Free Will

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
201

[quote]forbes wrote:
Pat, you know I respect you deeply and we get along quite well, and will always want to keep it that way, BUT…

Catholicism has no scriptural basis either. I mean the papacy, probably one of the most important doctrines of Catholicism (?We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.? (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.), was made up from ONE verse, which was manipulated to make one person Christ on Earth, who has power over the Church.
[/quote]
Christ on earth? That’s not what the papacy is, at all. Only Christ is Christ and the pope is his servant and head of the church, but nothing more and is established directly from Mt 18:16. It is not one of the most important doctrines in Catholicism. That would be the Eucharist. Which is supported by all the synoptic gospels, 1 Cor 11:23 - 29, JN 6:51-58. The papacy is important, but it’s not the focus of the Church, Christ is the focus of the church.
The papacy is merely centralized leadership, the reason for it is to prevent individual churches from coming up with their own dogma’s and doctrines. This was especially true for the early church. You couldn’t just send an email.
The result is that you can go to any Catholic church anywhere in the world and it is the same. The papal infallibility is so that priests and indeed even bishops just can’t make up their own dogma when ever they feel like it. But it’s only used for dogma.
The main purpose of the papacy is unity…But no pope ever has been anything but a servant of Christ. Some were better some were worse, but their job is to serve more than lead as stated in the gospels.
In 1302, there was only one Church, is was not called Roman Catholic. So technically, the statement was correct. Of course that is not longer the case. If you want to know what the church is and says, look at the current catechism. Because the God gave the church to men to run, it has to constantly correct itself to make sure that Christ is the focus, so that semantics, rituals, etc never lose their focus. But, of the basic tenets have not changed on iota since apostolic times. The Nicene Creed is the statement of the church and that has not changed ever.

[quote]
I do not agree with the Calvinistic TULIP doctrines, but to completely say there is NO basis for any of it is silly, especially when you believe unscriptural doctrines as well.

But none the less, please dont take this offensively.[/quote]

Any non-scriptural doctrines do not hold the same weight as the scriptural doctrines, save for the Trinity, which came before the Biblical cannon was assembled. Now that’s not the same as saying they are not important, but scripture is held in the highest esteem. There are plenty of religious historical documents, not biblical, but important none the less; they are not considered divinely inspired as scripture is and no one pretends they are.
I don’t take it offensively, I just think you have misconceptions which is normal. I’ll be happy to answer any questions, and so long as you don’t call me a liar, tool of satan, and hell bound we’re cool.

As far as TULIP, you really, really have to pick, isolate, and go way out of context to prove things like ‘Total depravity’ and unconditional election. That’s a stretch at best. I would actually go so far as to say they actually go against what scripture says. A bit harsh? Well I guess it depends on how orthodox you hold such beliefs to be true. But to say God creates condemned people by His will and that he is the father and author of sin, that’s going to far…If the only response is that ‘you cannot understand God and it’s way over your head so just believe it and shut up’, well you got yourself one stupid argument to support the notions.

I have great respect and admiration for most of my evangelical brethren, I find beneath the veneer of what we practice, we all express a deep love of God. It’s when we condemn each other, especially with out basis in truth or fact, then I have a huge problem with that. That is expressedly unchristian and we are specifically called, both in the gospels and in the epistles, not to do it.

202

[quote]pat wrote:<<< As far as TULIP, you really, really have to pick, isolate, and go way out of context to prove things like ‘Total depravity’ and unconditional election. >>>[/quote]All you have to do is let God be God and speak for Himself in His Word. God first, me next and there it is. Plain as day. The trouble is people go to the bible having already assumed beforehand that whatever else they may find there it CANNOT include a God who has more sovereignty over them than they have over themselves. That’s a just a given right off the bat. Theology proper, the doctrine of God, governs every other doctrine or God is reduced to the level of His creation which is precisely what happens in every form of theology EXCEPT reformed theology.

I don’t usually like to talk this way because it isn’t good for ME, but if we ever got in the same room with the appropriate resources available Pat? I would jackhammer you into the floor in a biblical debate about this. Your friends would have to come in and squeegee you into a dust pan to get you outta there. I really wish you wouldn’t throw an apocalyptic tantrum when you read this because I do not mean it as an insult to you. Your position is weak. It has never been defended well.

