Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Epicurus was not an atheist, although he rejected the idea of a god concerned with human affairs; followers of Epicureanism denied the idea that there was no god. While the conception of a supreme, happy and blessed god was the most popular during his time, Epicurus rejected such a notion, as he considered it too heavy a burden for a god to have to worry about all the problems in the world.
Kenneth Einar Himma claimed that omniscience and omnipotence may be incompatible: if God is omnipotent, then he should be able to create a being with free will; if he is omniscient, then he should know exactly what such a being will do (which may technically render them without free will). This analysis would render the ontological argument ...
The Kalam cosmological argument was influenced by the concept of the prime mover, introduced by Aristotle.It originates in the works of theologian and philosopher John Philoponus (490–570 AD) [10] and was developed substantially under the medieval Islamic scholastic tradition during the Islamic Golden Age.
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.
God in Islam is attributed with absolute omniscience. God knows the past, the present, and the future. It is compulsory for a Muslim to believe that God is indeed omniscient as stated in one of the six articles of faith which is: To believe that God's divine decree and predestination; Say: Do you instruct God about your religion?
Omniscience (all-knowing) is an attribute often ascribed to God. This implies that God knows how free agents will choose to act. If God does know this, either their free will might be illusory or foreknowledge does not imply predestination, and if God does not know it, God may not be omniscient. [81]
1. The Genesis text analyzed is the current traditional manuscript. 2. The text, for the purpose of literary analysis, is regarded as having been written by an "author" who is responsible for the final version of the text. The literary reading, therefore, relates to what is expressed in the current form of the text, assuming its unity. 3.
It claims that free will does not exist, and God has absolute control over a person's actions. Hard theological determinism is similar in implication to hard determinism, although it does not invalidate compatibilist free will. [8] Hard theological determinism is a form of theological incompatibilism (see figure, top left).