Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site azure.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!ucbcad!tektronix!azure!jonw
From: jonw@azure.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Re: Omniscience vs. Free Will [again!]
Message-ID: <2560@azure.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 23-Feb-84 13:55:12 EST
Article-I.D.: azure.2560
Posted: Thu Feb 23 13:55:12 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 25-Feb-84 03:57:31 EST
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 17

From Paul Dubuc:

   ...The simple statement David Norris was trying to make is
   that precognition is not the same as predetermination.  God's foreknowledge
   does not make him responsible for man's choices, nor does it require Him
   to intervene and change the outcome.  After all, the God we are speaking
   of has free will also.  The notion of free will (whether from God's
   perspective or ours) is not irrelevant in the face of the omniscience of
   God.  As long as man has the ability to freely choose right from wrong,
   God is in no way responsible for that decision.

I must say, this is starting to get a bit repetitious.  For the umpteenth time,
unless you can explain how God can exist in the future without having already
created it, you have not resolved the omniscience/free will contradiction!

			Jon White
			[decvax|ucbvax]!tektronix!tekmdp!azure!jonw