The Reality of Free Will

[childeye 2]

If you mean by this, I am saying you don't understand free will as explained in the OP, yes, that is what I am saying.

That's not what I mean. The OP gave contradictory meanings of free will; I wanted on record which one you meant. You went with the freedom to choose between options. In the moral/immoral context those two options are a subjective right and wrong. I always qualify what free will means according to what the Christ and Paul taught. --> a will free from sin. <-- this meaning is also in the moral/immoral context.

If a decision to serve God or not, or obey God or not, is in that category, then that's okay.

Oh yes, absolutely. Objectively speaking the choice/option to obey God or disobey God is the same as choosing between right/wrong because its right to obey God and it's wrong to disobey God --> so long as a person has a Trustworthy Image of God in their heart.

For example, If I had a subjective wicked image of god in my reasoning, then I could rationalize that it would be wrong to serve that god. Just like Joshua showed below:

Joshua 24:15
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

The sentiment in bold and underscored above indicates to me that a person who finds it evil to serve God has a subjective wicked image of god.

Thank you.
Your question then was a contradiction of reasoning, based on a false premise, because like freedom of choice, free will is not free from anything.
You had a false premise about free will due to not understanding it.

On the contrary. I said a will free from innocence. The contradiction is counting it freedom to have the disability of sin. That would be a negative connotation of freedom. There are negative and positive connotations of free will in scripture, in the moral/immoral context.

Morality <-- This carries a positive connotation
Immorality <-- This carries a negative connotation

Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. <-- This is a positive connotation of free will
For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. <-- This is a negative connotation of free will

This is why counting it freedom to choose to sin is a contradiction. Jesus called it servitude to sin not freedom to choose sin

32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

Just as I thought.
Some people equate free will with perfection.

I don't know what you mean by that. All I'm saying is that scripture shows that the will God gave mankind was without sin and without irreverence to God. To see what I mean by without sin, you need to know that sin is both an action and a condition. That's why there are levels of sinfulness in Romans 1, and that's why Jesus said the sick need a doctor referring to sinners as sick and sin as a sickness, not a choice/decision.

The two are far from equal.

The two what are far from equal? Are you talking about the freedom to choose or the free will that is free from sin?

Did Adam not know right from wrong, and had the choice of choosing one or the other?

Scripture says they began in innocence, not knowing good and evil, and they trusted in God. So, I don't think they knew anything about wickedness and righteousness.

How then could they be judged

I think God had mankind experience hardship to learn how good we had it.

Here is what the Bible says...
Genesis 2:15-17
15 Then the LORD God took the man and placed him in the Garden of Eden to cultivate and keep it.
16 And the LORD God commanded him, “You may eat freely from every tree of the garden,
17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die.”

Genesis 3:2, 3
2 The woman answered the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden,
3 but about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You must not eat of it or touch it, or you will die.’”

So, your mom baked a cake; slice it in half; gave you a quarter of the half, and the other quarter to your sister, and told you, you can eat those, but don't touch the half on the table.
Will you cut or break off piece of that cake, and say you did not know right from wrong?
Or, would you take your dad's wallet, and take money from it, and say you did not know right from wrong.

I don't think this qualifies as a working analogy. Your analogy has no serpent, no death if you eat. No false image of god.

Both Adam and Eve knew it was wring to disobey God, and they both confessed to their guilt, after hiding... though they tried to pass blame from themselves. Genesis 3:12, 13
This is what free will is about - God allowing humans to make their own decisions to act on their own accord, according to their own desire.

That's not true. The scripture shows that Eve was believing she would die if she ate. Adam and Eve both believed it was wrong to eat because they would die.

It's a contradiction in reasoning to claim they both confessed their guilt and blamed someone else. If they were blaming each other, don't you think God would have said they were lying.

I hope you know that we will be judged by what measure we use to judge others. You talk as if disobeying God is something people want to do.

