Free Will

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[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]
Free will of course originated with God. God created spirit beings in heaven long before he created man and these spirit beings were granted free moral agency, the privilege and responsibility of making a personal decision as to the course they will take.
When God said at Genesis 1:26 “let us make man in our image according to our likeness,” this means that man was created with qualities like those of God and the other spirit beings including love, wisdom, justice, power and free will. God didn’t create man like a machine that can perform only what it is designed or programmed to do. And he didn’t create us like animals that are primarily guided by instinct. Instead we can make personal decisions and choose between doing right and wrong. I’ll discuss the second question in another reply.

[/quote]

My problem with this line of reasoning is that it dodges the real question. If god is 100% responsible for creating us, including our values, self-control, desires, etc. then how can any decision we make not be the direct result of god?[/quote]

In a similar vein that not every decision I made was a direct result of my parents conception and upbringing of me.

At some point I took ownership of my own life and will and became a person in my own right.

102

Incidentally, I recall asking Tiribulus to explain his belief that god chooses to save some people, and chooses to send the rest to eternal suffering, in the context of 2 Peter 3:9.

He didn’t answer then, but maybe now?

103

[quote]Alpha F wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[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]
Free will of course originated with God. God created spirit beings in heaven long before he created man and these spirit beings were granted free moral agency, the privilege and responsibility of making a personal decision as to the course they will take.
When God said at Genesis 1:26 “let us make man in our image according to our likeness,” this means that man was created with qualities like those of God and the other spirit beings including love, wisdom, justice, power and free will. God didn’t create man like a machine that can perform only what it is designed or programmed to do. And he didn’t create us like animals that are primarily guided by instinct. Instead we can make personal decisions and choose between doing right and wrong. I’ll discuss the second question in another reply.

[/quote]

My problem with this line of reasoning is that it dodges the real question. If god is 100% responsible for creating us, including our values, self-control, desires, etc. then how can any decision we make not be the direct result of god?[/quote]

In a similar vein that not every decision I made was a direct result of my parents conception and upbringing of me.

At some point I took ownership of my own life and will and became a person in my own right.[/quote]

If YOU are nothing more than the product of your genetics and environment, there’s no such thing as free will. How could there be, if your will is 100% created by external forces?

104

[quote]forlife wrote:
Pat, what does being able to cause have to do with being an autonomous agent? Autonomy means independence of action, and has nothing to do with whether or not those actions affect other things.[/quote]

I know what it means, and your still wrong.

105

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:
Pat, what does being able to cause have to do with being an autonomous agent? Autonomy means independence of action, and has nothing to do with whether or not those actions affect other things.[/quote]

I know what it means, and your still wrong.[/quote]

Apparently you don’t, since the ability to choose has zilch to do with whether or not those choices affect anything else.

106

[quote]forlife wrote:
Mse2us, I appreciate your post. Your answer seems to be that god is benevolent, so he couldn’t possibly be omniscient and omnipotent. I agree they’re incompatible, but am surprised you believe this.

If god chooses not to know everything, he is by definition not omniscient.
[/quote]
Having it and using it are two different things. If I am naturally a talented basketball player, but I choose to be an accountant, it does not mean I am not a naturally talented basketball player…I just chose not to use it.

If I can shoot lightning bolts out of my asshole and I chose not to does not mean I cannot shoot lightening bolts out of my asshole. I just chose not to.

[quote]
So just to confirm: you believe god is neither omniscient nor omnipotent?[/quote]

Wouldn’t omnipotence be able to over come the inherent problems of omniscience?

107

[quote]forlife wrote:

If YOU are nothing more than the product of your genetics and environment, there’s no such thing as free will. How could there be, if your will is 100% created by external forces?[/quote]

This has not been my experience.

My will is 100% internal, pure, FORCE.

It is at my inner sanctum; a fortress that no one can break or enter without my permission.

My freedom to will is a product of my genetic code.
I can use it to self-regenerate and I can use it to self-destruct.
I can use it to build others or use it to destroy others.

Somewhere in my psyche I know that I am and I know that I can and therefore I know that I will.

Access that part of you that lets you know and experience yourself as a force of nature.

The part that is independent of your father, independent of your mother, independent of your environment.

That is your ID.

