| happydolphin said: Okay, read back your first post and realize we're far from just blindly accepting what's given. I'm asking questions and challenging the doctrine as well as the challenges to the doctrine, trying to piece things together logically, but not limiting myself to pre-set understandings of how it should work. Now to your question. If an event could possibly not occur, then it would mean that it was not part of reality, hence that it was not something in God's foreknowledge (he has foreknowledge of things that happen, by definition). His foreknowledge doesn't require it to be pre-determined, since pre-determination involves a lack of free will. So God's foreknowledge must be of another type (non deterministically discovered). My proposition was that God was actually unable to pre-determine our choices at time 0, but that he was able to know them regardless at time 0 because he was present at time tx before it came to pass in untranscended time (regular time, ie human time). |
If god was unable to pre-determine choices, but was able to know them, then that means god isn't omnipotent. Why? Because if he was unable to pre-determine the choices, that would mean that he would not be able to tweak his choice of creation events to prevent the choices from doing what he didn't want them to do - you know, like the choice to eat the forbidden fruit. If he was omniscient enough to know what his own choices would result in, then either he meant for everything to happen, in which case the so-called "free will" is really just god lining things up to give the illusion of free will, or he was incapable of affecting things, and thus isn't omnipotent. There's really no way to invoke some special form of logic to make it consistent, outside of something that isn't actually logic.
