On the omniscience of God

[JudgeRightly]

what you in fact freely choose is what God knows if you had freely chosen not-A instead, then God would have infallibly known that. His knowledge is of your free choice , it does not determine it or render it unfree

You could have chosen otherwise, and had you done so, God’s knowledge would have been different. The fact that God already knows what you will freely do does not turn your free act into a determined one

Your position is unfalsifiable as you've framed it. (And no, that's not a good thing.)

You're trying to have it both ways.

Either the future is settled or it isn't.

If God's infallible foreknowledge means the future is already settled, then the past that contains God's infallible knowledge is settled too.

So if God already infallibly knows that I will choose A, then that is part of the settled past.

I cannot later choose not-A without making that supposedly settled past false.

Your response is:

"If you had chosen not-A, then God would always have known not-A."

But that doesn't preserve the same past.

You've simply switched to a different history in which God's prior knowledge is different.

In one history:

God knows A → I choose A.

In another:

God knows not-A → I choose not-A.

That does not show that I could choose either A or not-A given the same settled past.

It shows only that different outcomes correspond to different pasts.

So you're trying to keep the future 100% settled when it supports infallible foreknowledge, but then make the past effectively changeable when you need to preserve free will.

You can't have both.

Either the future is 100% settled, in which case only one outcome is genuinely possible,

or the future is not 100% settled, in which case infallible foreknowledge of every future free choice is impossible.

There is no third option where the future is settled enough to be infallibly known, but somehow unsettled enough that the opposite choice remains genuinely possible.

 

[Clete]

I was, of course, speaking in very general terms. The exceptions all know who they are.

It's interesting (well, to me it's interesting) that all of the people who aren't exceptions, almost certainly think that they are exceptions. That means, taking the group as a whole, if you're one who "knows that you're an exception", the likelihood is that you aren't one.

Then the same observation would apply to this post as well! All the people that I'm actually talking about can read the observation I just made, understand the argument, agree with it's conclusion and still fail to recognize that the argument applies to them!

How do I even know that I'm not one of the TOL idiots!

 

[Right Divider]

It's crazy that some people think that the future can be settled for both an A and not-A choice at the same time ‍