108

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[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]
Free will of course originated with God. God created spirit beings in heaven long before he created man and these spirit beings were granted free moral agency, the privilege and responsibility of making a personal decision as to the course they will take.
When God said at Genesis 1:26 “let us make man in our image according to our likeness,” this means that man was created with qualities like those of God and the other spirit beings including love, wisdom, justice, power and free will. God didn’t create man like a machine that can perform only what it is designed or programmed to do. And he didn’t create us like animals that are primarily guided by instinct. Instead we can make personal decisions and choose between doing right and wrong. I’ll discuss the second question in another reply.

[/quote]

My problem with this line of reasoning is that it dodges the real question. If god is 100% responsible for creating us, including our values, self-control, desires, etc. then how can any decision we make not be the direct result of god?[/quote]
God is 100% responsible for creating us and we are made in his image meaning we can imitate most of the qualities that God has. Free will enables us to have values, self-control and desires but God is not responsible for how one chooses to use those values, self-control and desires. Animals, who don’t have free will, don’t have values, self-control and desires. Instinct drives them to act. Animals don’t think and do things such as weigh the positives verses the negatives or try to think about the result of their actions. Free will that God has given to spirit beings and humans allows them to develop values, desires and self-control and think and decide for themselves. Just because God is 100% responsible for creating us does not mean God is responsible for the value and desires that we develop and how we choose to use self-control. Are parents responsible for the acts that their children commit? Even if a parent neglects or abuses a child and due to that neglect and abuse causes the child to be a bad person. If this child commits a crime, the child is held responsible not the parent.

If you look at the examples in the Bible there are many scriptures where God is actually pleading with his people to to turn around from bad. I’ll list several:

Proverbs 1:23: “Turn back at my reproof. Then to you I will cause my spirit to bubble forth; I will make my words known to you.”

Isaiah 55:7: “Let the wicked man leave his way, and the harmful man his thoughts; and let him return to Jehovah, who will have mercy upon him, and to our God, for he will forgive in a large way.”

Jeremiah 3:22 “Return, you renegade sons. I shall heal your renegade condition.” “Here we are! We have come to you, for you, O Jehovah, are our God.”

Jeremiah 25:5: “they saying, 'Turn back, please, every one from his bad way and from the badness of your dealings, and continue dwelling upon the ground that Jehovah gave to you and to your forefathers from long ago and to a long time to come.”

Ezekiel 14:6: "Therefore say to the house of Israel, 'This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: "Come back and turn yourselves back from your dungy idols and turn your faces back even from all your detestable things;

If God was responsible, already knew and predestined the outcome of the wicked, why would he plead for the Israelites who were doing bad to come back to him? Those passages are sincere request from God. He would request that his people repent if he already determined and knew who would repent and turn around from bad and who would not.

109

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:
Mse2us, I appreciate your post. Your answer seems to be that god is benevolent, so he couldn’t possibly be omniscient and omnipotent. I agree they’re incompatible, but am surprised you believe this.

If god chooses not to know everything, he is by definition not omniscient.
[/quote]
Having it and using it are two different things. If I am naturally a talented basketball player, but I choose to be an accountant, it does not mean I am not a naturally talented basketball player…I just chose not to use it.

If I can shoot lightning bolts out of my asshole and I chose not to does not mean I cannot shoot lightening bolts out of my asshole. I just chose not to.

[quote]
So just to confirm: you believe god is neither omniscient nor omnipotent?[/quote]

Wouldn’t omnipotence be able to over come the inherent problems of omniscience?[/quote]

Having the potential to know everything is different from actually knowing everything.

Omniscience is actually knowing everything. Unless you know everything, you’re not omniscient.

110

[quote]Alpha F wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

If YOU are nothing more than the product of your genetics and environment, there’s no such thing as free will. How could there be, if your will is 100% created by external forces?[/quote]

This has not been my experience.

My will is 100% internal, pure, FORCE.

It is at my inner sanctum; a fortress that no one can break or enter without my permission.

My freedom to will is a product of my genetic code.
I can use it to self-regenerate and I can use it to self-destruct.
I can use it to build others or use it to destroy others.

Somewhere in my psyche I know that I am and I know that I can and therefore I know that I will.

Access that part of you that lets you know and experience yourself as a force of nature.

The part that is independent of your father, independent of your mother, independent of your environment.

That is your ID.
[/quote]

If your will is 100% internal, where did it come from?

