A contradiction between God's omniscience and hunmanity

[ZIon_Tong]

(Luke 20:20-25)
20 When evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the Twelve. 21 And while they were eating, he said, “I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me.” 22 They were very sad and began to say to him one after the other, “Surely not I, Lord?” 23 Jesus replied, “The one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with me will betray me. 24 The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born.” 25 Then Judas, the one who would betray him, said, “Surely not I, Rabbi?” Jesus answered, “Yes, it is you.”

I sometimes can’t help thinking that maybe Judas was deserving sympathy cause the moment Jesus answered, “Yes, it is you.”, Judas destined to be a traitor, otherwise his deed would break the Jesus’ prophecy and thus the god’s omniscience would be challenged. Perhaps someone might argue that it’s greed and lack of faith that makes Judas irreversibly choose himself to be a traitor, but is there any possibility that Judas repented after Jesus said “yes, it is you.”? No,I would say, no under the omniscience of Jesus and God.

However, it’s definitely erroneous that Judas destined to be a traitor or was born to be a sinner since everyone is born to go through a self-redemption from the original sin and other sins in lift, and finally gets to heaven. I came to think about this contradiction because it’s similar with the condition nowadays. The reason why some people become criminals or choose to commit crimes is that they are affected by the self-control, conscience, eternal factors and so on, which have all been set by god since they are born. Undoubtedly that’s not fair for them. So the only reasonable explanation would be that god’s omniscience should be understand in some other way, and the god doesn’t know what we are gonna be in future.

I know this may sounds absurd, but it’s been confusing me. And please pardon for the mistakes in language cause I’m not a native English speaker.

 

[angell1]

hi, i’m not sure which bible you have been reading. but i have never heeard of jesus say yes to judas. it certainly isn’t in my bible anyways

 

[jonathan_hili]

I think the passage you’ve quoted there is from Matthew’s Gospel: Matt 26:20-25. But notice that although it is true that Judas asks Jesus if he will betray him, and Jesus confirms this, by this stage Judas has already inquired of the high priests how much they would pay for Jesus’ betrayal (see Matt 26:14-16).

 

[bsroufek]

Earlier in the Gospel, Jesus says (John 6:70), “Then Jesus replied, ‘Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!’”

Also, Jesus says later John 17:12 “While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.”

So, God–and Jesus too–knew from ages preceeding it who would betray Jesus. Also, God and Jesus knew who would give birth to Jesus from the beginning: Mary.

St. Peter says to Jesus, “You know everything, Lord. You know that I love you.”

It’s kind of mystery that God knows everything from beginning to end, through all generations, and also gives us free will, knowing what we will choose beforehand. But that doesn’t mean that everything is fixed, just that He is great enough to know what each of us will do in every moment.

I see no contradiction in free will and God’s omniscience, as the Church teaches.

 

[ZIon_Tong]

Earlier in the Gospel, Jesus says (John 6:70), “Then Jesus replied, ‘Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!’”

Also, Jesus says later John 17:12 “While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.”

So, God–and Jesus too–knew from ages preceeding it who would betray Jesus. Also, God and Jesus knew who would give birth to Jesus from the beginning: Mary.

St. Peter says to Jesus, “You know everything, Lord. You know that I love you.”

It’s kind of mystery that God knows everything from beginning to end, through all generations, and also gives us free will, knowing what we will choose beforehand. But that doesn’t mean that everything is fixed, just that He is great enough to know what each of us will do in every moment.

I see no contradiction in free will and God’s omniscience, as the Church teaches.

Yes, it’s true that we have free will, and everything isn’t fixed for us. But for the God, didn’t he know that Peter would be a saint and Judas a sinner when they were babies or even fetuses. So I think, for the God,everything is fixed under his omniscience cause HE knows the destiny of Judas and that of St.Peter, no matter how free their will might be. I think that may be a contradiction in free will to choose the destiny and God’s omniscience (fixed destiny known by the God.)

 

[stephe1987]

God knows all things, which means he knows our future choices. But that doesn’t make us any less responsible for the choices we make. We are not being forced to act a certain way. We are not robots that are pre-programmed to sin or anything like that. Humans have free will.

Our destiny is “fixed” from the perspective of God (outside of time), but from human perspective (inside time) our destiny changes based on the choices we make.

 

[kmcarl56]

Like so many other things in the Bible that we might not understand, you simply have to accept it as part of God’s plan. He does things His own way and in His own time. Don’t worry over such things, accept it as a simple fact, and move on to learning more about what He is teaching more than how He is doing it.

