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