111

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[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]
Free will of course originated with God. God created spirit beings in heaven long before he created man and these spirit beings were granted free moral agency, the privilege and responsibility of making a personal decision as to the course they will take.
When God said at Genesis 1:26 “let us make man in our image according to our likeness,” this means that man was created with qualities like those of God and the other spirit beings including love, wisdom, justice, power and free will. God didn’t create man like a machine that can perform only what it is designed or programmed to do. And he didn’t create us like animals that are primarily guided by instinct. Instead we can make personal decisions and choose between doing right and wrong. I’ll discuss the second question in another reply.

[/quote]

My problem with this line of reasoning is that it dodges the real question. If god is 100% responsible for creating us, including our values, self-control, desires, etc. then how can any decision we make not be the direct result of god?[/quote]
God is 100% responsible for creating us and we are made in his image meaning we can imitate most of the qualities that God has. Free will enables us to have values, self-control and desires but God is not responsible for how one chooses to use those values, self-control and desires. Animals, who don’t have free will, don’t have values, self-control and desires. Instinct drives them to act. Animals don’t think and do things such as weigh the positives verses the negatives or try to think about the result of their actions. Free will that God has given to spirit beings and humans allows them to develop values, desires and self-control and think and decide for themselves. Just because God is 100% responsible for creating us does not mean God is responsible for the value and desires that we develop and how we choose to use self-control. Are parents responsible for the acts that their children commit? Even if a parent neglects or abuses a child and due to that neglect and abuse causes the child to be a bad person. If this child commits a crime, the child is held responsible not the parent.

If you look at the examples in the Bible there are many scriptures where God is actually pleading with his people to to turn around from bad. I’ll list several:

Proverbs 1:23: “Turn back at my reproof. Then to you I will cause my spirit to bubble forth; I will make my words known to you.”

Isaiah 55:7: “Let the wicked man leave his way, and the harmful man his thoughts; and let him return to Jehovah, who will have mercy upon him, and to our God, for he will forgive in a large way.”

Jeremiah 3:22 “Return, you renegade sons. I shall heal your renegade condition.” “Here we are! We have come to you, for you, O Jehovah, are our God.”

Jeremiah 25:5: “they saying, 'Turn back, please, every one from his bad way and from the badness of your dealings, and continue dwelling upon the ground that Jehovah gave to you and to your forefathers from long ago and to a long time to come.”

Ezekiel 14:6: "Therefore say to the house of Israel, 'This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said: "Come back and turn yourselves back from your dungy idols and turn your faces back even from all your detestable things;

If God was responsible, already knew and predestined the outcome of the wicked, why would he plead for the Israelites who were doing bad to come back to him? Those passages are sincere request from God. He would request that his people repent if he already determined and knew who would repent and turn around from bad and who would not.
[/quote]

Where do our values, self-control, and desires come from? Where does the will itself come from?

112

I submit the following:

By the venerated Prog Rock band RUSH - Free Will

There are those who think that life has nothing left to chance,
A host of holy horrors to direct our aimless dance.

A planet of playthings,
We dance on the strings
Of powers we cannot perceive
“The stars aren’t aligned,
Or the gods are malign…”
Blame is better to give than receive.

Chorus
You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice.
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill;
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose freewill.

There are those who think that they were dealt a losing hand,
The cards were stacked against them; they weren’t born in Lotusland.

All preordained
A prisoner in chains
A victim of venomous fate.
Kicked in the face,
You can’t pray for a place
In heaven’s unearthly estate.

Chorus

Each of us
A cell of awareness
Imperfect and incomplete.
Genetic blends
With uncertain ends
On a fortune hunt that’s far too fleet.

Chorus

113

[quote]pat wrote:<<< least likely scenario >>>[/quote]Contingent beings are subject to “likelihood” Pat. That’s Aquinas’s currency. I (and God) deal only in sovereign certainty. His.

[quote]forlife wrote:
Incidentally, I recall asking Tiribulus to explain his belief that god chooses to save some people, and chooses to send the rest to eternal suffering, in the context of 2 Peter 3:9.

He didn’t answer then, but maybe now?[/quote]And give up having you keep firing your biblical spitballs at me? Nadda chance.

@Cortes: Didn’t forget about ya buddy. You can see how this goes. I am the lone ranger for the gospel of the reformation (recovery is how I like to refer to it) here. I have no allies and 10 questions a day. I do my best to keep up, but you have a special spot in my line.

@Vires Eternus: Please go back in this thread a couple pages.

