Can free will logically exist with an omnipotent God?

[Incelforeever]

hmas aquinas teaches in the Summa Theologiae (I, q.83, a.1), man possesses free choice because he is rational, and reason is ordered toward the apprehension of the good under diverse aspects. God’s omnipotence doesnt compete with human freedom, bc he causes things according to their nature thus He moves the will in a way that preserves its freedom rather than destroying it (I, q.105, a.4). In classical theology divine causality is not coercive but foundational:

That nature itself is created by god. The circumstances where ur nature oprates and expresses it also are also created by God.

I should not have used "omnipotent" for god in this thread. Thats my mistake

 

[Deleted member 283745]

That nature itself is created by god. The circumstances where ur nature oprates and expresses it also are also created by God.

I should not have used "omnipotent" for god in this thread. Thats my mistake

But creation is not the same as determination. When God creates a rational nature, He creates it with genuine causal power, including the power of self-movement through intellect and will as TA explains , the will is moved by the intellect’s apprehension of the good, and because finite goods can be understood under multiple aspects, the will is not necessitated toward any particular one.


God gives you your nature, but He gives it as rational and indeterminate among finite goods. That indeterminacy is not a flaw; it is precisely what makes you an image of God (Genesis 1:27). If God had created a will that could only choose one way under given circumstances, that would not be a rational appetite but a natural instinct, like gravity pulling a stone.
Now consider providence. God arranges circumstances, but circumstances do not mechanically determine a rational will. Two people can undergo the same suffering and freely respond in radically different ways one with bitterness, another with charity. The external condition is the same, the interior act differs because the will is not reducible to environment.
God causes your power to choose but He does not force the specification of the choice. He is the cause of the act as act (that it exists) but the will determines the act’s moral character by freely adhering to one perceived good rather than another. This is why Scripture can affirm both truths without contradictiom and yet also command moral responsibility.
If God caused your choice in a way that removed freedom, then praise, blame, love, and sin would become meaningless. But divine wisdom does not create illusions; it creates real secondary causes. So yeah basically nature and circumstances come from gdp but he creates them in such a way that yurt rational will remains a true, interior, selfdetermining principle within His providential order.

God isnt competing with freedom; He is the reason it exists at all.

Sources are from Thomas Aquinas
Although FYI. I am agnostic,I used to be western catholic

 

[Incelforeever]

But creation is not the same as determination. When God creates a rational nature, He creates it with genuine causal power, including the power of self-movement through intellect and will as TA explains , the will is moved by the intellect’s apprehension of the good, and because finite goods can be understood under multiple aspects, the will is not necessitated toward any particular one.


God gives you your nature, but He gives it as rational and indeterminate among finite goods. That indeterminacy is not a flaw; it is precisely what makes you an image of God (Genesis 1:27). If God had created a will that could only choose one way under given circumstances, that would not be a rational appetite but a natural instinct, like gravity pulling a stone.
Now consider providence. God arranges circumstances, but circumstances do not mechanically determine a rational will. Two people can undergo the same suffering and freely respond in radically different ways one with bitterness, another with charity. The external condition is the same, the interior act differs because the will is not reducible to environment.
God causes your power to choose but He does not force the specification of the choice. He is the cause of the act as act (that it exists) but the will determines the act’s moral character by freely adhering to one perceived good rather than another. This is why Scripture can affirm both truths without contradictiom and yet also command moral responsibility.
If God caused your choice in a way that removed freedom, then praise, blame, love, and sin would become meaningless. But divine wisdom does not create illusions; it creates real secondary causes. So yeah basically nature and circumstances come from gdp but he creates them in such a way that yurt rational will remains a true, interior, selfdetermining principle within His providential order.

God isnt competing with freedom; He is the reason it exists at all.

Sources are from Thomas Aquinas
Although FYI. I am agnostic,I used to be western catholic

are u a philosphy student or is this pretty much Thomas aquinas work? (no idea who that is). honestly my brain is fried rn i cant really respond to most.

the two people choosing differently doesnt prove free will, whatsoever. Those two people were created differently by god. If they were the exact same person and choose differently that will prove free will. I never said circumstances alone determine action/will, its part of the whole package of ur creation by god.