203

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
All you have to do is let God be God and speak for Himself in His Word. God first, me next and there it is. Plain as day.
[/quote]
I did, TULIP is bullshit, plain as day.

Atta boy!
That was just sad… You really think theology and faith is a pissing contest? I already won, then.
You condemn me, I do not condemn you. You call me a tool of satan, I think you are just mistaken. You want to convert me, I just don’t want you to condemn me, especially based on falsehoods.

204

I can’t condemn anybody Pat. You ARE right though. It’s not really about winning a debate. Nobody ever actually WINS debates in the eyes of the committed opposition anyway. Internet forums are a poor medium for these kinds of discussions. It’s frustrating.

205

What is free will? Hmmm, First one must define the concept of what free will is, second one must establish how to apply it to ones introspect.

I define free will as ones own ability to choose, because;

I apply it to myself by allowing myself to decide upon my own choices.
I am governed by the laws of physics that help me define my own free choices.
I have ultimately made a choice that is governed by possibility, and thus have chosen.

So free will is introspective choices. That’s my take on it.

206


.

207

[quote]Cortes wrote:
Before starting, I should note that this question arose from a conversation between Tirib and myself and a few of the other members in a thread I no longer remember. I bring it up here now not to push a point (and not solely because Tirib just embarrassed me by reminding me I’d scooted out without answering his question how many months back), but because that earlier conversation led me to do something I normally do not have to do: To admit I could not explain the basis or origin for one of my core beliefs: that there exists and man possesses free will and the ability to determine the arc of his earthly existence.

So, my questions, if you are willing to tackle them, are these:

  1. Where does free will originate?

  2. How does one resolve the paradox of free will within a seemingly deterministic universe (if one is atheist), or its existence in a universe every subatomic particle of which has been created by an omniscient, omnipotent God?

And as a bonus, related offshoots and issues as well as attempts to answer why it exists at all are more than welcome.

I understand the question has been touched upon in this thread and that, and I apologize if I missed it, but at the time of this writing I cannot find a dedicated thread covering this particular topic.

So, have at it. [/quote]

I don’t know whether anyone has answered this correctly yet because I don’t intend to read the 200+ replies. Here we go:

  1. For all intents and purposes it originated from Pelagius.
  1. Extremely fucking good question…but I have no answer I’m afraid.
208

Pelagius who Augustine quite rightly stifled.

The notion of AUTONOMOUS free will whereby finite dependent creatures are said to reach conclusions and execute decisions in independence from the governing will of the creator God originated in the garden of Eden. "Did God really say… and even if He did, God wants to keep you subservient to His tyrannical will.

He knows if you eat from that tree you’ll be like Him, able to discern reality for yourselves and He wants that privilege for Himself only. You don’t need God tellin you what to think and what to do and what to eat. Don’t you have free will? Can’t you make decisions for yourselves?". THAT was in essence the deception. The fruit was an incidental vehicle.

The moment Adam bought into the idea that he could operate any part of himself independent of the all governing will of God it was over. Even tough the whole episode itself was dependent on the all governing will of God which is the point. They already had all the freedom and liberty they were designed for in the fact that they were living in complete blissful fellowship and dependence upon God for absolutely everything. Their quest for freedom and independence brought them the opposite. Death and slavery to sin.

To this day people, even Christian people are grasping for the very thing the serpent deceived Eve with. Freedom from God’s all governing hand. The power of the blood and resurrection of Christ is for the exact purpose of re-freeing us the live in utter willful dependence on the only certainty possible which resides in the mind of our creator. This is accomplished by the indwelling presence of God Himself in the promise of the Holy Spirit. Instead, people claiming His name spend vast amounts of time energy proclaiming their own autonomy instead of HIS incomprehensible omnipotent providence over all that is.

Once again. If even one sub atomic particle (or sparrow falling to the ground) moves without Him? He is not the God who reveals Himself in the ancient Christian scriptures.

209

“Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.”

emphasis mine.

free will start here.
Genesis 2:19

First, God name the plants for Adam, showing him the power of the Word.
Then, God let Adam use the power of the Word and name the beasts and the birds. Freely.

210

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Pelagius who Augustine quite rightly stifled.