 

[ToTheCross]

We all change as time goes on. Think back five years, ten years ago. Are you different? Is there anything that could make you change back to the way you were? The events you experienced led you to change, but did you feel as if you had no free will in the matter?

It is not that we do not have free will. To prove this to yourself, you can go outside and choose between simple things (I will go into the garden and pick this flower, but not that one…or to escape someone predicting I will pick the first flower, maybe I will then pick the second) etc. It is not that we do not have the free will to choose, only that God knows us so well, He already knows what we will pick. This is like a parent who knows his daughter will pick a blue dress over a pink because blue is her favourite colour.

And this is where religion in general and Catholicism in particular scores over atheism. Atheists must necessarily believe that we do not have free will, we are a slave to our genetics, because to them the only thing that can exist is science: biology. Morals are not part of science (at least not as we are taught today), in which case, you can only do what you are genetically programmed to do. If you sin or make a morally wrong decision, it must have been in your genes, because the idea that you can overcome what you are genetically capable of doing comes from God and what you get from believing in God (i.e. acting virtuously).

 

[ProdglArchitect]

You’re thinking far too linearly when dealing with God. God’s knowledge is not “it’s happens and I know about it;” It’s more like “It will happen, is happening, and has happened.” Time is non-existent for God. This does not, however, negate free will because, even though God may know our choices, they are still our choices to make. He only know what we will do because, in the absence of times, we will do it, are doing it, and have done it already.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

God knows all things, which means he knows our future choices. But that doesn’t make us any less responsible for the choices we make. We are not being forced to act a certain way. We are not robots that are pre-programmed to sin or anything like that. Humans have free will.

Our destiny is “fixed” from the perspective of God (outside of time), but from human perspective (inside time) our destiny changes based on the choices we make.

Did Judas have free will to betray Christ? At no time does it appear that God forced him to act in this way. He went to the Pharisees of his own accord. Satan may have tempted him, but in the end Judas’ choice was his own.

As to motive, I don’t think it was greed. Judas was a zealot, a fanatic. The Gospels spell that out, obviously for a reason.

He’d seen first hand the phenomenal power Christ had, and if anybody could get rid of the accursed Romans, He could. What better way to put Christ on the spot, than to force him to defend Himself against false charges by using His divine power, and ultimately lead a wildly successful insurrection and revolution.

Unfortunatly for Judas, his plan backfired. Christ didn’t cooperate with his political agenda.

That he was not really interested in the money is shown by his reaction when he realised what he’d done - “I have betrayed innocent blood!” and then hurling the money back at the Pharisees. Even when he was stealing money, it wouldn’t surprise me if he was passing it on to the Zealot movement. Arms are expensive you know.

But at all times, he made his own decisions. That he may have always have been predestined to be lost, as the Scriptures seem to indicate - that’s sad. But he was WILLING to make the choice that determined he was lost. Even when Christ told him point blank it was him, which should have given him pause at the last minute, he still went out and arranged to meet with the armed guard to arrest Christ.

And we’re all in that position every single day. The devil never forces any atheist to deny Christ. Not once. He certainly tempts them, but he never forces them. And God never forces anyone to believe in Him. Oh, He might seem to push a bit harder with some people than others, but He never forces anyone. About the only exception I can think of is St. Paul, with his Damascus experience. That was about as close to a forced conversion as I can think of. I mean if something like a lightning bolt knocks you off your high horse, gives you instant severe cataracts, and a voice like thunder comes down from heaven, you’d have to be a complete hard case to respond - “Not on your life, mate!”

But Paul had to pay for it too, with all the sufferings he endured over the following years. Yet he was willing to keep going.

On the other hand, if free will were the only ingredient, then God could hardly have a plan. I don’t think our free will is all it’s cracked up to be. Why Judas, and not some other Zealot? Why Peter, and not some other fisherman? Why Ananias and Sapphira and not some other deceitful couple? Why Pontius PIlate and not some other Roman governor? Did any of them plan to get mixed up with Christ the way they did. Not likely.

Why you? Why me?

In this respect, God’s choice is also evident, right down to specific people.

So both His grace, or possibly the lack of it in some cases, and our free will go hand in hand.

 

[Spencerian]

Did Judas have free will to betray Christ? At no time does it appear that God forced him to act in this way. He went to the Pharisees of his own accord. Satan may have tempted him, but in the end Judas’ choice was his own.

