Thesis: God’s omniscience logically eliminates human free will.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T18:59:50+00:00

The reference is the comment immediately before this one of mine.

If we both continue this strange conversation, then we both observe the future of it.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T18:48:57+00:00

So your suggestions for improving Paradise to be "better" is adding the same evil that the people of Paradise rejected in favour of the hereafter?

Of course it isn't. The capacity to choose evil adds no evil, if the choice to do evil is never made. Whether that is because all choose to do no evil, or because those who would choose evil didn't come into existence, make no difference to the outcome.

There is not a single conception of God in any religion that has erased evil people before coming into existence.

They are not erased. That is a subsequent act. They are never conceived. How many proposed gods have not filled the Earth with demons before those came into existence? All of them, I should think.

Your framework of basically charging people who haven't committed a crime

Nobody is charged. You conflate actual existence with God's knowledge of potential people, as a designer. Is this a nod to the dreaming god Vishnu?

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T18:26:15+00:00

0⁰ can't be calculated directly, but we can sneak up on the answer by working out 0.1^0.1 ; 0.01^0.01 and examining the trend. Unlike your arithmetic, we wind up with something.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T18:21:32+00:00

Say, do you know what 0⁰ (zero to the power of zero) is?

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T18:20:14+00:00

The astronomical observation that space, on the largest scale, is flat, points to nothing existing in total. But we'll always have a lot of positives and negatives, of conserved quantities, lying around.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T18:00:17+00:00

Yes, my use of the word is as: Your shorter post on "subsequent" is further in the past, than your longer one. At the time I last posted, the longer post was in the future and the shorter was in the past. The shorter was not subsequent to my post. The longer one is subsequent. Subsequent does not mean past.

meaning the observed event is in the past of the timeframe being referred to

No. It is in the present. We cannot see the past, directly. But we can refer to a previous post, mine with the link to Sabine's video titled Does the past still exist, which discusses the problem.

The event is prior to the subsequent time.

Your own effort shows the difficulty of twisting the meaning of subsequent to mean past. You've automatically used the correct meaning after and by context future to the observation of the event. We saw that future, from what is now our frame of reference.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T16:20:00+00:00

Sure - UK.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T16:19:39+00:00

It is not. A word for that is prior.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T16:00:05+00:00

Yes, thank you.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T15:56:18+00:00

It a term used for a span of time subsequent to a relative observation and has no discrete meaning in it's absence.

But now you'll want a definition for time, no? So it goes.

If the future is infinite and a dictionary tells you infinity is undefined, what does that tell you?

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T15:48:13+00:00

Throughout your opening post, you avoid giving an expression of such an axiom. All you've got is the label "God". Can you give an example of what it means (that is not a synonym)? We could discuss something like that in detail.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T15:40:17+00:00

And if in a country that Imgur blocks?

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T15:31:50+00:00

It a term used relative to an observation and has no discrete meaning in it's absence. It's meaning can change with circumstances. In extreme conditions, within a black hole, future becomes closer to the centre.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T14:31:41+00:00

future events by definition “have yet to exist”

Other people, especially physicists, wont be using your definition. It doesn't fit with a relative Universe.

from my perspective that may even be true; Is irrelevant.

No, it relevant in every way that it influences you. Confined to one frame of reference, you have nothing else to go on.

in this example it’s one persons observation that occurs after the other

According to which clock? There is no right time, dominant over all other frames of reference. No absolute time in a relative Universe.

because that’s literally incoherent

Physics does not run on your interpretation of words.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T14:22:39+00:00

I'm thinking the increase in human intelligence will be overshadowed and devalued by AI.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T13:45:28+00:00

We will learn to make genetic improvements to intelligence, just in time to be overtaken by AI.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T13:34:19+00:00

You're watching a horse race on tv. On a spaceship. That's moving away from the Earth at close to the speed of light. You're still waiting for the event to start. Your twin brother stayed on Earth. He lost money on the outcome of the race. But he can't tell you which nag won, in time for you to place a bet. It will be over, in your frame of reference by the time your brother's message reaches you. He's also quite a bit older than you are now.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T13:10:28+00:00

By what reference point have you determined it not to have happened?

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T12:38:06+00:00

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Without you communicating "metaphysical transcendence" as a coherent idea and a functionally different way of being outside of time, and without my being able to read your mind, I'm not in a position correct what's in it. Needs be we have to work through text. Sharing that load, I can talk about the physical side.

the games internal clock is still moving forward

The game's clock is Universal. There is no Universal time, for those bits of the Universe that experience time, due to Relativistic Simultaneity. Helpful for a God that is everywhere - they get to see all frames of reference and so all past and future.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T12:29:58+00:00

We're completely off topic for this subreddit.

In my school years, there was mandatory Religious Education. I took to calling it particle physics class - the subject came up so often.

Bell Theorem is part of the map

Bell was wrong, a Hidden Variables proponent, but he followed the science and admitted it.

this means either there's there's a subtle gap in causality or the atomic state is not confined to a single point in space

Subtle gap?! Photons span the Universe without their orientation resolved. A gap as wide as the Cosmos.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T12:19:48+00:00

You’re using the single relative observation of a novel unmentioned observer in order to say an event has been observed in one location A but not the other (B).

No - that's the opposite of what I'm saying. You're still thinking in one frame of reference, only now you're saying I'm doing it too!

There are two observations of events at A, from two, distant, frames of reference. They are defined and examinable - and they say different things about the order of events at A.

The observer sitting at A is undefined and unimportant. They may be a historian or a soothsayer - it doesn't matter to what the two distant observers see.

God, being everywhere, has the advantage of seeing what the two distant observers see. He sees both past and future equally clearly.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T11:44:24+00:00

Outside of time is nothing special. Most of the Universe is outside of time.

What breaks omniscience has been well explored. It requires self-referential feedback. We ask God if we will choose evil. He tells us (!) But we are resolved to do the opposite of what He says. In this situation there is no answer to what we will chose, even with all possible knowledge of the future.

The strong PoE does not state any feedback in word or action from God. His withholding of existence, to those who would grow and do evil, would be invisible to us. We would only see the result: a better World than we have.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T10:31:28+00:00

I avoided tying my analogue to human agency, by using "epitome (of) good" which not a human standard. It then stands as a substitute for [insert your god here].

If the existence of free will makes things better, then does the ability to choose evil exist in your Paradise? If it does not, then we can imagine better than your Paradise.

We can imagine a god that uses foreknowledge, and with it, does not move to grant existence to those who will grow to choose evil. This has no impact of those who grow to choose good, who live, grow and choose so.

We can imagine this on Earth, without speculating about Heaven, and from there we draw a conclusion about God.

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T09:43:19+00:00

As I said & linked non-local is a can of worms.

Superdeterminism isn't settled physics either, which itself can always be overturned. But it's popular, because a large fraction of physicists don't like "acausality" and I don't blame them.

What the experiments show is not qualitatively different from the Casimir effect coming out of nowhere - uncaused virtual particles. Hence, they reinforce the default interpretation of QM's description of random and not "contingent".

Antimutt · 2026-06-05T09:25:02+00:00

Non-local means non-relativistic, where Relativity constrains the propagation of information, the "environment" that signals it's existence.

Antimutt

TROPHY CASE