The notion of AUTONOMOUS free will whereby finite dependent creatures are said to reach conclusions and execute decisions in independence from the governing will of the creator God originated in the garden of Eden. “Did God really say… and even if He did, God wants to keep you subservient to His tyrannical will. He knows if you eat from that tree you’ll be like Him, able to discern reality for yourselves and He wants that privilege for Himself only. You don’t need God tellin you what to think and what to do and what to eat. Don’t you have free will? Can’t you make decisions for yourselves?”. THAT was in essence the deception. The fruit was an incidental vehicle.

The moment Adam bought into the idea that he could operate any part of himself independent of the all governing will of God it was over. Even tough the whole episode itself was dependent on the all governing will of God which is the point. They already had all the freedom and liberty they were designed for in the fact that they were living in complete blissful fellowship and dependence upon God for absolutely everything. Their quest for freedom and independence brought them the opposite. Death and slavery to sin.

To this day people, even Christian people are grasping for the very thing the serpent deceived Eve with. Freedom from God’s all governing hand. The power of the blood and resurrection of Christ is for the exact purpose of re-freeing us the live in utter willful dependence on the only certainty possible which resides in the mind of our creator. This is accomplished by the indwelling presence of God Himself in the promise of the Holy Spirit. Instead, people claiming His name spend vast amounts of time energy proclaiming their own autonomy instead of HIS incomprehensible omnipotent providence over all that is.

Once again. If even one sub atomic particle (or sparrow falling to the ground) moves without Him? He is not the God who reveals Himself in the ancient Christian scriptures.

[/quote]

So, is God incapable of allowing man the ability to determine his own fate? Or does He choose not to?

211

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Pelagius who Augustine quite rightly stifled.

The notion of AUTONOMOUS free will whereby finite dependent creatures are said to reach conclusions and execute decisions in independence from the governing will of the creator God originated in the garden of Eden. “Did God really say… and even if He did, God wants to keep you subservient to His tyrannical will. He knows if you eat from that tree you’ll be like Him, able to discern reality for yourselves and He wants that privilege for Himself only. You don’t need God tellin you what to think and what to do and what to eat. Don’t you have free will? Can’t you make decisions for yourselves?”. THAT was in essence the deception. The fruit was an incidental vehicle.

The moment Adam bought into the idea that he could operate any part of himself independent of the all governing will of God it was over. Even tough the whole episode itself was dependent on the all governing will of God which is the point. They already had all the freedom and liberty they were designed for in the fact that they were living in complete blissful fellowship and dependence upon God for absolutely everything. Their quest for freedom and independence brought them the opposite. Death and slavery to sin.

To this day people, even Christian people are grasping for the very thing the serpent deceived Eve with. Freedom from God’s all governing hand. The power of the blood and resurrection of Christ is for the exact purpose of re-freeing us the live in utter willful dependence on the only certainty possible which resides in the mind of our creator. This is accomplished by the indwelling presence of God Himself in the promise of the Holy Spirit. Instead, people claiming His name spend vast amounts of time energy proclaiming their own autonomy instead of HIS incomprehensible omnipotent providence over all that is.

Once again. If even one sub atomic particle (or sparrow falling to the ground) moves without Him? He is not the God who reveals Himself in the ancient Christian scriptures.

[/quote]

So, is God incapable of allowing man the ability to determine his own fate? Or does He choose not to?
[/quote]

He is essentially saying that God made him sin, but Adam is still culpable. No it doesn’t make sense. Yes it is incorrect…
How does he reconcile the conflict? Our tiny minds can’t understand God’s infinite mind so “shut up stupid”.

212

[quote]rambodian wrote:
What is free will? Hmmm, First one must define the concept of what free will is, second one must establish how to apply it to ones introspect.

I define free will as ones own ability to choose, because;

I apply it to myself by allowing myself to decide upon my own choices.
I am governed by the laws of physics that help me define my own free choices.
I have ultimately made a choice that is governed by possibility, and thus have chosen.

So free will is introspective choices. That’s my take on it.[/quote]

And that is 100% correct. That’s what freewill is, not only to be able to choose, but to have been equally able to choose otherwise.

213

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Pelagius who Augustine quite rightly stifled.

The notion of AUTONOMOUS free will whereby finite dependent creatures are said to reach conclusions and execute decisions in independence from the governing will of the creator God originated in the garden of Eden. "Did God really say… and even if He did, God wants to keep you subservient to His tyrannical will.

