On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:45:56 GMT, Grinder <grinder@no.spam.maam.com>
wrote:
>Allow me to break this conundrum down to its simplest form:
>
>Premises:
>
>1) Man has free will.
>
>2) God is omniscient.
>
>For a given decision, with two choices, A and B:
>
>3) God, being omniscient, knows the man will choose B.
>
>4) Man, has two choices:
>
> a) He freely chooses A, and shows God to be wrong,
> or *not* omniscient.
>
> b) He freely chooses B, as God knew he would all
> along.
>
>So here we are. There is *only one choice*, 4b, that
>can be made without violating Premise #2. If, however,
>man is not free to make either choice, that violoates
>Premise #1.
>
>Where is the flaw in this logic, or what is the means
>by which you can circumvent it?
Your premise fails to consider that man has free will but is not
omniscient. God is omniscient but can not act.
BB
http://www.biblebob.net
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 |
|