It absolutely does if coupled with omnipotence as choosing not to act is to permit what happens.
Even if that wasn't logically obvious to any body who took the time to think it through. God's Will being ordained long before creation is well established biblically, both in the old and new testament.
Regardless of anything else. God sets every atom in place in perfect systematic understanding of their interactions. To introduce randomness to his perfect system with some sort of "free will" wouldn't even work, since the consequences of Free will would already been known to him, and alterable or avoidable at his pleasure.
Even the act of granting free will is by definition deterministic for an omnipotent omniscient being.
It absolutely does if coupled with omnipotence as choosing not to act is to permit what happens.
Choosing to let children make their own mistakes does not in any way diminish one's power over them or knowledge of the consequences of those actions.
Its funny you bring logic into it, when logic is the very thing that says "if your actions are determined for you, you cannot logically be held responsible for committing them."
Again, all you've done is make God look worse by punishing us for things he decreed we'd do himself. In fact, him making you argue with me here is proof of free will. Because he wouldn't be that stupid to set up this worthless little interaction that accomplishes nothing. Whereas its simply a matter of circumstance if you choose to do so.
Your comment may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
First paragraph begs the question so hard it hurts.
As does the second. Because being responsible for something quite litteraly has nothing to do with being able to affect it.
Third begs the question AGAIN by ascribing meaning exclusively to free choice which... is retarded. "Making God look worse" is nonsensical. God is, regardless of how an idiot feels about it.
Oof, now the only God worthy of worship is an imperfect one. Again, enjoy the God to whom men are mysterious I guess.
Omniscience doesn't mean predestination. I'm sorry you cannot grasp this very simple difference.
It absolutely does if coupled with omnipotence as choosing not to act is to permit what happens.
Even if that wasn't logically obvious to any body who took the time to think it through. God's Will being ordained long before creation is well established biblically, both in the old and new testament.
Regardless of anything else. God sets every atom in place in perfect systematic understanding of their interactions. To introduce randomness to his perfect system with some sort of "free will" wouldn't even work, since the consequences of Free will would already been known to him, and alterable or avoidable at his pleasure.
Even the act of granting free will is by definition deterministic for an omnipotent omniscient being.
Choosing to let children make their own mistakes does not in any way diminish one's power over them or knowledge of the consequences of those actions.
Its funny you bring logic into it, when logic is the very thing that says "if your actions are determined for you, you cannot logically be held responsible for committing them."
Again, all you've done is make God look worse by punishing us for things he decreed we'd do himself. In fact, him making you argue with me here is proof of free will. Because he wouldn't be that stupid to set up this worthless little interaction that accomplishes nothing. Whereas its simply a matter of circumstance if you choose to do so.
Your comment may be one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
First paragraph begs the question so hard it hurts.
As does the second. Because being responsible for something quite litteraly has nothing to do with being able to affect it.
Third begs the question AGAIN by ascribing meaning exclusively to free choice which... is retarded. "Making God look worse" is nonsensical. God is, regardless of how an idiot feels about it.