He knows if you eat from that tree you’ll be like Him, able to discern reality for yourselves and He wants that privilege for Himself only. You don’t need God tellin you what to think and what to do and what to eat. Don’t you have free will? Can’t you make decisions for yourselves?". THAT was in essence the deception. The fruit was an incidental vehicle.

The moment Adam bought into the idea that he could operate any part of himself independent of the all governing will of God it was over. Even tough the whole episode itself was dependent on the all governing will of God which is the point. They already had all the freedom and liberty they were designed for in the fact that they were living in complete blissful fellowship and dependence upon God for absolutely everything. Their quest for freedom and independence brought them the opposite. Death and slavery to sin.

To this day people, even Christian people are grasping for the very thing the serpent deceived Eve with. Freedom from God’s all governing hand. The power of the blood and resurrection of Christ is for the exact purpose of re-freeing us the live in utter willful dependence on the only certainty possible which resides in the mind of our creator. This is accomplished by the indwelling presence of God Himself in the promise of the Holy Spirit. Instead, people claiming His name spend vast amounts of time energy proclaiming their own autonomy instead of HIS incomprehensible omnipotent providence over all that is.

Once again. If even one sub atomic particle (or sparrow falling to the ground) moves without Him? He is not the God who reveals Himself in the ancient Christian scriptures.

[/quote]

Out of curiosity, do you believe Adam and Eve would have had children in the Garden of Eden? Or was the fall necessary for mankind to exist?

214

[quote]pat wrote:<<< He is essentially saying that God rendered sin certain without in any way being responsible for it, but Adam is still culpable. No it doesn’t make sense to finite autonomous man, but is nevertheless absolutely biblical…
How does Paul reconcile the conflict? He doesn’t try. He simply says in essence our tiny minds can’t understand God’s infinite mind so “shut up creature”. [/quote]Fixed all that for ya Pat. You’re welcome =]

Great question Cortes which is the one Elder Forlife has thrown out a couple times. (Yes, I do pay attention when people speak). I have the content in my mind, but articulating it properly will be a work of semantic precision that I have not had the time to properly work on. Not that it’s necessarily SOOPER complicated, but it is pressing into the mysteries of God and I want to get it as right as I’m capable of. It is absolutely tied inextricably in with epistemology.

215

I was going to speak on behalf of free will, but now as I sit here I find myself literally unable. Obviously, I will need to reconsider my stance and get back to you all. Unless I can’t…

216

HEY GUYS I HAVE THE ANSWER ON WHETHER OR NOT FREE WILL IS REAL…

YOU HAVE THE FREE WILL TO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME INTELLECTUALLY MASTURBATING OVER A CIRCULAR CHICKEN OR THE EGG ARGUMENT FOR THE NEXT THREE WEEKS!

THIS IS THE DUMBEST THREAD EVER?

HOW MANY ANGELS CAN STAND ON THE HEAD OF A PIN?

217

[quote]Rohnyn wrote:

THIS IS THE DUMBEST THREAD EVER?
[/quote]

Well, there was a thread the dealt with something about speaking spanish in the US. You’ve seriously got to check that one out. You will literally fall out of your chair laughing. I don’t remember the title or the name of the poster, but dig around in search for a bit.

218

[quote]forlife wrote:<<< Out of curiosity, do you believe Adam and Eve would have had children in the Garden of Eden? >>>[/quote]Absolutely yes. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< Or was the fall necessary for mankind to exist?
[/quote]Absolutely not. Except that in the providence of God man fell before children (which leads me to believe they weren’t there long, another topic altogether).

219

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I was going to speak on behalf of free will, but now as I sit here I find myself literally unable. Obviously, I will need to reconsider my stance and get back to you all. Unless I can’t…[/quote]

Having exactly this happen to me a couple of times was what led me to starting this thread in the first place.

220

[quote]Rohnyn wrote:
HEY GUYS I HAVE THE ANSWER ON WHETHER OR NOT FREE WILL IS REAL…

YOU HAVE THE FREE WILL TO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME INTELLECTUALLY MASTURBATING OVER A CIRCULAR CHICKEN OR THE EGG ARGUMENT FOR THE NEXT THREE WEEKS!

THIS IS THE DUMBEST THREAD EVER?

HOW MANY ANGELS CAN STAND ON THE HEAD OF A PIN?[/quote]

Are you drunk?