I don't think you realize that the desire to sin is based on first believing a lie. Inordinate lusts of the flesh are the product of vain imaginings.

You still are leaving out the serpent who caused Eve to have vain imaginings with his lies. The serpent introduced an adulterated image of god that corrupted the mind and beguiled the woman. And Paul has a fear that we might be corrupted in the same way.

2 Corinthians 11:3
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

I don't understand what you mean by "I believe the freedom of choice in the moral/immoral context is the knowledge of good/evil.", and you did not explain why you believe that.

I believe that the knowledge of good and evil gave the ability to see good and bad, as in judge and find fault, and subsequently experience pride and shame. For example, I see carnal vanity as comparing oneself with others and either feeling lifted up or put down in the process.

I don't understand this statement - the choice/option between right/wrong is a valid freedom as conveyed by the serpent??
What do you mean? Can you explain.

Let me say it this way: The Satan is the one that conveyed we have the choice/option to disobey God and not die. The Satan conveyed we could choose to eat. The Satan coveted God was lying to mankind. I don't believe the capacity to disobey God is a valid freedom because it's based on a corrupt image of god.


There is a premise that the serpent subconsciously introduces a false image of God to Eve through his subtilty. I'm saying Eve is not consciously aware that she is accepting a false premise. That hidden premise is (1) that God is a liar because he said you will die if you eat (2) God is keeping the man and woman down by forbidding them from knowledge that would elevate their status (3) They could be free from their blind servitude to God and become like gods themselves if they ate.

Therefore, I don't believe the capacity to disobey God is a valid freedom because it's based on a corrupt image of god that the serpent/the devil corrupted the mind with.

You lost me.
I do not have a clue what you are trying to say, and unless I do, I cannot respond to it.
However, I believe the Bible is what substantiates truth, rather than people's ideas, or what they believe.

Joshua 24:15
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

There's only one God. There is no choice in monotheism. I think one has to have a corrupt image of god, to think it's evil to serve God. Just like the serpent beguiled Eve through introducing a corrupt image of god through subtlty.

Paul like wise feared someone would preach a different Christ

11 Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me.

2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

2 Corinthians 4:4
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

You believe the tree gave knowledge of good and evil.
So, you believe by eating a fruit, man got knowledge of good and evil.
May I ask, do you believe Adam and Eve could not see... they being blind... but after eating the fruit, they could then see?

No. I don't think they were blind. The way I interpret it is I think they found no fault in being naked before they ate and then found fault in being naked after they ate.

The Bible says... And the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; so they sewed together fig leaves and made coverings for themselves. Genesis 3:7

Do you believe they did not see each other's nakedness, and know of it?

I think their eyes being opened implies a realization. I think their feeling ashamed and wanting to cover their privates implies a carnal vanity.

 

[CoreyD]

Fair enough, though i find it can be helpful to identify where doctrine originate and how they trace through the history of the church by the men who present them. Satan may be the originator of the lie, but sometimes it's easier to recognize that it is a lie when we know who first proposed it and what their background is. I certainly don't fault Augustine, and think he was a truly devout man. But even devout men fall victim to falsehoods from time to time.

Not wanting to disagree with you, but...
I came to recognize lies, only after I studied the Bible.
For example, I came to realize that hellfire did not exist; the soul is not immortal; all good people do not go to heaven... and many other thing, and I did not know where they originated, or whom from, until after I appreciated that the Bible is truly God's word, and the source of truth.
It was then I realized how dangerous religion is, and why it's so important to consider what religious people teach, and match it with against the Bible.

To this day, I don't know half the teachings that are not scriptural, and who promotes them, but I know the truth, because it's easier to identify that from scripture.

It is true that some things are worth knowing, so as to avoid them, but these are mostly rituals, and customs.
Many people wear a cross on a chain, without knowing the origin, and how God views it.
I would agree it's helpful... in some cases, to know the background.

