Document Type : Biannual Journal

Authors

• abdol rasoul kashfi ¹
• matin tayefehrostami ²

¹ Associate Professor of philosophy department, University of Tehran (corresponding author) (akashfi@ut.ac.ir)

² MA in Philosophy of Religion, University of Tehran (matintayefehrostami@gmail.com).

Abstract

Abstract
According to the theological fatalism, future matters are necessary and this necessity makes them unalterable; so, human beings are not able to make the future by their free will and this is incompatible with human freedom.
   Based on theological fatalism, there are four alternatives: first, accepting divine foreknowledge and denying human freedom, which is in fact affirming theological fatalism; second, accepting human freedom and rejecting divine foreknowledge; third, accepting both; and fourth, refusing both.
   Allameh Tabatabaei and William Craig accept the compatibility between divine foreknowledge and human freedom; consequently both thinkers believe that divine knowledge about human free actions is due to His knowledge of conditions and properties of the action. Thus, God knows what the subject will freely do in any circumstance.

Keywords

• Keywords: Divine foreknowledge
• Human freedom
• Theological fatalism
• The middle knowledge
• Allameh Tabatabaie
• William Craig