Christianity and free will

[98cwitr]

I don't believe in free will. I believe free will is nothing more than a perception...an illusion. To say we have libertarian free will you must either deny God's Omniscience, or that He is the Creator. Your call....the truth of the matter is that we are governed by our nature.

 

[bling]

There has to be a reason for why someone would choose something while another person something else entirely, however. Even the devil. God created everything, so as part of free will, he must have created the possibility to choose wrongly. So why was it Lucifer, and not any of the other angels that chose to disobey God? Was it random chance? Was it something in his past the Bible does not mention? Is it some spark that God planted in him, but not the others? (Thought that would defeat the purpose of free will).

a third of the angels went on to follow satan.

 

[bling]

So the person who used their free will to choose God, and the other who used their free will to reject God, what's the difference between them? Is the one who chose God somehow a better person than the one who rejected God? How did the one who chose God overcome the hardness of his own heart, and his own love of darkness, to come to a love of God? And why didn't the one who rejected God do the same things? Is one more righteous than the other, or are we all born into sin?

Not at all! If one person “loved the light and did good deeds over another he could “deserve” some reward, as you might say “worked” to gain salvation.

The fact is the one that “accepts” the invitation really wimped out/ gave up/surrendered and is worthy of nothing. If the nonbeliever was really “strong”/ macho he would have fought on fully taking the “punishment” he fully deserved and paid the piper. The nonbeliever has really taken advantage of his Loving Father, so as a last act of “being respectful” to his Father he should just leave His Father alone, not disturb Him further and certainly not ask his father for something else he totally does not deserve.

The father is calling them all, but what can a rebellious disobedient child expect, who has been fighting against his own Father? Even if he surrenders he should be put to death for his war crimes.

Surrendering to the Father is done for selfish reasons (to possible have some type of life [although fully undeserved]) so they are deserving of nothing.

What worthy commendable “thing” did the prodigal son do?

 

[RDKirk]

a third of the angels went on to follow satan.

I'm not sure they weren't asked to volunteer.

I would not argue that Satan rebelled, but I'm not sure the traditional teaching of when he rebelled is accurate. The traditional teaching is that Satan rebelled prior to creation--primarily because of his deception of Eve in Eden. But his appearances in Job and in Kings in Chronicles appearing in Heaven and taking assignments from God makes that a very odd "rebellion."

Rather, in Revelation 12 we see a genuine rebellion with the result being what we'd expect: Satan no longer has any place in heaven. The timing earmarks given for that rebellion place it at the time of Jesus on earth or slightly afterward.

My suspicion, then, is that Satan and his angels still had a fealty relationship with God, but as an adversary to man--a role assigned to him. I think the actual rebellion occurred when Jesus became man and entered the realm that Satan presumed he had been given.

 

[98cwitr]

I'm not sure they weren't asked to volunteer.

I would not argue that Satan rebelled, but I'm not sure the traditional teaching of when he rebelled is accurate. The traditional teaching is that Satan rebelled prior to creation--primarily because of his deception of Eve in Eden. But his appearances in Job and in Kings in Chronicles appearing in Heaven and taking assignments from God makes that a very odd "rebellion."

Rather, in Revelation 12 we see a genuine rebellion with the result being what we'd expect: Satan no longer has any place in heaven. The timing earmarks given for that rebellion place it at the time of Jesus on earth or slightly afterward.

My suspicion, then, is that Satan and his angels still had a fealty relationship with God, but as an adversary to man--a role assigned to him. I think the actual rebellion occurred when Jesus became man and entered the realm that Satan presumed he had been given.

I think this sort of understanding would begin to address the answer as to why an Omniscient God would create satan in the first place.

 

[bling]

I'm not sure they weren't asked to volunteer.