 

[Deleted member 283745]

are u a philosphy student or is this pretty much Thomas aquinas work? (no idea who that is). honestly my brain is fried rn i cant really respond to most.

the two people choosing differently doesnt prove free will, whatsoever. Those two people were created differently by god. If they were the exact same person and choose differently that will prove free will. I never said circumstances alone determine action/will, it’s part of the whole package of ur creation by god.

Personally not a philosophy student,I’m not even in college yet although I did study theology ever since I was thirteen and I have been in zoom meetings with college theology professors and I’ve even met Alvin platinga and William lane Craig who are top theologians
My own words but inspiration from Thomas aquinas as he is the goat theologian

Second question
God’s creating a rational nature automatically determined every act then rationality itself would be meaningless because deliberation presupposes real openness to alternatives, as taught by TA IN Summa Theologiae I–II, q.13, a.6. Your “exact same person” objection collapses into a logical tautology, because if the total state already includes the completed act of will you have defined away the possibility rather than disproved it. God causes the will to exist and to act but He does not determine it to one finite good, since only the Infinite Good necessitates the will (I II, q.10, a.2). To deny this would mean every human action is metaphysically necessary, which destroys contingency, morality, and divine justice simultaneously. If your position were true, how could God justly command, praise, or punish creatures for acts they were incapable of not performing?

 

[Incelforeever]

Personally not a philosophy student,I’m not even in college yet although I did study theology ever since I was thirteen and I have been in zoom meetings with college theology professors and I’ve even met Alvin platinga and William lane Craig who are top theologians
My own words but inspiration from Thomas aquinas as he is the goat theologian

Second question
God’s creating a rational nature automatically determined every act then rationality itself would be meaningless because deliberation presupposes real openness to alternatives, as taught by TA IN Summa Theologiae I–II, q.13, a.6. Your “exact same person” objection collapses into a logical tautology, because if the total state already includes the completed act of will you have defined away the possibility rather than disproved it. God causes the will to exist and to act but He does not determine it to one finite good, since only the Infinite Good necessitates the will (I II, q.10, a.2). To deny this would mean every human action is metaphysically necessary, which destroys contingency, morality, and divine justice simultaneously. If your position were true, how could God justly command, praise, or punish creatures for acts they were incapable of not performing?

i dont understand/lack the mental cpu right now to understand most of those terms u used tbh.

Ur last question i do understand, and the answer is that idk how he can "justly command" those things. Those things can be deeply real to us in this fleshly world, yet also not real from a higher dimensional sense .

Bp is already pretty much genetic determinism

Psalm 139:1–4, 12: "O LORD, you have searched me and known me... Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O LORD, you know it altogether... even the darkness is not dark to you"

Isaiah 55:8-9:
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,”declares the Lord.
“As the heavens are higher than the earth,so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

 

[Deleted member 283745]

i dont understand/lack the mental cpu right now to understand most of those terms u used tbh.

Ur last question i do understand, and the answer is that idk how he can "justly command" those things. Those things can be deeply real to us in this fleshly world, yet also not real from a higher dimensional sense .

Bp is already pretty much genetic determinism

Psalm 139:1–4, 12: "O LORD, you have searched me and known me... Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O LORD, you know it altogether... even the darkness is not dark to you"

Isaiah 55:8-9:
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,”declares the Lord.
“As the heavens are higher than the earth,so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Just because God knows everything doesn’t mean He makes you choose it. Saying its not really real from God’s view would mean right and wrong aren’t truly real, which doesn’t fit Christianity. If you had no real choice, then it wouldn’t be fair to reward or punish you. So if God is truly just, then your choices have to be real
Knowing something will happen is not the same as causing it to happen.



If I know the sun will rise tomorrow, my knowledge doesn’t cause the sunrise.

Like in summa theologia God’s knowledge doesn’t force your choice but he just knows it because you freely choose

 

[Incelforeever]

Just because God knows everything doesn’t mean He makes you choose it. Saying its not really real from God’s view would mean right and wrong aren’t truly real, which doesn’t fit Christianity. If you had no real choice, then it wouldn’t be fair to reward or punish you. So if God is truly just, then your choices have to be real
Knowing something will happen is not the same as causing it to happen.



If I know the sun will rise tomorrow, my knowledge doesn’t cause the sunrise.