As to motive, I don’t think it was greed. Judas was a zealot, a fanatic. The Gospels spell that out, obviously for a reason.

He’d seen first hand the phenomenal power Christ had, and if anybody could get rid of the accursed Romans, He could. What better way to put Christ on the spot, than to force him to defend Himself against false charges by using His divine power, and ultimately lead a wildly successful insurrection and revolution.

Unfortunatly for Judas, his plan backfired. Christ didn’t cooperate with his political agenda.

That he was not really interested in the money is shown by his reaction when he realised what he’d done - “I have betrayed innocent blood!” and then hurling the money back at the Pharisees. Even when he was stealing money, it wouldn’t surprise me if he was passing it on to the Zealot movement. Arms are expensive you know.

But at all times, he made his own decisions. That he may have always have been predestined to be lost, as the Scriptures seem to indicate - that’s sad. But he was WILLING to make the choice that determined he was lost. Even when Christ told him point blank it was him, which should have given him pause at the last minute, he still went out and arranged to meet with the armed guard to arrest Christ.

And we’re all in that position every single day. The devil never forces any atheist to deny Christ. Not once. He certainly tempts them, but he never forces them. And God never forces anyone to believe in Him. Oh, He might seem to push a bit harder with some people than others, but He never forces anyone. About the only exception I can think of is St. Paul, with his Damascus experience. That was about as close to a forced conversion as I can think of. I mean if something like a lightning bolt knocks you off your high horse, gives you instant severe cataracts, and a voice like thunder comes down from heaven, you’d have to be a complete hard case to respond - “Not on your life, mate!”

But Paul had to pay for it too, with all the sufferings he endured over the following years. Yet he was willing to keep going.

On the other hand, if free will were the only ingredient, then God could hardly have a plan. I don’t think our free will is all it’s cracked up to be. Why Judas, and not some other Zealot? Why Peter, and not some other fisherman? Why Ananias and Sapphira and not some other deceitful couple? Why Pontius PIlate and not some other Roman governor? Did any of them plan to get mixed up with Christ the way they did. Not likely.

Why you? Why me?

In this respect, God’s choice is also evident, right down to specific people.

So both His grace, or possibly the lack of it in some cases, and our free will go hand in hand.

Wow.

That interpretation stimulated me faster than my sips of coffee. I’ve not thought or read before of the motivations of Judas as attempting (with “good intentions”) of forcing Christ’s hand to show His divinity for a cause. It makes great sense as there was no way that Judas could deny Christ’s powers and sign as he was a direct witness to them. It never made sense to me why Judas would betray Christ for something as simple as money. But for a cause, yes.

The interpretation fits in why Judas falls to despair when Christ doesn’t respond as he hoped but, in fact, called Judas out on his duplicity before he committed to his act. So Christ’s one true sign to Judas that made sense to him in the end foretold the man’s own failure, although he didn’t understand it until it was too late.

That’s a *very *insightful and human way to explain Judas’s motivations. Great answer; thanks for sharing that!

 

[ZIon_Tong]

Did Judas have free will to betray Christ? At no time does it appear that God forced him to act in this way. He went to the Pharisees of his own accord. Satan may have tempted him, but in the end Judas’ choice was his own.

As to motive, I don’t think it was greed. Judas was a zealot, a fanatic. The Gospels spell that out, obviously for a reason.

He’d seen first hand the phenomenal power Christ had, and if anybody could get rid of the accursed Romans, He could. What better way to put Christ on the spot, than to force him to defend Himself against false charges by using His divine power, and ultimately lead a wildly successful insurrection and revolution.

Unfortunatly for Judas, his plan backfired. Christ didn’t cooperate with his political agenda.

That he was not really interested in the money is shown by his reaction when he realised what he’d done - “I have betrayed innocent blood!” and then hurling the money back at the Pharisees. Even when he was stealing money, it wouldn’t surprise me if he was passing it on to the Zealot movement. Arms are expensive you know.

But at all times, he made his own decisions. That he may have always have been predestined to be lost, as the Scriptures seem to indicate - that’s sad. But he was WILLING to make the choice that determined he was lost. Even when Christ told him point blank it was him, which should have given him pause at the last minute, he still went out and arranged to meet with the armed guard to arrest Christ.