114

[quote]Cortes wrote:<<< Certainly. Faith is so strongly emphasized throughout the gospels that it almost seems it could be described as a “work.” :wink: >>>[/quote]If it originated from us I would agree, but I’m getting ahead of myself [quote]Cortes wrote:<<< Maybe you want to take the fork in the road with the words “the decision to believe” instead? >>>[/quote]This is closer. In light of the unmistakable message from the passages I quoted (you’re obviously welcome to look them up), that being that before the foundation of the world in the mind of the eternal God His Lamb was already slain, foreordained as the sacrifice and Paul telling us this in the 1st of Ephesians (larger quote this time) Please read the whole thing. ESV, Catholic approved translation.

[b]3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.[/b]

Now who’s ultimate choice was it that somebody believed?

115

Cut and pasted from another thread:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:<<< Could I choose to believe? Or wouldn’t I have to be elected?[/quote]If you are one of the elect in Christ you WILL choose to believe because He will make you alive, freeing your will from slavery to your flesh and draw you to Himself. You will do it humbly, willingly and joyously. This is seen everywhere in the bible when God is allowed to be God.

If you do choose to believe you ARE one of the elect in Christ because dead men can’t raise themselves and Jesus Himself said that no one CAN come to Him unless the Father draw Him.

If God were to wait for the spiritually dead to choose Him Christ died for nothing.
[/quote]

If I’m possibly understanding what you are implying (stating), and combine it with the idea of “foreknow” that you talked about earlier, along with a few notions of my own, then I almost get the idea that you and the Catholics may not be talking about such different conditions.

If what I’m thinking is true, then perhaps there has been a lot of undue understanding between the two of our groups. The reason I feel I’m wrong is actually because of just how much disagreement there has been, though. At this point I have a hard time believing we could have been talking about the same thing, and if we had that it could have been cleared up with just a bit of plain speaking. I’ll just cut and paste this over there so that we don’t have two threads about the same thing going on. Capped you are welcome to respond there, too, though I doubt you were looking to go down the Catholic/Protestant road in this discussion.

EDIT: Read to the bottom of my group of posts before responding, please.

116

[quote]pat wrote:

[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?
    [/quote]
    Originate? In a temporal sense it didn’t, it has always existed as it is a metaphysical entity. Running regression on it in a contingency line, as everything it originated with the Uncaused-cause. But freewill’s contingency lies with consciousness.
    But I don’t know really.
    Unless you are asking from a religious perspective then I can propose that the ultimate conscious being, God created itâ?¦

I see no paradox at all. Material determinism requires physical existence. Freewill, not having a physical countenance, is not bound by the rules and laws that govern physical matter. Choice is the master of freewill, not matter or physical laws.

Very happy to have you join this discussion, Pat, you were one of the posters I sincerely hoped would drop by.

Really good stuff here. I’m still digesting much of it. I’ve tried responding twice now and kept deleting and retyping and finally figured out that I need to let what you’ve said set in a bit before trying to work with it.

In the meantime, would you mind explaining your answer to question 2 just a bit further?

117

[quote]mse2us wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:
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]

Your second question will take a lot longer to answer. Many people believe that God is omniscient meaning that he is all-knowing and that he foresees and foreknows all future actions of all his creatures, spirit and human. This belief advocates reason that God’s divinity and perfection require that he be omniscient, not only respecting the past and present but also regarding the future. According to this concept, for him not to foreknow all matters in their minutest detail would be evidence of imperfection. And that he even foreordains such actions or even predestinate what shall be the final destiny of all his creatures, even doing so before they have come into existence.
Let’s think about this for a second and the implications of these views.

First, the omniscient view.
This concept would mean that, prior to creating angels or man, God exercised his powers of foreknowledge and foresaw and foreknew all that would result from such creation, including the rebellion of one of his spirit sons, the subsequent rebellion of the first human pair in Eden, and all the bad consequences of such rebellion down to and beyond this present day. This would necessarily mean that all the wickedness that history has recorded (the crime and immorality, oppression and resultant suffering, lying and hypocrisy, false worship and idolatry) once existed, before creation’s beginning, only in the mind of God, in the form of his foreknowledge of the future in all of its minutest details. If the Creator of mankind had really exercised his power to foreknow all that history has seen since man’s creation, then the full weight of all the wickedness thereafter resulting was deliberately set in motion by God when he spoke the words: “Let us make man.” Does that sound reasonable? This goes completely against what James states at James 3:14-18 which states:
“But if you have bitter jealousy and contentiousness in your hearts, do not be bragging and lying against the truth. 15 This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is the earthly, animal, demonic. 16 For where jealousy and contentiousness are, there disorder and every vile thing are. 17 But the wisdom from above is first of all chaste, then peaceable, reasonable, ready to obey, full of mercy and good fruits, not making partial distinctions, not hypocritical. 18 Moreover, the fruit of righteousness has its seed sown under peaceful conditions for those who are making peace.”