Like in summa theologia God’s knowledge doesn’t force your choice but he just knows it because you freely choose

U didnt create the sun

 

[Deleted member 283745]

U didnt create the sun

You’re right I didn’t create the sun but inna way that actually helps the point.
Creating something and knowing what it will do are two different things. Even if God created the world, it doesn’t automatically mean He forces every choice inside it knowing what you’ll freely choose isn’t the same as making you choose it

 

[Incelforeever]

You’re right I didn’t create the sun but inna way that actually helps the point.
Creating something and knowing what it will do are two different things. Even if God created the world, it doesn’t automatically mean He forces every choice inside it knowing what you’ll freely choose isn’t the same as making you choose it

U messed up the construct i used. God knew what u would do before ur creation, and still chose to create u. "it doesnt automatically mean he forces every choice inside the world he created" I dont think i ever used "forced" in this convo.

Essentially what im saying is that if God already saw all of ur actions before while and after creating u, where is the free will and choice for u in that? U never had any other possible option to choose differently because God not only saw ur future, he also created u unlike ur previous example of trying to support free will existence with a omnipotent God by comparing urself and the knowladge that the sun would rise tomorrow and saying "see, knowing something will happen is not the same as causing it to happen" which completly already falls flat in comparsion to God who not only had the knowladge of the future of the object he created beforehand.

Now im not saying god "causes" things to happens in the human sense. This is simply about free will, if God sees ur future, created u and he is never wrong. U can never pick a different option of action thus free will, at least my definition of it is out the window

 

[Deleted member 283745]

U messed up the construct i used. God knew what u would do before ur creation, and still chose to create u. "it doesnt automatically mean he forces every choice inside the world he created" I dont think i ever used "forced" in this convo.

Essentially what im saying is that if God already saw all of ur actions before while and after creating u, where is the free will and choice for u in that? U never had any other possible option to choose differently because God not only saw ur future, he also created u unlike ur previous example of trying to support free will existence with a omnipotent God by comparing urself and the knowladge that the sun would rise tomorrow and saying "see, knowing something will happen is not the same as causing it to happen" which completly already falls flat in comparsion to God who not only had the knowladge of the future of the object he created beforehand.

Now im not saying god "causes" things to happens in the human sense. This is simply about free will, if God sees ur future, created u and he is never wrong. U can never pick a different option of action thus free will, at least my definition of it is out the window

God’s eternal knowledge does not occur before your act but outside of time altogether, as explained by TA Summa Theologiae I, q.14, a.13. It is necessary that whatever God knows will occur, but it does not follow that what He knows occurs by necessity the infallibility belongs to the knowledge, not to the mode of the act. He creates you knowing you will freely choose X, but His knowledge is based on the free act as it exists in His eternal present. If the act were not free, He would not know it as yet Scripture says, “God made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his own counsel” (Ecclesiasticus 15:14, ). If divine knowledge simply turns contingency into necessity, how could any created event remain truly contingent at all?

 

[Incelforeever]

God’s eternal knowledge does not occur before your act but outside of time altogether, as explained by TA Summa Theologiae I, q.14, a.13. It is necessary that whatever God knows will occur, but it does not follow that what He knows occurs by necessity the infallibility belongs to the knowledge, not to the mode of the act. He creates you knowing you will freely choose X, but His knowledge is based on the free act as it exists in His eternal present. If the act were not free, He would not know it as yet Scripture says, “God made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his own counsel” (Ecclesiasticus 15:14, ). If divine knowledge simply turns contingency into necessity, how could any created event remain truly contingent at all?

First thing, the eternal present idea isn't a confirmed concept, Its not biblical for the most part. It makes logical sense if god exist out of time but even if i play into that it doesnt confirm free will in a cosmic sense with an omniscient being.

If the omniscient being created every single moment of us and everything plays at the same time in an eternal present which like u said eliminate foreknowledge, but true free will still doesnt exist, since the omniscient being created and sees the exact version of me that chose x, there was never a y choice possible.

So free will might exist from a human perspective, or inside this timeline. But from outside the timeline where u can see everything at once there was never another option possible, it all plays out at the same eternal moment.

 

[Deleted member 283745]

First thing, the eternal present idea isn't a confirmed concept, Its not biblical for the most part. It makes logical sense if god exist out of time but even if i play into that it doesnt confirm free will in a cosmic sense with an omniscient being.

If the omniscient being created every single moment of us and everything plays at the same time in an eternal present which like u said eliminate foreknowledge, but true free will still doesnt exist, since the omniscient being created and sees the exact version of me that chose x, there was never a y choice possible.