I would not argue that Satan rebelled, but I'm not sure the traditional teaching of when he rebelled is accurate. The traditional teaching is that Satan rebelled prior to creation--primarily because of his deception of Eve in Eden. But his appearances in Job and in Kings in Chronicles appearing in Heaven and taking assignments from God makes that a very odd "rebellion."

Rather, in Revelation 12 we see a genuine rebellion with the result being what we'd expect: Satan no longer has any place in heaven. The timing earmarks given for that rebellion place it at the time of Jesus on earth or slightly afterward.

My suspicion, then, is that Satan and his angels still had a fealty relationship with God, but as an adversary to man--a role assigned to him. I think the actual rebellion occurred when Jesus became man and entered the realm that Satan presumed he had been given.

Luke 10: 18 Jesus replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.

 

[RDKirk]

Luke 10: 18 Jesus replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.

In order to correlate that verse with a pre-creation Satanic rebellion, that's usually taught as Jesus speaking of His pre-incarnate experience.

Instead, Jesus may have been speaking of, say, that previous night. The Revelation 12 rebellion might have happened right then. Notice that in Revelation 12, it's Michael who leads the angels for God...where is Jesus? Maybe Jesus was on earth at the time. "...like lightning from heaven" implies an earth-based point of view.

 

[ScottA]

Why do I believe that free will is part of our lives, and part of Christianity?

To me the evidence is that both good and evil exists. Instead of us being God's empty vessels - His puppets - He gave us true souls and true free will. To me it looks like He valued free will more, but all the same He knew the price of free will as well.

So as Christians we are free... to choose God. And as non-Christians, something else. But that we chose God in our free will means that the choice will have significantly more value than just saying so as a slave of a master.

In my experience, this is also one of the major differences between Christianity and Islam. While God waits for the Christian "prodigal son" to finally return home, Muslims see as their strict duty to serve Allah.

Christianity is bittersweet that way. But so is life.

Free will only exists when you don't know the outcome.

So, then, the question becomes not a matter of "free will", but rather "what will", i.e. what will I do? But even that assumes that there is time for such a course of action - none of which actually works in the timeless realm of God. No, in the case of God, not having time to "will", there is no "free will" or "what will", but rather "I am."

Time, then, is the key component to "will"...which, of course, is simply created and passing away. All of which exists as an aside to the greater timeless reality of God: Time in a bottle, so to speak...or in this case, "will" in a bottle. None of which, of course, is free - but has been bought with a price.

Conclusion: If we have any part with God - with "I am" that is...then we "are" who we are, and we "will" be who we will be...and yet seem to be "free" to at least put feet to that will, and walk in it.

 

[sculleywr]

So the person who used their free will to choose God, and the other who used their free will to reject God, what's the difference between them? Is the one who chose God somehow a better person than the one who rejected God? How did the one who chose God overcome the hardness of his own heart, and his own love of darkness, to come to a love of God? And why didn't the one who rejected God do the same things? Is one more righteous than the other, or are we all born into sin?

TO reject God, one must reject that which God is, as well as what He desires. In reality, just as a person who is in agreement with the nature of who you are will like you upon meeting (striking it off on common ground), the person who is in line with the nature and will of God will not reject God upon meeting Him.

God already gave us ALL the ability to overcome our hardness, not by our own breaking the hardness, but by giving us the key to open the door for Him to come in.

St Irenaeus of Lyons, the Second Century missionary to the "barbarians" in what is now France, said this:

Man is Endowed with the Faculty of Distinguishing Good and Evil; So That, Without Compulsion, He Has the Power, by His Own Will and Choice, to Perform God’s Commandments, by Doing Which He Avoids the Evils Prepared for the Rebellious. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies Book IV Chapter XXXVII [37]-http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/freewill.html#freewill)

Choice is the inevitable result of knowledge. Man did not eat of the fruit of the knowledge of sin, but of the knowledge of good and evil. This tree existed for a very specific reason, though we know not exactly what. The reason we know this is it was part of God's Creation, which God Himself described as "very good". Because God is morally perfect, He is incapable of making something that is morally sinful, which means that tree had to be good. It is actually theorized in the early Church that had Adam and Eve persisted in the "fast" from the tree, God would eventually have allowed them to partake of the fruits thereof, for why else would He create it and place it in the garden that Adam and Eve were resident in. It's like the cake which mom tells you not to eat because it is saved for the party tonight.