The predestination or foreordain view:
This concept states that God has predetermined and set ones life course from eternity in such a way that an individual cannot alter or change it. Meaning that every choice a person makes has already been determined by God. So that means that if a person turns out to be bad or wicked this person’s life course was determined by God before that person was even born. And yet God will still hold this individual accountable, judge and even punish this person for something that he had no control over. So that would mean that the bad life course that billions have taken throughout history was actually caused by God and the adverse judgment that they receive was determined by God long before they were even born. Does that sound reasonable? Does that make sense? Is this just? Absolutely not! This goes against God’s very nature. One of God’s main attributes is justice. Psalms 33:5 states that God is “a lover of righteousness and justice.” The fact that God stuck to his own standard of justice regarding the redemption of mankind by means of his son shows that God has a perfect sense of justice. Deuteronomy 19:21 states: “Soul will be for a Soul.” So in order to replace Adam and cover the perfect human soul or life that Adam lost, another perfect human life that corresponded in value with Adam was needed. The fact that God stuck to this at great cost to himself shows how much justice means to him.

The fact that God gives warnings and guidance all throughout the Bible shows that God has not predestined ones life path before that person was born and that he does not choose to know the outcome of every individual born. Below are some scriptures that support this.
Ezekiel 33:11 states:
"11 Say to them, ‘“As I am alive,” is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, “I take delight, not in the death of the wicked one, but in that someone wicked turns back from his way and actually keeps living. Turn back, turn back from your bad ways, for why is it that you should die, O house of Israel?”’
How sincere would that statement be if God already knew who would turn back from bad? Instead God sincerely urges all to turn back from bad and keep living as he did with the Israelites.
Logically, he could not do this if he foreknew or predestined that they were individually destined to die in wickedness.

2 Peter 3:9
“Jehovah is not slow respecting his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.”

If God already foreknew and foreordained millenniums in advance precisely which individuals would receive eternal salvation and which individuals would receive eternal destruction, then how meaningful would such ‘patience’ of God be and how genuine would his desire be that ‘all attain to repentance.’

Also, the concept of predestination would mean that all of the heinous acts that have been committed throughout history would have been a direct result of God predetermining ones life course. So that would me that when a little girl is kidnapped, raped and killed by a predator that girls destiny which is death at the hands of predator was determined by God long before the girl was born. That would also mean that the acts of Hitler and Stalin and the result of their acts on the millions of victims was predetermined by God. Again, does that make sense? Does that sound like a God of love? Absolutely not! The only thing this belief does is slander God and attribute all the bad things that happens to God.

According to the Bible God has the power to foreknow future events but he doesn’t always choose to exercise or use this power. For example, God knew that regarding Isaac’s twin sons Esau and Jacob, that Jacob would inherit the birth right which should have been Esau’s since he was born first. God also foreknew that a Persian named Cyrus would be the one to conquer Babylon and then eventually free the Jews in 537/36 B.C.E. But there are also instances in the Bible that points to an examination by God of a current situation and a decision made on the basis of that examination. At Genesis 11:5-8 God is described as directing his attention earthward, surveying the situation at Babel, and, at that time, determining the action to be taken to break up the unrighteous project there. After wickedness developed at Sodom and Gomorrah as recorded at Genesis 18:20-22, 19:1, Jehovah advised Abraham of his decision to investigate (by means of his angels) to “see whether they act altogether according to the outcry over it that has come to me, and, if not, I can get to know it.” At Genesis 18:19, 22:11,12, God spoke of ‘becoming acquainted with Abraham,’ and after Abraham went to the point of attempting to sacrifice Isaac, Jehovah said, “For now I do know that you are God-fearing in that you have not withheld your son, your only one, from me.”

I could go on and on but since this is very long I’ll close with this thought. The prospect of everlasting life is presented in the Bible as a goal for all people, something that is attainable. To offer something so desirable to another person on conditions known beforehand to be unreachable is both hypocritical and cruel. After urging his listeners to ‘keep on asking and seeking’ good things from God, Jesus pointed out that a father does not give a stone or a serpent to his child that asks for bread or a fish. Showing his Father’s view of disappointing the legitimate hopes of a person, Jesus then said: “Therefore, if you, although being wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those asking him.”