And we’re all in that position every single day. The devil never forces any atheist to deny Christ. Not once. He certainly tempts them, but he never forces them. And God never forces anyone to believe in Him. Oh, He might seem to push a bit harder with some people than others, but He never forces anyone. About the only exception I can think of is St. Paul, with his Damascus experience. That was about as close to a forced conversion as I can think of. I mean if something like a lightning bolt knocks you off your high horse, gives you instant severe cataracts, and a voice like thunder comes down from heaven, you’d have to be a complete hard case to respond - “Not on your life, mate!”

But Paul had to pay for it too, with all the sufferings he endured over the following years. Yet he was willing to keep going.

On the other hand, if free will were the only ingredient, then God could hardly have a plan. I don’t think our free will is all it’s cracked up to be. Why Judas, and not some other Zealot? Why Peter, and not some other fisherman? Why Ananias and Sapphira and not some other deceitful couple? Why Pontius PIlate and not some other Roman governor? Did any of them plan to get mixed up with Christ the way they did. Not likely.

Why you? Why me?

In this respect, God’s choice is also evident, right down to specific people.

So both His grace, or possibly the lack of it in some cases, and our free will go hand in hand.

I think I agree with your point. Thanks for your much passionate and wise explanation. And never have I been told the comparatively reasonable explanation of Judas’ intention until you said. I’m deeply touched and inspired reading it.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Did Judas have free will to betray Christ? At no time does it appear that God forced him to act in this way. He went to the Pharisees of his own accord. Satan may have tempted him, but in the end Judas’ choice was his own.

As to motive, I don’t think it was greed. Judas was a zealot, a fanatic. The Gospels spell that out, obviously for a reason.

He’d seen first hand the phenomenal power Christ had, and if anybody could get rid of the accursed Romans, He could. What better way to put Christ on the spot, than to force him to defend Himself against false charges by using His divine power, and ultimately lead a wildly successful insurrection and revolution.

Unfortunatly for Judas, his plan backfired. Christ didn’t cooperate with his political agenda.

That he was not really interested in the money is shown by his reaction when he realised what he’d done - “I have betrayed innocent blood!” and then hurling the money back at the Pharisees. Even when he was stealing money, it wouldn’t surprise me if he was passing it on to the Zealot movement. Arms are expensive you know.

But at all times, he made his own decisions. That he may have always have been predestined to be lost, as the Scriptures seem to indicate - that’s sad. But he was WILLING to make the choice that determined he was lost. Even when Christ told him point blank it was him, which should have given him pause at the last minute, he still went out and arranged to meet with the armed guard to arrest Christ.

And we’re all in that position every single day. The devil never forces any atheist to deny Christ. Not once. He certainly tempts them, but he never forces them. And God never forces anyone to believe in Him. Oh, He might seem to push a bit harder with some people than others, but He never forces anyone. About the only exception I can think of is St. Paul, with his Damascus experience. That was about as close to a forced conversion as I can think of. I mean if something like a lightning bolt knocks you off your high horse, gives you instant severe cataracts, and a voice like thunder comes down from heaven, you’d have to be a complete hard case to respond - “Not on your life, mate!”

But Paul had to pay for it too, with all the sufferings he endured over the following years. Yet he was willing to keep going.

On the other hand, if free will were the only ingredient, then God could hardly have a plan. I don’t think our free will is all it’s cracked up to be. Why Judas, and not some other Zealot? Why Peter, and not some other fisherman? Why Ananias and Sapphira and not some other deceitful couple? Why Pontius PIlate and not some other Roman governor? Did any of them plan to get mixed up with Christ the way they did. Not likely.

Why you? Why me?

In this respect, God’s choice is also evident, right down to specific people.

So both His grace, or possibly the lack of it in some cases, and our free will go hand in hand.

I think this suffers from too-linear thinking as well.

Why Judas? Because Judas Chose to follow Christ, and Judas chose to betray him.

Why Peter? Because Peter Chose to follow Christ and Christ chose Peter to lead the Church because Peter had already lead the Church, and lead it well.

The OT prophets weren’t foretelling what would happen in the same sense that a fortune teller claims to; they were recounting what, to God, had already happened.

Christ’s actions don’t conform to the OT, the OT conforms to Christ’s actions. If Christ had done something else, the OT would have said something else to be in line with it. If Christ had been born in Jerusalem instead of Bethlehem, the OT would have said so; but he was born in Bethlehem, so the OT related that the savior would be born there.

 

[Semangelof]

I believe that whenever we move, act, or don’t act we set forth a series of collisions that can collide for thousands of years. As if life was a massive game of pool.