But since man took of the tree without permission, he was infected with sin, and all men through Adam and Eve were infected with sin. The Creation of God had given itself to the enemy of God, and so Christ came to rescue ALL of His Creation, not just part, but all who will come, from the servitude into which we were sold. But this is the issue: Love does not force itself on another person. It is naturally known that if a man forces his girlfriend or wife into doing something, then he is not loving, but abusive. This is not something we need to ponder on. We know it within ourselves, and it is also commanded against in Scripture, so we know that it is sin to force someone against their will.

So we have to ask ourselves, would God commit the actions which He says are sin? Of course not! To even imply such would be pure and utter heresy! It would be unthinkable to say that God sins. And yet, if we are to believe the Hellenistic Fatalism which is the source of Calvinistic Predestination doctrine, then we must believe that God is a sinner.

 

[Anna the Seeker]

I see the relationship with God the same as relationship of parent with child.

Does a good father...

... love his child? Yes.
... want his child to love him back? Yes.
... want his child to find his own place in this world? Yes.
... accept that his child's life path is not what he originally thought? Depends.
... accept everything that his child might do? No.
... want to see his child after the child has done the adventures? Yes.

Father does accept the free will, but He also does have an idea of what's decent.

Didn't even Jesus say that we do have the right to call God as "abba", father?

 

[Jipsah]

But there is sufficient evidence in creation of God's existence and character--see Psalm 19.

And thus one, on that evidence and of their own Free Will, becomes a Muslim. Wonderful.

 

[Jipsah]

Love does not force itself on another person. It is naturally known that if a man forces his girlfriend or wife into doing something, then he is not loving, but abusive. This is not something we need to ponder on. We know it within ourselves, and it is also commanded against in Scripture, so we know that it is sin to force someone against their will.

Then be good enough to explain God forcing Balaam and Jonah and St. Paul and others to do as He bade them as opposed to what they wanted to do and what their Free Will was having them do. And please don't insult anyone's intelligence by saying that God didn't force them to obey. Jonah in particular tried his best to escape doing as he was bidden, and when he did finally obey, he did so grudgingly, and was pointedly displeased with the end results.

Yeah, we have Free Will, but all it's good for is making us freely choose to sin. Our Free Will, like the rest of us, is corrupt. Left to ourselves, it will lead us to destruction with terrible certainty, unless God intervenes to save us.

 

[Job8]

How can anyone freely choose something that he does not know or understand?

The answer is in Scripture (Rom 10:14,15). When the Gospel message goes out they will both know and understand. That is called the power of the Gospel unto salvation (Rom 1:16). And the Gospel must be preached to all nations before the coming of Christ:

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?
and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?
and how shall they hear without a preacher?
And how shall they preach, except they be sent?

as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

So my question is "How come that Christians who are seemingly conversant with Gospel truth fail to grasp these fundamentals?"

 

[Job8]

Yeah, we have Free Will, but all it's good for is making us freely choose to sin.

That is a clear misrepresentation, and once again the appropriate Scriptures have been ignored.

For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another, In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. (Rom 2:14-16).

 

[sculleywr]

Then be good enough to explain God forcing Balaam and Jonah and St. Paul and others to do as He bade them as opposed to what they wanted to do and what their Free Will was having them do. And please don't insult anyone's intelligence by saying that God didn't force them to obey. Jonah in particular tried his best to escape doing as he was bidden, and when he did finally obey, he did so grudgingly, and was pointedly displeased with the end results.