However, for the most part, I don't want to know who teaches falsehood, and where they originated, because when I talk to people about the Bible, I don't want to be focused on comparing religion, or religious people. I just want people to see what the Bible says. Then they will see for themselves who is teaching otherwise.

To give an example, I may be talking to someone about what the Bible says about, say, idols.
I don't know who I am talking to, but then I mention some religion by name, that promoted this teaching.
Lo and behold, without realizing it, I just put a wall between that person and the scriptures, because they are fervent worshippers of that religion, and so, rather than hear, or see what I am showing them, their emotions kick in, and they only hear "Your religion is wrong."
It's better they come to see that for themselves, by examining what the Bible says, than me telling them.
You get what I'm saying?

 

[childeye 2]

Free will
2 of 2

1
: voluntary choice or decision
I do this of my own free will


2
: freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention

Above are two Merriam/Webster definitions of free will. It matters what the term "free" implies.

The reason I only comment on the will in a moral/immoral context is to glorify God. The fruit of God's Holy Spirit are these:

Galatians 5:22-23
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance:

If we say we choose/decide to have these qualities of Character of our own volition, then we are denying that it's God's Spirit in us, which is irreverence/ungodliness

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

 

[CoreyD]

That's not what I mean. The OP gave contradictory meanings of free will; I wanted on record which one you meant. You went with the freedom to choose between options. In the moral/immoral context those two options are a subjective right and wrong. I always qualify what free will means according to what the Christ and Paul taught. --> a will free from sin. <-- this meaning is also in the moral/immoral context.

There was no contradiction... unless you mean they contradicted your wrong premises. That I would agree with.
All the terms used agreed in the proper context.

Oh yes, absolutely. Objectively speaking the choice/option to obey God or disobey God is the same as choosing between right/wrong because its right to obey God and it's wrong to disobey God --> so long as a person has a Trustworthy Image of God in their heart.

Why does it depend on the person?
Right is right and wrong is wrong, regardless of what a person knows, or has, isn't it.

For example, If I had a subjective wicked image of god in my reasoning, then I could rationalize that it would be wrong to serve that god. Just like Joshua showed below:

It does not matter what subjective view one has.
If God gives one a command, and one disobeys, one has done wrong... made the wrong choice.... regardless of what one think.
Sorry. I forgot to use 'one', instead of 'you'.

Joshua 24:15
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

The sentiment in bold and underscored above indicates to me that a person who finds it evil to serve God has a subjective wicked image of god.

On the contrary. I said a will free from innocence. The contradiction is counting it freedom to have the disability of sin. That would be a negative connotation of freedom. There are negative and positive connotations of free will in scripture, in the moral/immoral context.

I understand that many persons, like yourself, have this idea.
Some people even believe that a perfect person cannot sin, and that is simply because they have the wrong concept of perfection.
Perfection is simply relative to the perfector.

In other words, it's perfect to the one who designed it, because it is made how he wants it.
You would hear a craftsman exclaim. "Perfect!" at one of his designs, and this is because it is just how he wanted it.
It does not mean it cannot break, or anything like that.

Similarly, the idea that free will means freedom from sin, dictates that free will is absolute perfection.
This is a mistaken view, since free will is relative to the one who requires an exercising of that will. It's not a freedom from.
This is your mistake, which I an trying to get you to see.

Here, take my $800.00 Van Heusen jacket. You are free to wear it.
Here are the keys to my brand new Mercedes Benz. You are free to drive it.
All of us are free to go jump off the highest cliff.
In all those cases, what are you free from?

When we limit word to one context, we can misunderstand their meaning.
Free will is not free from. It's free to. The God given gift to exercise one's freedom of choice without being forced.
Maybe that's what it's free from. force.

Morality <-- This carries a positive connotation
Immorality <-- This carries a negative connotation

Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. <-- This is a positive connotation of free will
For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. <-- This is a negative connotation of free will

This is why counting it freedom to choose to sin is a contradiction. Jesus called it servitude to sin not freedom to choose sin

32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

There you go.
You misplaced free will because of misunderstanding.

