Is God omniscient? This is a big question that plagues many people today. The concept that God knows everything is something that can comfort people or leave them feeling disturbed. One of the questions that go’s along with God’s omniscience is do we have free will. Are we truly free if God knows everything that has ever happened and will ever happen? Freedom is an idea that becomes nonexistent if God is omniscient. What does freedom mean if God has Omniscience? Humans cannot possibly be free to choose their lives if God knows everything. By examining the article Nelson Pike’s God’s Foreknowledge and Human Free Will are Incompatible and St. Augustine’s Divine Foreknowledge and Human Free Will, It will be shown that free will cannot possibly exist if God is truly omniscient. Nelson Pike …show more content…
Part of what that meant when we say that a person is omniscient is that person in question believes nothing that is false” (Pike, 114) What this means is if God can never believe something that is false then he knows all that is true. If God knows all that is true then God knows everything that will take place in the world. God knows each individuals life before it happens and before it ends. If this is the case is it really possible for that persons life to be free if their life was entirely already mapped out before they existed? For example if God believed that a person would turn right on 03/15/2016 it would be impossible for that person to turn left. This is due to the fact that God already knew this would happen. If God believed that the person would turn right and they did turn left then this God would not be omniscient. Therefore if God is omniscient there is no such thing as free will. One of the beliefs that go’s along with God and free will is sin. It is believed that God let’s us sin by giving humans free will. It is believed that humans sin voluntarily. The idea in the Christian faith is if a person sins
St. Augustine of Hippo, Boethius, and Anselm all address the concept of free will and God’s foreknowledge in their works “The City of God”, “The Consolation of Philosophy”, and “De Concordia”. While each work was written during a different time period, each of their approaches consists of a solution comprised of both unifying and unique points and arguments. While there is no clear contesting between one work and another, it is clear that free will is a complex and critical idea in Christian theology that has long since been debated. '
In our reading on Discourse of Free Will, we get a good idea of the opinions both Erasmus and Luther had on the topic of free will and the how it correlates with God’s grace. Once we look beyond the back and forth debate of this text, we will begin to look at their theological opinions on free will separately to find a better understanding and formulate our own opinions on this commonly debated topic.
Struggle for Self-Realization in Their Eyes Watching God. Zora Neale Hurston, the author of Their Eyes Were Watching God, uses Janie’s experiences to show her struggle for self-realization. Hurston’s life is similar to Janie’s in how they are searching for love and self-realization. During Hurston’s childhood (1890’s), her father gave much attention to her sister, and she was jealous of her; Janie also felt “unloved” by Nanny, her grandmother. When Hurston was young, her family moved to Eatonville, Florida, where her dad became the mayor.
In the Proslogion, Anselm tries to prove the existence of God and his powers through the ontological argument. This argument redirects the argument of God’s existence from science and observation to logic, where Anselm explains that there has to be a being that nothing greater can be thought of, and that is God. One of Anselm’s main topics of contention is God’s omnipotence and whether He is actually infinite. In the Proslogion, Anselm talks about God’s omnipotence and if it can be disavowed because of self-contradictory statements, how God’s non-action gives him more possibility and power, and how being all-powerful can lead to God being both merciful and yet not feel the pains of sinners.
My re-covering of “Their Eyes Were Watching God” is not your usual cover of a book. I was trying to incorporate a school math book type of cover onto a regular book cover, what I mean by that is that I used important details from the book and scattered them across the cover. The important details were four symbols that I found throughout the book; Janie’s hair, the mule, checkers, and the hurricane. These symbols give an interesting look at the book.
...o tensions. Paul the apostle wrote by the same Spirit that Milton claimed that the Potter has the power over the clay and by the riches of God’s mercy he shall show mercy upon who he wants to show mercy. Theologians of history, Augustine, Wyclif, Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and others all held this doctrine of predestination and taught it with vigor. With vigor predestination stands in Scripture and the challenge for Milton was to demonstrate the Father is reasonable, but at the same time God is the Almighty. So where does Milton’s views stand in relation to a perfect God? As others before "of Providence, Foreknowledge, Will and Fate, Fixt Fate, free will, foreknowledge absolute," in the Apostle Paul’s reply "O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus" (2.559,560- Romans 9:20 K.J.V.)?