Our fate or our destiny being the compiled collection of the collisions we made using the stick of our free will and the cue of our actions. Only an outside force, a second cue, can alter the collision course. An outside force being anyone or anything not currently involved in the collision path that can willfully act with knowledge to alter the collision path. The key component being knowledge. As soon as that force chooses to act it becomes a new collision and therefore a new destiny is made.

I believe our destiny is under constant assault by outside forces. Our path is in constant flux between deviation and correction. The free choice of mankind seems to be a sacred rule of the game. However satan is in constant play to deviate our destiny, and God is in play trying to correct our destiny. If either forces apply themselves on us in anything but balance our free choice begins to be lost.

Imagine a person who willfully wishes to go somewhere. One force causes the persons legs to become tired to discourage his will. A different force causes a strong wind to blow across the persons back to strengthen his will. Even if the weariness is greater than the wind the person can still continue to go on (to a point). So even though +positive and -negative forces are applied and constantly effecting our course their net value will not be greater than free will. Leaving ourselves as the only ultimately culpable party. The choices are not always easy, but they are still our choices.

 

[bsroufek]

Wow.

That interpretation stimulated me faster than my sips of coffee. I’ve not thought or read before of the motivations of Judas as attempting (with “good intentions”) of forcing Christ’s hand to show His divinity for a cause. It makes great sense as there was no way that Judas could deny Christ’s powers and sign as he was a direct witness to them. It never made sense to me why Judas would betray Christ for something as simple as money. But for a cause, yes.

The interpretation fits in why Judas falls to despair when Christ doesn’t respond as he hoped but, in fact, called Judas out on his duplicity before he committed to his act. So Christ’s one true sign to Judas that made sense to him in the end foretold the man’s own failure, although he didn’t understand it until it was too late.

That’s a *very *insightful and human way to explain Judas’s motivations. Great answer; thanks for sharing that!

You’re making Judas’ motivations sound good, even though he had said to the chief priests, “What will you give me if I betray him to you?” That’s not a good motivation.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I think this suffers from too-linear thinking as well.

Why Judas? Because Judas Chose to follow Christ, and Judas chose to betray him.

Why Peter? Because Peter Chose to follow Christ and Christ chose Peter to lead the Church because Peter had already lead the Church, and lead it well.

The OT prophets weren’t foretelling what would happen in the same sense that a fortune teller claims to; they were recounting what, to God, had already happened.

Christ’s actions don’t conform to the OT, the OT conforms to Christ’s actions. If Christ had done something else, the OT would have said something else to be in line with it. If Christ had been born in Jerusalem instead of Bethlehem, the OT would have said so; but he was born in Bethlehem, so the OT related that the savior would be born there.

Christ called Peter in a very direct way. Peter didn’t go up to Christ and say “I think I’ll follow you.” Christ called Him first.

As Christ said to His apostles, and by extension to us, “I chose you. You didn’t choose me.”

 

[Spencerian]

You’re making Judas’ motivations sound good, even though he had said to the chief priests, “What will you give me if I betray him to you?” That’s not a good motivation.

You’re missing the point.

Of course Judas acted with ultimately evil intent. But most of us don’t act evil for the sake of evil. We often want to make “good” from what is ultimately an evil act. If Judas wanted Jesus to be more than just a lamb, betraying him (in Judas’ mind) would force Jesus to show his martial glory as a conquering messiah, as many of His followers thought their Messiah would be.

This is still reprehensible, not just because this was not Christ’s purpose (and he said so often) but Judas also put Christ to the test–a violation of one of the Commandments. Not to mention bearing false witness and surely a few others.

The point here is that Judas acted not with a Snidley Whiplash moustashe and a “MMUHAHAH” evil cackle, doing evil because he liked doing it, but acting as we today do–attempting to do acts of grave matter by our will, believing we are right in doing so and ignoring what God wills of us. Judas himself may not have been evil but he choose these actions possibly under the illusion that his actions were good. This is a very *human *explanation, which was why I found it insightful.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

(Luke 20:20-25)
20 When evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the Twelve. 21 And while they were eating, he said, “I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me.” 22 They were very sad and began to say to him one after the other, “Surely not I, Lord?” 23 Jesus replied, “The one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with me will betray me. 24 The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born.” 25 Then Judas, the one who would betray him, said, “Surely not I, Rabbi?” Jesus answered, “Yes, it is you.”