Yeah, we have Free Will, but all it's good for is making us freely choose to sin. Our Free Will, like the rest of us, is corrupt. Left to ourselves, it will lead us to destruction with terrible certainty, unless God intervenes to save us.

Did God open their brains up and rewire them? Did He open their programming up like a bunch of lines of code and change it? Or did He interact with them from external sources? God didn't puppet string Jonah and Paul and Balaam into obeying. He was coercive, but certainly not internally changing their will to match His. They changed their will. In the case of Paul, Paul thought that he WAS following God! He was so zealous about his actions because he truly believed that he was a righteous warrior for God. God revealed to him that he was deluded, clearing up the delusion. In the case of Jonah, Jonah let his discrimination against the Ninevites, in the end, still get the best of him. God did not prevent him from being who he truly was in the end. God was being a parent to Jonah who made sure the dishes got done, even though the child didn't want to do the dishes. But what He didn't do was tie strings to Jonah and make Jonah do what He wanted without any choice in the matter. Had Jonah stuck to his guns, God had plenty of other options to go to. And in the case of Balaam, God was the parent to a child that was being bullied, but whose parent was much more powerful than the bully or the bully's parent would ever be. God didn't make Balaam be nice to Israel by anything internal. In fact, God didn't directly effect Balaam at all. He effected Balaam's donkey. Like many bullies, Balaam was going to bully Israel because it seemed easy and simple, though his apparent inability to simply lie to the king he served bit him in the rear. I always asked myself why he had the scruples to attempt to curse Israel but was above lying and simply telling the king that he had cursed Israel.

Free will is not free will if it is not able to choose either good or evil. Let's examine each individual sin, though. Is there any one sin where the person who sins is not able to choose to do the right thing? For example, when a person steals, is he unable to choose simply not to steal that object? There isn't a single sin in which man is incapable of choosing the right path. This is evident in the way that sin works.

But what's worse is that if God programs people to sin, if He makes them incapable of avoiding sin, then He is the one responsible for their sin, just as the man who programs a computer virus is responsible for the damage that virus does. When a virus causes 1.8 billion dollars of damage to computers across the world, we don't blame the virus, which was just doing what it was created to do. We blame the virus maker. Well, in reality, sinners are just viruses created by God (because God formed them in the womb), if there is no truly free will in regards to sin.

 

[Jipsah]

That is a clear misrepresentation, and once again the appropriate Scriptures have been ignored.

Baloney.

 

[Jipsah]

He was coercive, but certainly not internally changing their will to match His. They changed their will.

Ah, so if I torture you into signing a confession, then you're actually doing it of your Free Will, right? That's what I'm hearing.

[In the case of Paul, Paul thought that he WAS following God!

As what heresiarch, or jihadist, or what have you, does not?

God revealed to him that he was deluded, clearing up the delusion.

By lovingly knocking him down, striking him blind and telling him to knock it off. Any why was St. Paul "kicking against the goads" if it was just his Free Will being adjusted? Ever hear the the phrase "dragged kicking and screaming"?

In the case of Jonah, Jonah let his discrimination against the Ninevites in the end, still get the best of him. God did not prevent him from being who he truly was in the end.

<Laugh> So Jonah just needed a little prodding, in the form of being tossed into a stormy sea and being eaten by a fish and the vomited out on shore. Nah, no arm twisting there. All pure Free Will.

But what He didn't do was tie strings to Jonah and make Jonah do what He wanted without any choice in the matter.

Sure, Jonah could have Freely Willed to stay in the fish and be digested. And if you sign the confession, then you've simply chosen of your Free Will to pick up the pen rather than having bamboo shoots shoved under your fingernails.

God didn't make Balaam be nice to Israel by anything internal. In fact, God didn't directly effect Balaam at all.

Who do you reckon that angel was working for? "No, Al Capone didn't kill those people, he had a button man do it." Big difference.