So free will might exist from a human perspective, or inside this timeline. But from outside the timeline where u can see everything at once there was never another option possible, it all plays out at the same eternal moment.

Yeah ggs bro I give up I’m to tired to read this,maybe tomorrow I’ll answer

 

[Xcruvia]

title

Yeah that's why u have the ability to ascend into true Adam 6'9 and mog all the sub 5s manlets brootalll dooood

 

[Incelforeever]

Yeah that's why u have the ability to ascend into true Adam 6'9 and mog all the sub 5s manlets brootalll dooood

 

[Deleted member 283745]

First thing, the eternal present idea isn't a confirmed concept, Its not biblical for the most part. It makes logical sense if god exist out of time but even if i play into that it doesnt confirm free will in a cosmic sense with an omniscient being.

If the omniscient being created every single moment of us and everything plays at the same time in an eternal present which like u said eliminate foreknowledge, but true free will still doesnt exist, since the omniscient being created and sees the exact version of me that chose x, there was never a y choice possible.

So free will might exist from a human perspective, or inside this timeline. But from outside the timeline where u can see everything at once there was never another option possible, it all plays out at the same eternal moment.

First, the claim that eternity is not biblical is incorrect because “I am Alpha and Omega… who is, and who was, and who is to come” Apocalypse 1:8 and “One day with the Lord is as a thousand years” 2 Peter 3:8 both reveal that God transcends temporal succession.

The classical account of divine eternity was articulated philosophically by TAin the Summa Theology I, q.10, a.1, but it rests on the biblical truth that God is pure act and not subject to change. Second, your argument confuses certainty with necessity, because from the fact that God eternally sees you choose X it does not follow that X was metaphysically necessary, only that it is certainly known. If there were never a Y possible then your act would be necessary by nature, yet finite goods never necessitate the will as shown in Summa Theologiae I to II, q.10, a.2, meaning alternative possibilities are grounded in your rational power itself.
Viewing all moments at once does not collapse contingency into necessity any more than watching a recorded game makes each play inevitable by nature, so if contingency disappears simply because it is eternally known, are you not redefining freedom as ignorance rather than rational self determination?

 

[madma]

There are many verses talking and explaining this exact topic

 

[Incelforeever]

There are many verses talking and explaining this exact topic

jfl, it reminds me of muslims using verse from the quran

 

[madma]

jfl, it reminds me of muslims using verse from the quran

im not even religious, im just saying if someone really wanted to know the answer to the question they could

 

[Incelforeever]

First, the claim that eternity is not biblical is incorrect because “I am Alpha and Omega… who is, and who was, and who is to come” Apocalypse 1:8 and “One day with the Lord is as a thousand years” 2 Peter 3:8 both reveal that God transcends temporal succession.

The classical account of divine eternity was articulated philosophically by TAin the Summa Theology I, q.10, a.1, but it rests on the biblical truth that God is pure act and not subject to change. Second, your argument confuses certainty with necessity, because from the fact that God eternally sees you choose X it does not follow that X was metaphysically necessary, only that it is certainly known. If there were never a Y possible then your act would be necessary by nature, yet finite goods never necessitate the will as shown in Summa Theologiae I to II, q.10, a.2, meaning alternative possibilities are grounded in your rational power itself.
Viewing all moments at once does not collapse contingency into necessity any more than watching a recorded game makes each play inevitable by nature, so if contingency disappears simply because it is eternally known, are you not redefining freedom as ignorance rather than rational self determination?

Those verses dont prove eternal present as a concept, they show god trancends time but whatever i already bought into that so lets move on.

He doesnt just view all moments at once, he will all moments of existence with his thought/creation as a timeless act. Ur argument of eternal present is even more against cosmic free will than any other jfl

To make it clearer to u, the contingecy doesnt just disappear because it is eternally known, it wasnt just known it was created.

"watching a recorded game" anology is not a good anology, same with ur sun anology. In this case ur a passive viewer, cant u see that?

if i snap my fingers and create an entire timeline and every creature in it inculding every single choice they would ever make, i cant have "foreknowledge" of their actions ur correct because jfl i created their actions in my mind already. There was never a version of the timeline where they chose y instead of x, because i created the moment of them choosing x.


So essentially u have an illusion of free will, but eternal present destroys cosmic free will even more than any other argument everyone here threw at me in support of free will which is funny.