I sometimes can’t help thinking that maybe Judas was deserving sympathy cause the moment Jesus answered, “Yes, it is you.”, Judas destined to be a traitor, otherwise his deed would break the Jesus’ prophecy and thus the god’s omniscience would be challenged. Perhaps someone might argue that it’s greed and lack of faith that makes Judas irreversibly choose himself to be a traitor, but is there any possibility that Judas repented after Jesus said “yes, it is you.”? No,I would say, no under the omniscience of Jesus and God.

However, it’s definitely erroneous that Judas destined to be a traitor or was born to be a sinner since everyone is born to go through a self-redemption from the original sin and other sins in lift, and finally gets to heaven. I came to think about this contradiction because it’s similar with the condition nowadays. The reason why some people become criminals or choose to commit crimes is that they are affected by the self-control, conscience, eternal factors and so on, which have all been set by god since they are born. Undoubtedly that’s not fair for them. So the only reasonable explanation would be that god’s omniscience should be understand in some other way, and the god doesn’t know what we are gonna be in future.

I know this may sounds absurd, but it’s been confusing me. And please pardon for the mistakes in language cause I’m not a native English speaker.

Your thinking is a little confused, so is your Theology. If you read and study your Catechism of the Catholic Church many of your confusions would disappear.
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM. This is in English but I’m sure it has been translated into your own language.

But to answer your question. God knows all possible things and all possible events, he knows ahead of time what our thoughts and actions will be and has planned responses to every variable. Even though he knows we may fail, he still created us for himself. What we do is our decision, not his - he does not cause us to fail. He created us in freedom, what we do with that is our choice and God allows us to make it. If we choose wrongly, he is sad, but he allows us to make the choice anyway.

Linus2nd

 

[ZIon_Tong]

Your thinking is a little confused, so is your Theology. If you read and study your Catechism of the Catholic Church many of your confusions would disappear.
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM. This is in English but I’m sure it has been translated into your own language.

But to answer your question. God knows all possible things and all possible events, he knows ahead of time what our thoughts and actions will be and has planned responses to every variable. Even though he knows we may fail, he still created us for himself. What we do is our decision, not his - he does not cause us to fail. He created us in freedom, what we do with that is our choice and God allows us to make it. If we choose wrongly, he is sad, but he allows us to make the choice anyway.

Linus2nd

I think I didn’t explicitly express my opinion before.Here is my deduction.
The major premise is that God is omniscient. If a person committed a murder, God knows the crime. And God definitely knows the person would commit the murder before he did.
Because God’s omniscience is so much ahead of time, God knows the person would commit the murder even he was a fetus in the womb. If he commit the crime,then there will be no problem. There come the problem, what if he didn’t commit the murder? If he didn’t, the God’s antipathy towards the person will be proved to be wrong,which would thus contradicts to God’s omniscience. So the person will definitely grow up and at some time commit the crime even when he was a fetus womb with a pure soul expect for the original sin that results from Adam and Eve. Then I was confused how can a pure soul be destined to sin according to the God’s omniscience.

However, now I’m released from the confusion cause someone taught me in the previous answer that I should focus more on what God teaches us than how he does.

And thank you for the site recommended, I’m gonna check it out.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I think I didn’t explicitly express my opinion before.Here is my deduction.
The major premise is that God is omniscient. If a person committed a murder, God knows the crime. And God definitely knows the person would commit the murder before he did.
Because God’s omniscience is so much ahead of time, God knows the person would commit the murder even he was a fetus in the womb. If he commit the crime,then there will be no problem. There come the problem, what if he didn’t commit the murder? If he didn’t, the God’s antipathy towards the person will be proved to be wrong,which would thus contradicts to God’s omniscience. So the person will definitely grow up and at some time commit the crime even when he was a fetus womb with a pure soul expect for the original sin that results from Adam and Eve. Then I was confused how can a pure soul be destined to sin according to the God’s omniscience.

However, now I’m released from the confusion cause someone taught me in the previous answer that I should focus more on what God teaches us than how he does.

And thank you for the site recommended, I’m gonna check it out.

That’s fine. But you must understand, in the scenario you described there is a serious error. God only knows of the crime if we actually commit it. He knows that will be our choice. The situation you described would not happen, has never happened. He knows that we will do the deed. That does not force us to do it.

We could not grow up and " not do the deed. " God knows that we will. We cannot not do something that God knows we will do. That would mean that God was not Omniscient. He knows that we will not change our minds. And he will not love us any the less knowing that in fifteen years we will commit a crime. His anger will occur when we do the deed, not before.

Linus2nd