To establish a clearer understanding on the competing ideologies on the compatibility (or lack thereof) of foreknowledge and free-will, we will use Peter Kreeft’s (Boston College) story analogy; According to Mr. Kreeft, every good story has a sense of destiny, as if it were written by God. But every story also leaves its characters free. While lesser writers may jimmy and force their characters into molds, the greater the writer the more likely the characters will have a life and choice of their own. God, of course, is the greatest writer of all. Since human life is his story, it must have both destiny and freedom. This is of course Augustine’s point of view in City of God. Like Kreeft Augustine would contend that God is omniscient and not pre or post anything. This omniscience allows him to be present to everything. As such God does not need to look down into crystal balls, he does not have to wait for anything. Nor does he wonder what will happen. Nothing is uncertain to him, as the future is uncertain to us. Furthermore, God has no need to force our choice because he knows every possible outcome. However this is still problematic, if we are to consider God to be this omniscient author who knows every potential outcome to the story, it still leaves open the question of an unchanging story; does the story change to fit our actions (questionable if God is perfect), or do our actions change to be in line with the story, making free-will an illusion. This is
The novel, “Their Eyes Were Watching God”, by Zora Neale Hurston clearly is a great book. In the book a young woman named Janie who was raised and married off by her grandmother. At first, all Janie knows of marriage and love is what her grandmother tells her which is that the only thing that is important is if he has land. As Janie goes on her journey of her life and re-marries, she finds that everybody in the town (and in general) has their own belief towards the role of their spouses in marriage. The reader notices Janie struggle in finding herself and over time Janie begins to develop her own ideas and ideals. In Their Eyes Were Watching God each character has their own beliefs towards marriage which in turn develops a viewpoint of how marriage should be and what it shouldn’t be. “Their Eyes Were Watching God” (Hurston) explores this marriage issue by showing Janie’s failing love endeavors, showing her real true love, and the after-effects of losing someone dear.
...f the traditional view. Process theologians attribute the laws of nature to an act of God. For this reason, God knows the extent to which the future is open—what the laws allow and what they do not allow. The process God is also aware of the conditions that creaturely decisions set upon future actualization, opening up some possibilities. Unlike the other characteristics of God, omniscience isn't necessarily required for the argument. Any situation God doesn't see can still be created as intended through the power of semi-potence or omnibenevolence. I gloss over omnibenevolence because it is implied by his interaction with the world. An omnipotent being can be the unmoved mover and then remain entirely devoid of any feeling towards the creation, but a being that participates because of its lack of omnipotence will only do so because of its sympathy towards becoming.
The Divine Command Theory is an ethical theory that basically proposes that God is the sole distinguisher between what is right and what is wrong. The textbook describes that under this theory, God commands what is moral and forbids what is immoral. Critics of this theory state that if God is the sole decision maker of morality, immoral actions could be acceptable if He willed it, and thus, God’s authority would be subjective and arbitrary. However, proponents contend that God would not allow immoral actions because he is omnipotent and all good. To follow the Divine Command Theory, one must believe and trust that it is in God’s nature to do good, and He will not act against his nature. By believing in this, one would dispute the critics’ argument by proving that God his not making
The key purpose of predestination was satisfied in both salvation and condemnation that the glory of God might be shown. According to Calvin, God’s predestination was exclusively to his will, independent of external reasons, and so was eventually mysterious to humanity. For this reason, Calvin backed the inquiry by saying the predestination confined to scripture. Calvin disagreed to the claims that predestination made God unjust, so he argued that all of sinful humanity deserved punishment—and so none were fated unjustly—and that since God’s mysterious will was righteous, we affirmed that predestination was
In John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion he spends a great deal of time expounding his doctrine of God's Divine providence in all of creation. He explains not only how God continually governs the laws of nature, but also how God governs man's actions and intentions to bring about His own Divine Will. Calvin believes that God's providence is so encompassing in creation that even a man's own actions, in many ways, are decreed by God. Because of this belief there arises the question, "Does Calvin leave room for the free will of man?"
The concept of God can be a difficult one to grasp especially in today's world - a world in which anyone that believes in God is trying to define exactly what God is. To even attempt to grasp such a concept, one must first recognize his own beliefs in respect to the following questions: Is God our creator? Is God omnipotent (all-powerful) or omniscient (all-knowing) or both? Does God care? Is God with us? Does God interfere with life on earth? These questions should be asked and carefully answered if one should truly wish to identify his specific beliefs in God's existence and persistence.
One thing that philosophers are great at is asking big questions, usually without providing answers. However, Saint Augustine has a more direct approach to his speculation, often offering a solution to the questions he poses. One such topic he broached in The City of God against the pagans. In this text, Augustine addresses the problem of free will and extends his own viewpoint. Stating that humankind can have free will with an omniscient God, he clarifies by defining foreknowledge, free will, and how they can interact successfully together (Augustine, 198). Throughout his argument, he builds a compelling case with minimal leaps of faith, disregarding, of course, that you must believe in God. He first illustrates the problem of free will, that it is an ongoing questions amongst many philosophers, then provides insight into the difference between fate and foreknowledge. Finally, finishing his argument with a thorough walk-through on how God can know everything, and yet not affect your future decisions.
The concept of free will has developed slowly, though ancient philosophers did address the subject when trying to reconcile intentional action with religious concerns about human and divine freedom. It wasn’t until the end of medieval times that the modern-day understanding of freedom as a completely undetermined choice between alternatives was introduced. However, it is unclear how to reconcile contemporary science that acknowledges the in...