And yes, each sin is an act of Free Will. That's all that Free Will is good for. Our Free Will isn't free. It's corrupted, as we are (because we are, really). And God can, and will, have us do His will whether we want to or not. He is, after all, God. The "Poor God, He can't override our Free Will" thing is the worst kind of rubbish.

 

[sculleywr]

Baloney.

Good to see that you just completely ignored the Scriptures he posted to the point that you intentionally excluded them from your quote of his post. That's misrepresentation by textbook definition. I guess it doesn't matter what Scripture says when it contradicts Hellenistic Fatalism

 

[sculleywr]

Ah, so if I torture you into signing a confession, then you're actually doing it of your Free Will, right? That's what I'm hearing.

In technicality, yes I am. Granted, you are abusive and unethical in doing so, but you are not rewiring my brain. There is a reason that the torture that occurred in Guantanamo Bay didn't reveal a single terrorist plot or lead to the capture of a single terrorist, because it can't overcome free will.

As what heresiarch, or jihadist, or what have you, does not?

By lovingly knocking him down, striking him blind and telling him to knock it off. Any why was St. Paul "kicking against the goads" if it was just his Free Will being adjusted? Ever hear the the phrase "dragged kicking and screaming"?

Except Paul wasn't dragged kicking and screaming. He was confronted by the person he thought he was following, and when realizing that he was going against the wishes of the One he wished to follow, he changed his ways of his own free will. That is plain as the nose on my face. Paul COULD have chosen to not go to the man God sent him to. Paul COULD have chosen to reject God even after he lost his sight. There are certainly stories of people who, after even the worst torture, refused to reject their ways, I believe in many cases, these people were called martyrs. And then there are people who, at the first sign of difficulty, left their original path because it was just too hard. But if Paul had chosen to leave, we wouldn't be reading his story in Scripture, now would we? And if God could just reach in and rewire his brain, God wouldn't have needed to use a bright light. He could have simply snapped his fingers and BOOM, Paul follows Him with no need for any kind of punishment. In the scenario lacking free will, the only reason for God to cause pain is because He enjoys the pain, because He could achieve the same results without the pain.

And yes, each sin is an act of Free Will. That's all that Free Will is good for. Our Free Will isn't free. It's corrupted, as we are (because we are, really). And God can, and will, have us do His will whether we want to or not. He is, after all, God. The "Poor God, He can't override our Free Will" thing is the worst kind of rubbish.

Then it isn't free will. If God could override our free will, and He doesn't, then HE is responsible for EVERYTHING we do. If God made us the way we are, then HE is responsible for EVERYTHING we do. It is not we who are evil, any more than a gun is evil. It is always, ALWAYS the shooter who is at fault. God is the shooter. He made us and set us on the path we went on, and therefore God is the chief of all sinners, the source of all lies, the cause of all murders and rapes.

Free will is not free if it cannot choose to do the opposite of sin. That is the OPPOSITE of free will that you are describing, and it makes God the sinner, not us, for we are no different than rocks, knives, guns, logs, or any other inanimate object. Essentially, unless free will is truly free, then Romans 2:2 is complete and utter rubbish. It is God bold-faced lying to us.

We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements, and rewards are rendered
according to the merit of each man’s actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is in our own power. For
if it be predestined that one man be good and another man evil, then the first is not deserving of praise or the other to be
blamed. Unless humans have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their
actions-whatever they may be.... For neither would a man be worthy of reward or praise if he did not of himself choose the
good, but was merely created for that end. Likewise, if a man were evil, he would not deserve punishment, since he was not
evil of himself, being unable to do anything else than what he was made for. (St. Justin Martyr)

 

[Geralt]

Through faith

Albion is correct. understanding precedes faith, and not the other way around.

we have faith in God, simply because we understand and acknowledge who God is.

contrary to what you seem to suggest, Faith is NOT a blind leap in the dark.

and that is the very reason for mission, so that people may hear and understand-> and then they decide for or reject christ.