The teaching of God using his omnipotence all the time and that he predetermines one’s life course is not a Bible teaching. This belief slanders God and attributes all the bad things that happened throughout history to him. This false teaching is one of the reasons people are turned off by God.[/quote]

Hey thanks a ton for taking all your work with this posts, mse2us. I appreciate your going into such detail because my brain tends to grasp concepts concretely presented far easier than when they are done so abstractly. I feel like I get exactly what you are saying here, and I cannot find anything that I disagree with. Indeed, this is pretty much what I’ve always felt in my gut, but had never deeply examined.

Guess Catholics and Jehova’s Witnesses are not 100% polarized. :wink:

Tirib, at the risk of muddying up our own discussion, would you agree with what is written here?

EDIT: This and all prior posts showed up before yours did above. I am just reading it now, and will not be able to respond until tomorrow, probably.

118

[quote]Cortes wrote:<<< Tirib, at the risk of muddying up our own discussion, would you agree with what is written here? >>>[/quote]Absolutely not. There is a hermeneutics issue here I went over a while back that I’ll see if I can find. If not I’ll type it again as soon as I can. In short? God interprets man and not vice versa. What this guy just said is a classic example of forcing God into conformity to man. The absolute theocentric God statements of the bible govern the contingent anthrocentric man statements, never the other way around.

Example: It is crystal clear that the Word of God says that God predestines and is in control of everything. I can post a wall demonstrating that very thing. Old and new testament. That is an absolute statement of eternal divine truth that governs all else we may find. So when a passage is found that seemingly states that God wants everybody to be saved for instance, we already know that whatever that means the absolute description of God we already have cannot be compromised. Every statement describing man is seen in the light of what we assume beforehand about God from what we’ve seen the bible say about Him.

The alternative is to make the man centered statements and hence man Himself interpret God. That is “No matter what it says God cannot predestine because of what some passage says about man”. I reject that. I reject it with my whole heart and mind while there’s breath in my lungs and light in my eyes. God interprets EVERYTHING and especially man. Not the other way around.

119

I find any assertion involving god to be unsupportable, or at least a position which cannot be influenced by rational argumentation when looked at from a broader perspective. The main problem with all theological arguments is that they presume a certain framework, namely the presence of a god, or gods.

However, if one does not subscribe to that framework, there can be no logical argument as the presence or non-presence of a god is a matter of belief. Therefore, arguing about free will in the theological context between people who do not share the same basic belief structure is basically pointless. It boils down to whether one believes or not; there is no rational argument.

joyfull_beast said:

[quote]
First, “free will” is one of most vague concepts in all of philosophy (along with “possibility”). It has no intrinsic importance; it’s talked about because it’s thought that free will is necessary for moral responsibility. So I’ll just talk directly about MR.

Second, it’s not conceptually coherent (not possible) for anyone to be morally responsible. Here’s a non-technical argument that gives the intuitive thrust of why:

  1. You do what you do, in any given situation, because of the way you are.

  2. So in order to be ultimately responsible for what you do, you have to be ultimately responsible for the way you are â?? at least in certain crucial mental respects.

  3. But you cannot be ultimately responsible for the way you are in any respect at all.

  4. So you cannot be ultimately responsible for what you do

3 is true because the way you are is totally a result of your nature and nurture. no need to decide the exact contribution of each (nature vs nurture debate), just to realize that the way you are is a result of their sum total.

Another argument:
To be responsible for how you are now, there must have been an earlier you who is responsible for the way you are now. But for that earlier you to be responsible, there must be an even earlier you that is responsible for the earlier you that is responsible for how you are now, etc. This is an infinite regress which can’t happen for someone that hasn’t existed forever. [/quote]

This argument is based on the premise that you cannot think. We have logic and reasoning ability. We have the ability to choose from a variety of responses. You have to have lived in a bubble if there’s never been a situation in which you DOUBTED yourself and what you should do. If every action was simply the result of “the way you are” then there would be no doubt, and no choice.

120

[quote]talldude wrote:<<< , arguing about free will in the theological context between people who do not share the same basic belief structure is basically pointless. >>>[/quote]UNBELIEVABLE! Here kids we have a self proclaimed unbeliever who has the best grasp I’ve seen yet of anybody here (aside from myself of course =] ) of exactly why epistemology is paramount. If only more of the Christians of the world understood what this guy just said. This man just explained my long post on the first page of this thread.