If God is the ultimate author of reality, how does divine intent square with our free will, and does this turn us into mere characters in a predetermined story?

>>24509332 (OP)
If God is omnipotent (all-powerful) and omniscient (all-knowing), then presumably, nothing happens outside of God's will or knowledge. If God "authored" reality, then every event, every choice, every outcome would seem to be part of that divine script. This leads to the idea of a "predetermined story."

OP is a faggot.
That is all.

>>24509332 (OP)
Just because God knows our choices doesnt mean he causes them. He exists eternally, outside of time, which is a human illusion to begin with. Read St. Augustines argument on time and go from there

As soon as you admit you're a no reply troll, I will say that free will is just things you don't have to put effort into and also don't necessarily need to do.

>>24509332 (OP)
>St. Augustines argument on time
Augustine points out that the past is no longer, and the future is not yet. Therefore, neither truly "exists" in the present moment.

>>24509345
Learn to notice the details. For example, the similarities between Jesus and Superman end only with a) doing extraordinary things, b) sympathy of followers. Superman is an alien who operates a closed catalog of powers that are useful in specific situations. Superman can even be treated as a god, but he is a Greek type god, closed within the framework of his individuality and quite limited. To a large extent, his divinity ends with strength and the ability to use it. Meanwhile, Jesus has no "power", Jesus is a soteriological figure who, instead of individual abilities, continues the actions of God himself, i.e. the process of Creation. One who follows Christ continues Creation. Jesus does not even have to perform miracles to have such a function (which is why he so often gives them up).

>>24509338
If you fill a rain bucket it doesn't have to be rain water.

>>24509369
>Learn to notice the details. For example, the similarities between Jesus and Superman end only with a) doing extraordinary things, b) sympathy of followers.

Good

> Superman is an alien who operates a closed catalog of powers that are useful in specific situations. Superman can even be treated as a god, but he is a Greek type god, closed within the framework of his individuality and quite limited. To a large extent, his divinity ends with strength and the ability to use it. Meanwhile

Idiotic

>Jesus has no "power", Jesus is a soteriological figure who, instead of individual abilities, continues the actions of God himself, i.e. the process of Creation. One who follows Christ continues Creation. Jesus does not even have to perform miracles to have such a function (which is why he so often gives them up).

Good

>>24509369
Using marvel or dc or whatever to understand philosophy is reductive and shallow

>>24509373
>If you fill a rain bucket it doesn't have to be rain water.
Idiot

>>24509332 (OP)
>If God is the ultimate author of reality,
He isn't
>how does divine intent square with our free will
It doesn't
>does this turn us into mere characters in a predetermined story?
No

>>24509457
He is

>>24509332 (OP)

chatgp jeet thread

>>24509332 (OP)
Yes, unless you conclude that god isn't actually omnipotent and omniscient. Afaik, christians believe that god can't really act outside of his plan.

>>24509373
Your analogy doesn't work because god has full agency and knowledge over what falls in that bucket

>>24509332 (OP)
The flat Arminian view is that insofar as we do good, this is something we observably do, and using synergic language is perfectly fine; but in truth, this is all God's doing through us; he is the one who enables us in the first place and corporally elects His chosen few. But God does not lie when he says he puts a choice before us today; we can choose life or death; and only in the full view does God predestine these actions. In other words, this form of Protestantism is synergic. Catholics and EO's have a similar theological view, if we can ignore their naked apostasy in other departments.
The flat Calvinist/Lutheran view is that this by resistless proof means free will isn't real; the will is monergic and God causes all good; all men are deeply taintedly sinful. God ultimately sovereignly damns people from beyond spacetime in crafting the Divine Plan (tm). It's why Luther, in his disputations with Erasmus about free will, remarked that Erasmus was the only one to get to the heart of the matter; while everyone else was discussing the Lutheran theses on penance, Erasmus focussed on disputing the Lutheran view of the bondage of the will.
Either way, Arminian or Calvinist, the Bible never preaches unrestrained free will. The will is impaired by the Fall; and this is no mere inclination, but a cosmic maiming of the creation order, that affects us metaphysically (entropy), physically (death), spiritually (drive to hate God and commit sin) and legally (second death in Hell). Free will is much more of a modern theological invention.

>>24509332 (OP)

>>24509867

>>24509933
'Insufficient disses to Satan' have never been the Protty theological objection to Eastern Heterodoxy; it's the veneration of saints when all forms of veneration are for God alone, penance as salvatory rather than sanctifying, obstinate breaching of the second commandment, and relic worship
>inb4 b-b-but we anathematised iconoclasm at the Council of Nothingburger you Nestorian

>>24509332 (OP)

>>24509634
Wrong on both

Just be kind to each other. That is the simple truth.

didn't read, not literature, reported, stop shitting up the board.

>>24509382
Oh, you don't like my example because Deleuze doesn't like examples? Why don't you just support the alternative then?