 

[Incelforeever]

im not even religious, im just saying if someone really wanted to know the answer to the question they could

The bible is not very explicit on free will

 

[Deleted member 283745]

Those verses dont prove eternal present as a concept, they show god trancends time but whatever i already bought into that so lets move on.

He doesnt just view all moments at once, he will all moments of existence with his thought/creation as a timeless act. Ur argument of eternal present is even more against cosmic free will than any other jfl

To make it clearer to u, the contingecy doesnt just disappear because it is eternally known, it wasnt just known it was created.

"watching a recorded game" anology is not a good anology, same with ur sun anology. In this case ur a passive viewer, cant u see that?

if i snap my fingers and create an entire timeline and every creature in it inculding every single choice they would ever make, i cant have "foreknowledge" of their actions ur correct because jfl i created their actions in my mind already. There was never a version of the timeline where they chose y instead of x, because i created the moment of them choosing x.


So essentially u have an illusion of free will, but eternal present destroys cosmic free will even more than any other argument everyone here threw at me in support of free will which is funny.

You’re still assuming that if his crayes a timeline in one eternal act, then everything inside it must be fixed the way a writer fixes a script. But that only works if creation equals deterministic authorship. Classical theism does not say God imagines a rigid sequence of necessitated acts. It says He causes beings with real causal power, and that includes rational self determination.



When God wills a rational creature, He wills a being whose choices are contingent by nature. That is exactly what TA argues in SUMMA THEOLOGIA I, q.19, a.8: God wills some effects to happen contingently. The necessity belongs to God’s act of willing, not to the mode of the creature’s act.

You keep saying “there was never a version where Y happened.” Of course not. Only one history is actual. But contingency never meant multiple actual timelines. It means the act was not metaphysically necessary in itself. If the creature had chosen Y, that would have been the history God eternally knows and wills instead. His knowledge tracks the act’s mode. It does not convert contingency into necessity.

Your snapping fingers example still assumes that creating something means preprogramming every decision as logically necessary. But why must divine causality work like a deterministic simulation engine? Why can it not ground real secondary causes whose actions are genuinely their own while still fully dependent on God?





If your position were right, then every contingent event in the universe would actually be necessary. But then the word contingency would be meaningless. So here is the pressure point: are you arguing that divine causality logically entails determinism, or are you just assuming it without proving that link?

 

[foidlessbum]

title

The real answer is if free will of choosing evil should exist if god its omniponent and an almighty being.

 

[JordanFagget271]

title

Like free will?

That’s the same argument for saying if he knows what u will do then why not immediately put us in judgement day
If so he puts you you’ll say “muh but god I didn’t even live the life your saying I will do so and so I swear I’m not gonna do it if I lived it actually”
So he give u this life so u can’t have any argument get it?

yall are so illogical

to prove free will exists u would have to have 2 separate identical universes, and something ever to change in atleast one of them, for example person A choses option 1 in 1 universe and option 2 in another

if u did this infinite amount of times, they would still be the same which means that u are simply a reaction to action, determinism

u never made any choice, you didnt even chose like ur starter pack, uve never chose anything


and if u could actually do something different then ur basically above laws of this world, which therefore makes u a creator? ur above the 3 dimensions then, and if u think that god exists but he is also beyond time dimension thats okay, i think, but thats very illogical cuz we're clearly not above the laws of this world, every time we're observed atleast, and u are always observed by urself so it again doesnt make any sense for us to be above

im very faded so idk if i explained it well enough but ik the sober me has the same ideology

 

[Incelforeever]

You’re still assuming that if his crayes a timeline in one eternal act, then everything inside it must be fixed the way a writer fixes a script. But that only works if creation equals deterministic authorship. Classical theism does not say God imagines a rigid sequence of necessitated acts. It says He causes beings with real causal power, and that includes rational self determination.



When God wills a rational creature, He wills a being whose choices are contingent by nature. That is exactly what TA argues in SUMMA THEOLOGIA I, q.19, a.8: God wills some effects to happen contingently. The necessity belongs to God’s act of willing, not to the mode of the creature’s act.

You keep saying “there was never a version where Y happened.” Of course not. Only one history is actual. But contingency never meant multiple actual timelines. It means the act was not metaphysically necessary in itself. If the creature had chosen Y, that would have been the history God eternally knows and wills instead. His knowledge tracks the act’s mode. It does not convert contingency into necessity.

Your snapping fingers example still assumes that creating something means preprogramming every decision as logically necessary. But why must divine causality work like a deterministic simulation engine? Why can it not ground real secondary causes whose actions are genuinely their own while still fully dependent on God?





If your position were right, then every contingent event in the universe would actually be necessary. But then the word contingency would be meaningless. So here is the pressure point: are you arguing that divine causality logically entails determinism, or are you just assuming it without proving that link?

U have "rational power" from ur own perspective inside this dimention of time and space, but thats not true free will.

the eternal omniscience being that exist outside of time (according to how u laid it out) and sees everything at once doesnt just "see" like the anologys u used with the reply of a football game on tv and knowing whats gonna happen. He creates every single moment just like a script writer but he does it outside of time so he doesnt have foreknowledge of everything thats gonna happen, he thinks, will and create every moment at once.

Lets use this convo as an example:
u chose to reply to me and engage in this, lets call this decision X.
the other option which was not engaging lets call it "Y".

Inside the timeline (that God created), u freely choose X, u were aware that not engaging (Y) was also an option right? so it does feel like free will inside this timeline that has a begining and and end, but from an eternal present perspective of God this timeline where u chose to engage was the only one created.

"If the creature had chosen Y, that would have been the history God eternally knows and wills instead. His knowledge tracks the act’s mode. It does not convert contingency into necessity."

God doesnt just have the contingency, he wills the desicion just like u said. He doesnt just have the knowledge of the act he created the moment and the act.

"Your snapping fingers example still assumes that creating something means preprogramming every decision as logically necessary" how does it assumes every decision is logically necessary? How would choosing Y be a logical contradiction? Y is still a possibilty in our "minds" ig when u reflect back on ur decsions but it was never really there u understand?

"Why can it not ground real secondary causes whose actions are genuinely their own while still fully dependent on God?" How can the action genuinely be ur own and still fully willed by God?


Yes divine causality logically entails determinism, bingo. And i proved it throughout this convo using ur eternal present framework. yes contingency would be pointless from the eternal present/cosmic free will view which is what im arguing for, not "free will" inside this created model, Real cosmic one.

 

[playaaa]

It's possible because he can break logic

God cant break logic lol

 

[Heretic]

God cant break logic lol

Are you gonna elaborate on that or what? Nigga just threw a statement that makes no sense

 

[888mastermind]

No, free will can't exist even without god

 

[Incelforeever]

yall are so illogical

to prove free will exists u would have to have 2 separate identical universes, and something ever to change in atleast one of them, for example person A choses option 1 in 1 universe and option 2 in another

if u did this infinite amount of times, they would still be the same which means that u are simply a reaction to action, determinism

u never made any choice, you didnt even chose like ur starter pack, uve never chose anything


and if u could actually do something different then ur basically above laws of this world, which therefore makes u a creator? ur above the 3 dimensions then, and if u think that god exists but he is also beyond time dimension thats okay, i think, but thats very illogical cuz we're clearly not above the laws of this world, every time we're observed atleast, and u are always observed by urself so it again doesnt make any sense for us to be above

im very faded so idk if i explained it well enough but ik the sober me has the same ideology

great way to explain it. U can only choose X, even tho Y was a "possible" option u can reflect back on in ur own mind

 

[Incelforeever]

Are you gonna elaborate on that or what? Nigga just threw a statement that makes no sense

Hes basicly saying God cant make a square circle

 

[playaaa]

God can only do things that are possible and follow logic. He cant make a square circle or make a rock too heavy for him to lift. These are logical contradictions. God cannot break these even if he is all powerful.

 

[Incelforeever]

God can only do things that are possible and follow logic. He cant make a square circle or make a rock too heavy for him to lift. These are logical contradictions. God cannot break these even if he is all powerful.

true

 

[Heretic]

Hes basicly saying God cant make a square circle

Well you agree with him so I'm not gonna disagree with you

 

[Ted Bundy]

But if he omnipotent he knows ur outcome and everything u will do before even creating u so how is free will even possible logically?

knowing something is going to happen does not change the fact that you were going to do it anyway


even if God had no knowledge of what was going to happen you were still going to do {x} thing you still made the choice

 

[Incelforeever]

knowing something is going to happen does not change the fact that you were going to do it anyway


even if God had no knowledge of what was going to happen you were still going to do {x} thing you still made the choice

U just took away his omnopotency and omniscience