Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!laura From: laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: YAOFW (Yet another Omni/Free Will) Message-ID: <3587@utzoo.UUCP> Date: Sat, 3-Mar-84 05:53:38 EST Article-I.D.: utzoo.3587 Posted: Sat Mar 3 05:53:38 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 3-Mar-84 05:53:38 EST References: <858@ssc-vax.UUCP>, <3586@utzoo.UUCP>, <6852@unc.UUCP> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 83 Byron, I think that we get to the same conclusions, but we get there by different paths. If this is not the case then I am still misunderstanding you. You say: What I was trying to get away from is the notion of G-d's responsibility in the matter of human actions. This does not, however, imply that humans are necessarily responsible (in the ultimate sense) for their actions. However, the whole notion of "responsibility" will require re-examination if God is deemed to be omniscient. We have already concluded that in that case, human beings are not responsible for their actions. Thus "responsibility" is either God's or it is itself a meaningless phrase like "round square". To drive this one closer to home -- if God is omniscient, could Jesus sin? It is pretty well agreed that He didn't -- but a good question is "Could He?". If He could, then there must be some moment in time where He could have behaved differently than he did. In that case, could God the Father have predicted His action? Suppose Jesus had decided not to go through with the crucifying, for instance. If Christianity is correct, then this has serious implications for Mankind. What happened in the Garden of Gethsemene anyway? Could Jesus have let the cup pass from Him? If so, was God the Father upstairs sweating it out because he knew one decision would have had terrible consequences for His Son and the rest would have terrible consequences for Mankind? This is sort of the way that they picture it in most of the Easter enactments at the various Christian Churches I have attended. On the other hand, this does not seem to jibe well with the God the All-Knowing Father bit. For a third hand, remember that Jesus is supposed to be God. Was He omniscient as he walked through life? Somehow it kind of detracts from the story line when you picture Jesus saying "okay, in 10 minutes it is time for the Sermon on the Mount, and this is real important and I remember what I will have said...later I am going to curse the fig tree --- boy they are going to puzzle over that for centuries ..." It also makes Jesus rather less (though as well more) than human, for indeed it is a very basic that all human beings sin. If Jesus couldn't Sin and human beings can, then presumably Jesus never had to feel sorrow for his sins, or shame or guilt as all human beings I know have felt. I think that in this case he seems to have missed out on important experiences. Of course, if he couldn't because he had no free will and neither do any of us, then all of our guilt and shame seem rather pointless, so it is impossible to say that they are important in any way -- for all seems rather meaningless. In the matter of G-d vs. human perception of time, I imagine that G-d sees time much like human's see physical dimensions, only with unlimited vision and resolution. (I agree with Dave Norris [*gasp*] that 'where' G-d was 'in/on' that dimension when it created the dimension itself is an ill-formed question.) Man, standing in the dimension sees muddily toward the past, and almost not at all toward the future and is, in fact, only sort of philosophically aware that the dimension exists at all. This is the bit that I don't agree with you about. The future is every bit as understood as a dimension in human perception as the past. The distinction is "what is the present"? What makes the present the present? Why do I feel *this* as now rather than 10 minutes ago or ten minutes from now? This is a very serious question. If your vision of God's perception is correct, then there seems no reason for us to have a concept of now -- moreoever, there seems no reason why I should share my perception of *now* with the others that I am with. Given problems of continuity and the indivisibility of a line, the question "what is now"? or "when is now"? is not easy. However, I will agree with you -- it spawns fascinationg problems. -- Laura Creighton (NOTE NEW ADDRESS) utzoo!laura