there, just that God can see the most probable outcome.

That's fine, but then that takes away his omniscience, because then he can only see what's likely to happen, not what definitely will happen.

(For the record, this isn't actually a personal issue with me, I just don't like seeing simplistic answers to complex problems.)

A Mom, but not yours wrote:Well reasoned and thought-out presentations of current fields of thought.

Thank you. I am glad that it came out in such a manner that others could understand it. I was not working under optimum conditions to say the least.

361 - the funny thing about the flatland thought experiment is that it was first globally proposed in an 1884 satirical work attacking the Victorian hierarchy. And for another gospel connection to it, consider how sound would travel in 2 dimensions, then how a 3D being could come to their plane and speak at their level making use of the sense organs as they are usually used, or they could speak from above, creating a resonance within the 2D beings that transcends the senses.

And thanks for your confidence Fred, I hope it was well placed.

Tao wrote:361 - the funny thing about the flatland thought experiment is that it was first globally proposed in an 1884 satirical work attacking the Victorian hierarchy. And for another gospel connection to it, consider how sound would travel in 2 dimensions, then how a 3D being could come to their plane and speak at their level making use of the sense organs as they are usually used, or they could speak from above, creating a resonance within the 2D beings that transcends the senses.

Tao, have you read Flatterland?

What about Flatter Than Flatterland ??

Katya wrote: That's fine, but then that takes away his omniscience, because then he can only see what's likely to happen, not what definitely will happen.

Ok, I bow down to your ever reaching logic.

Maybe one of the Board Editors is God?

Seriously though, you are right Katya. It is a complicated answer that most likely cannot be answered simply.

What are the Flatlands, Flatter Lands, and Flattest Lands about?

katya wrote:
The problem with the simultaneous vision theory is that it gets rid of free will. If God can see THE future at the same time He can see the past, that implies there's only one future out there, and that means I don't actually have a choice in any given matter, any more than a bowling ball has a choice about crashing to the ground if you drop it from a second story window.

How does that take away free will? I still think this means that he knows us so well, he knows how we'll react, no matter the situation. It's not that I have to do something, it's that I will, because that's who I am.

I also don't think there are several different futures. Maybe there are, with slight variences, but things like what I'm going to have for breakfast aren't going to affect much, in the eternal persective (which is God's perspective)

yellow m&m wrote:

katya wrote:
The problem with the simultaneous vision theory is that it gets rid of free will. If God can see THE future at the same time He can see the past, that implies there's only one future out there, and that means I don't actually have a choice in any given matter, any more than a bowling ball has a choice about crashing to the ground if you drop it from a second story window.

How does that take away free will? I still think this means that he knows us so well, he knows how we'll react, no matter the situation. It's not that I have to do something, it's that I will, because that's who I am.

OK, but how can we be held accountable for doing anything if we only do it because "that's who we are"? Is something really a moral choice if we only do it because we were raised or genetically predisposed to make that choice?

Katya wrote:

yellow m&m wrote:

katya wrote:
The problem with the simultaneous vision theory is that it gets rid of free will. If God can see THE future at the same time He can see the past, that implies there's only one future out there, and that means I don't actually have a choice in any given matter, any more than a bowling ball has a choice about crashing to the ground if you drop it from a second story window.

How does that take away free will? I still think this means that he knows us so well, he knows how we'll react, no matter the situation. It's not that I have to do something, it's that I will, because that's who I am.

OK, but how can we be held accountable for doing anything if we only do it because "that's who we are"? Is something really a moral choice if we only do it because we were raised or genetically predisposed to make that choice?

I suppose God could just make some kids and say "Well, I know you so well that I know you're going to end up in Telestial glory so there you go..." and he would, of course, be correct...

But that wouldn't be very fair... Nor would we learn anything.

So even though He knows it all already, He has to let us live it for ourselves so that we can understand and learn. To give us a chance to grow.

I still don't get the problem...

I just see it as God knows what we will do, but that doesn't stop me from choosing my actions, thus not taking away my agency. It isn't like he has said "tomorrow you will go to church and be praying for such and such experience. Even if you don't want to, I am making you." I make the choice to do it... just because he already knew that I would make the choice doesn't mean I didn't make the choice. Likewise I could choose to stay home in my warm comfy bed. God would have known that I made that choice on that particular day, but I still don't get how it takes away from my ability to choose just because he knows what I am going to do...

For me it boils down to the phrase "It's all about me". I need to go through the experiences and gain the growth. Even if God knows which choices I would have made, even if I hadn't come to Earth, that wouldn't help me at all...

I just don't get it..

If there isn't more than one possible outcome in a situation, there isn't really a choice. Do you agree with me so far?