If God Knows What We Are Going to Do, He Has No Right to Reward the Good and Punish the Wicked. Discuss

God cannot determine the outcome of our free choice. So either there is no omniscient god or we are created without free will and therefore are forced/unable to avoid doing evil. Again this shows that god is not benevolent, nor omniscient, therefore he is non-existent. Theists may argue the following reason for god to have granted humans free will. It is possible that god raised homo sapiens to rationality giving the gift of abstract thought, language and disinterested love. And so it is arguable that god gave us free will to allow for love, as free will is necessary for love. Although this may be one of many reasons that god granted us free will, it is one that we may understand. Free will is necessary for both erotic and platonic love. One may argue that evil is only trumped by love. And that the existence of evil, although in its masses is worth it for the sake of

Imagine a place where tyrants stand up to their ears in boiling blood, the gluttonous experience monsoons of human filth, and those who commit sins of the flesh are blown about like pieces of paper in a never-ending wind storm. Welcome to Dante 's Inferno, his perspective on the appropriate punishments for those who are destined to hell for all eternity. Dante attempts to make the punishments fit the crimes, but because it is Dante dealing out the tortures and not God, the punishments will never be perfect because by nature, man is an imperfect creature. Only God is capable of being above reproach and of metering out a just punishment. While Dante 's treatment towards the tyrants is fitting, his views on the

God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, therefore a predetermined path of righteousness or condemnation is contradictory to the core values of Christianity, as it eliminates the need for the will to be saved by Christ. This shows that God does not control our actions, in hopes that we live in accordance to him.

Out of all the different choices human’s have to make not all of them are made using freewill, for example someone’s choice may me chosen by something or someone else and thus any evil that is caused from that choice was not chosen via freewill. If evil is created this way then it is not supporting the existence of god. There are many examples of this like how suffering (evil) may be created from a natural disaster, which was not an option someone had chosen via freewill, this creates a problem for the free will defence. Not all evil is due to choices human’s have made. In response to this problem for the free will defence, if god was all good, powerful and knowing then he would have been able to prevent and stop natural disasters as the evil they create is not due to freewill. However, this is evidently not true as natural disasters have

The consequences of accepting that the goodness of actions consists simply in the fact that God favours them are obviously disagreeable. However, the consequences of accepting the alternative also appear unfortunate. If it is maintained that God favours certain actions because they are objectively good, it seems that their goodness is independent of His will. But such a view appears to be inconsistent with the conception of God as the omnipotent creator and sustainer of all that is. It means that there is a realm of moral values which exist quite apart from God's creative will and to which His will must conform. Such a view must inevitably appear blasphemous to all those who believe in God, for it makes God out to be less than He is.

Omniscient God only have the power, knowledge and control over human; to maintain that superiority God typically responds to human behavior with what they deserve. God blesses the righteous and punishes the evil man to remind their limitation and worship to the God.

If God is both omnipotent and wholly good, then He would make men freely choose good on every occasion.

Namely, hell is a place where the inhabitants suffer inconceivable torment for all eternity. The Bible plainly argues this, and to believe that the Bible does otherwise will require improper hermeneutics. One of the prime examples that reveal the severity of hell is Calvary: Jesus died a severe death to save humanity from a severe torment. Additionally, a loving God does not reject the idea of hell since He is just in punishing the infinite crime of

On the contrary, this view stems from looking at the punishment from the standpoint of human justice systems. This is not a valid way to view hell as a punishment because God determined what acts deserved what punish meant a great number of years before the creation of any human justice systems. Although you must “die” an earthly to be sent to Hell, you are not “dead” while in Hell because you can not be tormented if you are dead. The unsaved will have everlasting consciousness which enables them to suffer the torment.

Whether we have free will is widely controversial. The absence of a universal definition poses a primary problem to this question. In this essay, I shall base my argument on a set of three conditions for free will: 1) that the actor is unconstraint in his action, 2) the actor could have acted otherwise and 3) the actor must be ‘ultimately responsible’ (Kane, 2005: 121) for his action. After I have explained them, I shall apply these conditions to three scenarios that cover most, if not any, circumstances that occur when taking choices. The purpose of this essay is to show that if my conditions are true, none of the scenarios is based on free will and thus we do not have free will.

This is a great blow against classic theology that describes God as all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good, ect… However, the process theologians argue that God is the most-powerful being, the most-knowing being, and the most-good being that could exist. This slight change in thinking complete attacks the view of the classical theologian’s views in their perfect God. In process theology many arguments are made to fight the “all” standing of the classical Theologians. Arguments that point the inconsistency of an all-powerful and all-good God that allows evil to exist in the world. A popular response to the existence of evil is that God graced humanity with the gift of free will. However, the process theologians have asked how an all knowing God can allow free will, if he knows what everyone will choose. These two arguments against that “all” God have allowed the process to take a slightly weaker stance, the “most” God. This allows God to know the most possible, but not necessarily all future events. And therefore free will is plausible and evil can exist in a world where an extremely good and extremely powerful God also

If God knows what we will do before we do it, how can we be held accountable for our actions? This is the question most Christians ask themselves often. All through the entire history of Christianity, the theologians and philosophers have tried to answer if God will save all people or only particular people. Christians believe that “God is omniscient and omnipotent. Therefore, every human action is known to God and thus predestined.” This means God foresees people choices and actions before it is committed. Augustine's Confessions and Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy both deal with this question by narrowing it to three of this categories: original Sin, free will and predestination.

How exactly can we know God’s will? In divine command theory, God’s will is the only thing that determines morality. Theists will first point to the religious scriptures...but which one? A Christian might think it is obviously the Bible, but an objective viewer will have to choose between the Bible, Quran, Vedas etc. You can not say look at which one has the better moral arguments, since you’re trying to derive morality from the book! Another common source for morality is through people who have spoke to God. But many people claim this, so how do we know who is right? Someone might say that God told him to destroy a village; does this mean he is right? The final option is that God gave us reason and knowledge, and so morality is instilled in our very nature. But then, what is the point of believing in certain religions if people are going to act the same anyway? And people don’t act the same, so does that mean God is responsible for

First, many theologians have assumed that if God is all-powerful, omnipotent, which the Bible clearly teaches (e.g., 1Chron 29:11; Jer 32:17; Mt 19:26; Rev 1:8; 19:6), that nothing in his creation can ever thwart his will. At the very least, it is reasoned, God

In both the old times and modern time of Christianity, one of the main controversial topics has surrounded one single word. Hell. Some people hear it and thing noting of it. Others shutter at the name. But everyone has questions about it, whether hell is real or a fable, eternal or temporary, physical or spiritual. Being in the Baptist community since birth, I have believed in a hell since I can remember because “to believe in God and not in hell is ultimately to disbelieve in the reality of human choices.” (Ross Douthat). My definition of hell comes straight from the Bible. That there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mathew 13:42) and that God will say, “Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil