Free Will, Creativity and Recursion

So, again querying the Christians (including myself): Why allow sin? In order to permit free will, goes the standard answer (even amongst non-Catholics, there is a sort of catechism - this is the answer given even in the movies, for example Time Bandits). One must admit, this does seem a logical answer. For, if humans are not allowed to choose against Him, can it really be said that we are choosing in favor of Him? But Who made logic (I am being rhetorical, here)? Or is it even something made? Is logic pre-existent to God? Is logic greater than God? If logic is greater than and pre-existent to God, then it only seems fair to say that logic IS in fact God. I don't think that this is what most Christians believe (including me). So, if God made logic, why did He make it the way that it is? We must admit that He could have made it anyway he chose, otherwise we run again into the problem of some pre-existing order which is greater than God. So why did God CHOOSE to make a logic that would cause free will to require sin? Why not create logic in such a way that free will and absolute sinlessnes could get along just swimmingly??? The only answer I can come up with, and a disconcerting one it is, at that, is that He made things the way He made things because He wanted to. It certainly isn't the way I would've done it. But then, I'm not God. Obviously. And probably a good thing too, I suppose.

Now, though I started this blog with the idea that I am actually asking Christians, it's not something that I would really go around doing (nor would I recommend that anyone else try it - so kids, don't try this at home). If they (and I really shouldn't keep saying "they" since I consider myself one too, but I don't know how else to phrase this) actually get your meaning, you will get the inevitable response (as I once did):
Roman 9:19-21
One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

To which I can't help but respond that this is a very interesting analogy (personally, I can't help but feel there is a hidden meaning in it, which is more important than the obvious one?), however, I am not a pot. I am a living, breathing, thinking, questioning being made in His image. I do not say that my brain is perfect, but He gave it to me and it's the only one I have, so of course I'm going to ask the questions which pop into my head! Besides, it's not as though I am attaching any silly, impudent conditions to my question, like "God, you'd better answer me or I'll stop beliving in you!" - I am merely asking a question. I'm not even sure that my question is worthy of an answer (Currently reading GEB. Maybe the answer is "Mu," or that is to say "You have not asked a well-formed question"), but I do think that it is worthy to be asked by me. Besides, what about other Biblical themes like Jacob wrestling with God in order to be blessed, or the widow persistently asking a judge for justice until she gets it, or "knock and the door will be opened for you," etc?

Anyway, I can't help but feel there is nothing wrong with asking questions, provided it is done with a proper attitude. I think free will and the ability to question, have alot to do with creativity. I think creativty is the defining characteristic of humantiy; that is, what separates us from animals. It is very telling, I think, that the Bible weaves a story of a Creator who creates in His own image. Of course we are creative, and of course we are supposed to be! Perhaps, in the end, this is why God could not create a perfect world. Since God can do everything, he doesn't have to do any one thing. If we are created in His image, then we also have unlimited power as well (though, I believe, somewhat bridled at this time), just as He has. If He had made us essentially limited (that is, limited in essence, as opposed to temporally/temporarily limited), we would not be like Him.

There are, or course, a whole sector of Christians who do not even believe in free will: Calvinists. The Calvinism vs. Arminiamism debate is, in many ways, one of determinism vs. free will. If God is omnipotent, and omnicient, then determisnism seems inevitable. How could He not have control over us? How could He not know the future? Although I detested the ego-centric conclusions of Calvinism (namley, that some are chosen by God to be saved and some are not), I was attracted to all the omni-'s that it guaranteed any conception of God. Afterall, if God is not omni-, why should I be interested? What guarantee is there that He could solve any of my problems? Who wants a wimpy God? Yet, in my ever-present fascination with time, I also had to remember that God is supposed to be omnipresent, meaning he inhabits and sees all times at once. If time is conceived as a dimension, and God lives in some hyperdimension above time, then He would see all times at once. Not only that, but it is not so much that we are predestined to choose certain things, it's more like we already have chosen them, and our limited dimensional senses just haven't clued us in to the fact yet. Still, this is a bit hard to think about. C.S. Lewis suggests this sort of thinking in his various writings, the clearest depiction, I think, being in The Great Divorce.

After reading The Divine Conspiracy, by Dallas Willard, I saw yet another possibility. That is, God may not actually see the future, He simply wills it, since He posesses the sort of will which can create everything it wants. Maybe the future hasn't happened yet, and maybe there is no "hyperdimesnion" where he sees the landscape of time all laid out before him as a scroll, but maybe His will power is sufficient enough that it doesn't matter. This does, however, bring us back once again to a problem of determinism from the human perspective.

I mentioned recursion in my title. I must admit this is going to be a rather brusque tie-in, since I haven't figured out a smooth transition. Self-reference is exactly what it sounds like. In and of itself, it's a little interesting, but not much. An example of self-reference is the statement "I am" (denoted in Hebres as YHWH). Within certain systems, self-reference often leads to paradoxes, which are quite amusing (for instance, the liar's paradox). Recurions is the idea of something calling itself over, and over, and over (possibly into infinity). Calling on oneself is a form of self-refernce, but recursion also implies that there is a bit of change going on at each iteration. I believe that repetition is the best way to learn, because it leads to recursion, which is creativity. Anyway, if YHWH creates creators in His own image - is it any wonder that we wind up with a paradox between free will and determinism?