by Anti-Christ 3 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
It always bugged me the way the JWs would explain the "universal question". It always sounded to me like if we were all in some sort of cruel experiment to just prove a point, that apparently he (Jehovah) already knows the outcome not that it's important because he is all powerful and he can change the outcome to fit his desire.
What do you all think?
Good one! This is related to an argument which has been referred to as the Free Will Argument Against the Existance of God. You can search it out to see all the nifty logical symbology and whatnot, but basicall it is the logical argument against the set of theistic views that claim the deity is all knowing, all powerful, all good and at the same time things are not the way he intended. It's particularly good against JW's, because (in my skeptical atheistic standpoint) a closer tie to traditional theology has already worked out some of the issues that they create by inventing a different god than the orthodox and apologetic historical christian movement.
The argument goes like this:
It's logically impossible to be all knowing (including future events) and all powerful. If future events SHALL obtain with 100% certainty, then no action can alter their obtaining. In other words an all knowing being would know his future actions and therefore be unable of changing his mind.
Related counter arguments are the testing defense (TD) and the unknown purpose defense (UPD). But Witnesses can't appeal to these because of their unique biblical literalism presuppositions. Some orthodox theologies have rationalized this problem with the acceptance that if God is alknowing and allpowerful, then the world is therefore exactly as he intends if for purposes of testing and/or unknown "higher" purposes. Other rationalizations have included a non-interventionist deism against this argument.
It's interesting to point out to Witnesses that the argument against logical impossibility as explanatory power for the deity is accepted by them and used against the Trinity doctrine. That would undermine one of their chief criticisms against divine mystery.
Jehovah's witnesses often resort to a unique and bizarre twist whereby they claim Jehovah can know the future but can choose not to, never answering the problems of...
1. If the set of future events shall obtain, the willfull knowing or non knowing of these events has no impact upon their being determined. Acceptance of this yields the conclusion of determinism which JW's claim to reject because of it's impact on other aspects of their theology (the free-will actions of humans impact their ultimate destiny)
2. If the set of future events which will occur is established in the knowing of them by the deity (whatever that means), then the decision of knowing is equivalent to agency or fixing of the future by the deity in a form of agency. This undermines the validity of the JW's form of the testing defense as life being a sort of Divine Trial to prove the issue of Divine Sovereignty. Jehovah would be obviously stacking the deck in his favor by establishing future events that are unable to be changed. This also undermines the free will of humans. As I remember, according to JW's all people have the opportunity to freely choose to serve, this being the merit for punishment for those who choose not to serve. It is therefore logically possible that all humans could have chosen to serve Jehovah right from the start. If that was impossible, then according to the JW theology, it appears Satan was right. If you are to be punished for something that it was eternally impossible for you to do, AND the outcome was eternally fixed AND KNOWN when the conditions for your punishment were established then there is no argument as to why that person OUGHT to serve Jehovah. Lay that one on a JW sometime. "If it was impossible for any single person to exercise free will in serving Jehovah then Satan was right." Admittedly, not a highly effective statement to make to a JW, but a fun one!
The JW testing defense is slippery and non-sensical and is a great place to attack their basic theology.
bookmark
1. If the set of future events shall obtain, the willfull knowing or non knowing of these events has no impact upon their being determined. Acceptance of this yields the conclusion of determinism which JW's claim to reject because of it's impact on other aspects of their theology (the free-will actions of humans impact their ultimate destiny)
2. If the set of future events which will occur is established in the knowing of them by the deity (whatever that means), then the decision of knowing is equivalent to agency or fixing of the future by the deity in a form of agency. This undermines the validity of the JW's form of the testing defense as life being a sort of Divine Trial to prove the issue of Divine Sovereignty. Jehovah would be obviously stacking the deck in his favor by establishing future events that are unable to be changed. This also undermines the free will of humans. As I remember, according to JW's all people have the opportunity to freely choose to serve, this being the merit for punishment for those who choose not to serve. It is therefore logically possible that all humans could have chosen to serve Jehovah right from the start. If that was impossible, then according to the JW theology, it appears Satan was right. If you are to be punished for something that it was eternally impossible for you to do, AND the outcome was eternally fixed AND KNOWN when the conditions for your punishment were established then there is no argument as to why that person OUGHT to serve Jehovah. Lay that one on a JW sometime. "If it was impossible for any single person to exercise free will in serving Jehovah then Satan was right." Admittedly, not a highly effective statement to make to a JW, but a fun one!
A wile back me and one of my JW friend had this kind of discussion, they were other JW present, a bunch of young guys having a beer together, they started to freak out. Some could not really understand what we were talking about and the others who did were very uncomfortable with our logic. The response we got was " you guys think to much." Talk about an insult
