>Sure, God knows what results
>will stem
>from which of the possible
>actions. But
>how can knowledge of mere
>possibilities
>give God knowledge of what
>will actually
>occur unless it's somehow
>predetermined? The metaphor of
>God
>"looking forward" in time
>seems to imply
>that the future already
>exists. But if the
>future already exists, then it
>can only turn
>out the way that it already
>is.

Any theory which can justify both free will and pre determined fate is going to have to be very complicated, of course. But, if God exists outside of time (that is to say, doesn't change over time, and is aware of all time at all times...) than God's knowledge of the future (or of the many possible futures, which is a possibility not to be discounted) does not determine the future. Rather, God's knowledge of the future is due to the fact that God is there. This is not to say that god 'has already been there' or 'has seen the future'. In this model, there is no such thing as future. God sees the universe in very much the same way as Kurt Vonnegut's Trafalmadorians, all time at once. There is no distinction between moments. This is not to say that there is no choice, or will, which we who are trapped within a linear perception of time can exercise. Quite the opposite. We can, and do, exercise free will every day. It's just that our choices, from now into forever, are observed by a higher power. Now, you might argue that God's having prior knowledge of our actions means that we have no choice in the matter. In fact, God simply knows what we will choose to do because God has no foundation in time, and spreads out through all of time and space at once.

An example of this principal at work, the principal that observation does not imply negation; If you are there, watching a baby as it takes it's first steps, the baby's first steps are still it's own. It probably had a teacher (in the form of a parent or guardian) who helped it get to a point where it could walk on it's own. But when the time came for the baby to walk, it did so by itself. Your observation had little or no direct effect on the baby. Further; were you to have invented a time machine, and traveled into the future to observe this activity, would traveling into the past and telling mommy and daddy that baby was going to take it's first steps in a week and a half change the fact that the baby made the choice to walk? I think not.

Further, if the alternate thesis is correct, and The Almighty sees every possible course of action we could take, while still being completely outside of time, there is even more room for free will. This is more difficult to visualize. God sees the universe as a lightning bolt, or a family tree. The beginning of time is a single point. From this point, the universe extends as a straight line. As each possibility for each being that has existed to make a decision occurs, the line breaks off, to indicate all of the options which that being has available to it. We shall imagine that this web, which extends out into eternity (or up until all possible endings of the universe, whichever comes first), has one strand lit up, brightly colored. The rest is very dim. This brightly colored strand loses it's color at some point in the web, that point being "now" or "this moment in time". As time progresses, and choices are made (via free will) the colored strand progresses. God, if such a theory could be proven accurate, sees the universe in this way; all of it's potential for greatness and destruction. God is aware of ever choice that we could possibly come into contact with in our whole lives. Some of these choices would barely effect the web at all. Like, the choice to go to the bathroom before the movie or to wait until the movie is over. Some have a profound affect, like the decision to begin a nuclear war. Whatever it is, we can choose, and God knows.

Of course, such a web would be so complex that it would be impossible for the human mind to fully contemplate beyond recognizing it's existence. Whereas, the Godly mind would have no trouble comprehending. What with omnipotence.

I don't know that I actually believe what I just told you. The fact is, I don't know if I believe in god or not. But this theory strikes me as the most likely way to justify free will and fate, in order to give full credit to both sides of the issue. What I find particularly interesting is that a being can make decisions in their life which will greatly increase their opportunity to make decisions later on in life. Which will leave their options open, as it were. Or a being can make even one choice which will effectively eliminate their free will for the rest of their life. Hmm...