I still don’t understand why you and Geoff both accept the statement, “If the future is fixed then we have no real free will” as if it were self-proving.

But I don’t think we’re getting anywhere. Interesting discussion. I hope the continuation of the “Does God know/not know the future?” discussion on this thread hasn’t derailed it from its original inquiry, which I find very interesting (as you can see above).

Do we? Or are the scriptures you previously cited using language familiar to the speakers and not necessarily literal?

For example, does Nephi—in 1 Nephi 22:4—in his usage of the phrase “the isles of the sea (and not “some isles of the sea”) mean that every island in the world was inhabited by the tribes of Israel? Did Mormon in Helaman 3:8 really mean that the entire planet was inhabited by Nephites? Did Moses really mean in Genesis 6:18-22 that Noah took two (or more) of every animal in the world on the ark; did Noah travel to Australia to get the kangaroo and the North Pole to get the polar bear? Does Isaiah in Isaiah 5:28 really saying that the future will see horses that have wheels?

In the scriptures you cited, are they really describing knowledge as we know it or are they using words that describe the process/quality better than any other word can?

“if God can predict the future with absolute infallibility, then the future is known to him.”

No, it is not. It is not absolute. If he cannot see it, it cannot be known, at least not known in the sense of the word as you are using it.

Interestingly enough, I came across the definition of know today:

• To perceive directly; grasp in the mind with clarity or certainty.
• To regard as true beyond doubt.
• To have a practical understanding of, as through experience; be skilled in.
• To have fixed in the mind.
• To have experience of.
• To perceive as familiar; recognize.
• To be acquainted with.
• To be able to distinguish; recognize as distinct
• To discern the character or nature of.

It seems that “to know” can be used in more than the way you are interpreting the aforementioned scriptures.

“However, you could easily free yourself from this box”

That’s just it; I don’t think God’s knowledge (of the future, or otherwise) has to have the confinements you are placing on it. I am open to the possibility, as previously stated, that God’s knowledge may be more than simply an accumulation of numberless facts. I think your box analogy is misdirected.

“I’m not willing to let them impose human limitations on God.”

And yet you are letting yourself do just that. You are defining his knowledge by human limitations (i.e. his knowledge is linear, limited in two directions; backwards and forwards).

However, taking your own previous statements at face value, if God can predict the future with absolute infallibility, then the future is known to him. If that means the future is fixed, then the future is, according to you and not me, fixed. You’ve kept repeating the nonsequitur mantra that if the future is fixed then we have no freedom.

Since you believe that we DO have freedom (I think) then according to the false dichotomy between foreknowledge and freedom that you’ve embraced, you can’t believe that God is able to predict everything with infallible accuracy.

If you don’t believe that God is absolutely infallible about the future, then you believe in a God who is fallible. I don’t.

However, you could easily free yourself from this box by simply recognizing that God’s knowledge of the future, or the conditions or abilities that make his knowledge thereof possible, do nothing to limit or compromise or limit the agency of man. In other words, God can know the future, perfectly and absolutely, and we can still have true freedom.

I believe the Prophets when they tell me we have freedom of will, and I also believe them when they tell me that God knows the end from the beginning. If some philosophers and logicians have a problem with that, too bad. I’m not willing to let them impose human limitations on God.

Exactly.

Semantically, yes. But I wonder whether past prophets thought there was a distinction.

“Is the future fixed? Sure it is. What fixes it? Free choices made by people with true free will and agency.”

If people really do make choices based on complete freedom to choose, then the future cannot be fixed; it is undetermined until those choices are made. If it is determined beforehand, then choices cannot be made to change it. If someone can make a choice that would change the fixed future, than it cannot be fixed.

Not according to Joseph Smith. He says that matter is co-eternal with God. So are you. Joseph rejected the teaching that “creation” meant creation ex nihilo.

You suggest that God’s predictive power could be absolutely perfect, so that he is always right about what’s really going to happen. Is there any real distinction between this and knowing the future? If he really knows exactly what’s going to happen, then he knows the future, and according to you, the future is fixed.

So as I said before, his knowledge of the future is either infallible or fallible. If it’s infallible, the future is fixed.

I, on the other hand, can’t accept the statement that if the future is fixed, we have no free will. That’s because, unlike you and Geoff, I’m willing to look at the course of causes and effects independently from the course of time. Is the future fixed? Sure it is. What fixes it? Free choices made by people with true free will and agency. What causes God to know the future? Seeing the free choices that people make.

No, I said if the future is fixed, we have no free will.

“Either he knows what’s going to happen and can’t be wrong about it, or he’s just predicting what’s going to happen and is vulnerable to error.”

I don’t think there’s a dichotomy. I think there is a possibility for other scenarios. For example, God’s omniscience could be so advanced and complete as to include the ability to predict the future to a degree far more accurate than any human could ever do; even perhaps to the point that he is always right.