Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The heart of Lorenzo's initial argument is that although God does know who we are and what we are going to do, we still have the ability to decide to live within God's grace and make the most of what we have. [2] Antonio and Lorenzo go on to agree on the terms of the concepts of free will and predestination.
Other means of reconciling God's omniscience with human free will have been proposed. Some have attempted to redefine or reconceptualize free will: God can know in advance what I will do, because free will is to be understood only as freedom from coercion , and anything further is an illusion.
In short, open theism posits that since God and humans are free, God's knowledge is dynamic and God's providence flexible. Whereas several versions of traditional theism picture God's knowledge of the future as a singular, fixed trajectory, open theism sees it as a plurality of branching possibilities, with some possibilities becoming settled as time moves forward.
Jewish philosophy stresses that free will is a product of the intrinsic human soul, using the word neshama (from the Hebrew root n.sh.m. or .נ.ש.מ meaning "breath"), but the ability to make a free choice is through Yechida (from Hebrew word "yachid", יחיד, singular), the part of the soul that is united with God, [citation needed] the only being that is not hindered by or dependent on ...
De libero arbitrio diatribe sive collatio was nominally written to refute a specific teaching of Martin Luther, on the question of free will. [note 1] Luther had become increasingly aggressive in his attacks on the Roman Catholic Church to well beyond irenical Erasmus' reformist agenda.
Molinism, named after 16th-century Spanish Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina, is the thesis that God has middle knowledge (or scientia media): the knowledge of counterfactuals, particularly counterfactuals regarding human action. [1]
Foreordination is a prominent part of LDS theology. Brigham Young, the first LDS Church leader to explain it, taught that God's omniscient foreknowledge does not constitute a divine decree. [3]
God desires that all persons should come to faith in Him, and election is according to God's foreknowledge, not only of faith but of all events (1 Peter 1:1-2). (However, a minority of Free Grace theologians have proposed unconditional election, for example Charles Ryrie ).