I don't know what you mean by that. All I'm saying is that scripture shows that the will God gave mankind was without sin and without irreverence to God.

Please explain how you arrived at that being a will. Are you redefining will?

To see what I mean by without sin, you need to know that sin is both an action and a condition. That's why there are levels of sinfulness in Romans 1, and that's why Jesus said the sick need a doctor referring to sinners as sick and sin as a sickness, not a choice/decision.

Okay, but that does not explain what you are saying.
If you are talking about perfection, I can see what you are saying, but free will is not perfection.

The two what are far from equal? Are you talking about the freedom to choose or the free will that is free from sin?

Perfection, and free will, or freedom of choice are far from equal.

Scripture says they began in innocence, not knowing good and evil, and they trusted in God. So, I don't think they knew anything about wickedness and righteousness.

Knowing good and evil was explained, to a degree, in the scriptures.
I'll return to this.

I think God had mankind experience hardship to learn how good we had it.

Many people think that as well.
Would you agree, what we think, is not really important, but what the scriptures teach, is?

I don't think this qualifies as a working analogy. Your analogy has no serpent, no death if you eat. No false image of god.

How does knowing if something is wrong or right, depend on a serpent, death, and a false image of god?

That's not true. The scripture shows that Eve was believing she would die if she ate. Adam and Eve both believed it was wrong to eat because they would die.

???
Eve repeated what God said.
She, nor the scriptures do not say the reason both believed it was wrong to eat was because they would die.
That's something you think as well, isn't it?

It's a contradiction in reasoning to claim they both confessed their guilt and blamed someone else. If they were blaming each other, don't you think God would have said they were lying.

Why did they hide?
Genesis 3:8 Now they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.

I hope you know that we will be judged by what measure we use to judge others. You talk as if disobeying God is something people want to do.

I'm only going by what the scriptures reveal, or teach.

Did the angel that became Satan the Devil want to disobey God?
The Bible's answer: John 8:44 Yes, he did.

Did Adam want to disobey God?
The Bible's answer: 1 Timothy 2:14 Yes, he did.

Do many people today want to disobey God?
The Bible's answer: Romans 1:28-32 Yes, they do.

Something I hope you will eventually come to learn about me, is that I go by what the Bible says. Not by what I think.
What I think, is not important, because "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death". Proverbs 14:12

I don't think you realize that the desire to sin is based on first believing a lie. Inordinate lusts of the flesh are the product of vain imaginings.

I do not realize that, because it's not what the scriptures reveal.
While that's what you think, the disciple James says this:
"...a man is tempted, being drawn away and being enticed by the own desire." James 1:13

One of the things the scriptures reveal, is that God knows what's in the heart, and a thought, or desire that lingers there, is what develops into action.
Jesus said this, in agreement with his brother. Matthew 15:18-20

God knew what was in Eve's heart, before she went near the tree.
To think About...
Why did Eve not tell Adam anything, if she did not want to act on her own desires?
Adam was her head... was he not?
If she is so innocent, why is she not submissive to her head, but listens to a serpent who tells her to disobey something that her husband told her, or that God repeated in their presence?

Questions we can ask ourselves, lest we forget that unless we have all the facts, forming opinions can lead to wrong conclusions.
The serpent did not give Eve life. She came from Adam's rib, and Adam knew this, and no doubt, like we would, told her about this and the other magnificent things her maker did.
Why did she disobey God - her creator (not a serpent), if she did not want to?

Rebellion started in heaven, and continued on earth.
Psalm 78:17, 18
17 Yet they still continued to sin against Him, To rebel against the Most High in the desert.
18 And in their heart they put God to the test By asking food according to their desire.

You still are leaving out the serpent who caused Eve to have vain imaginings with his lies.

He caused her...? Do you mean, as in, "The Devil made me do it"?

The serpent introduced an adulterated image of god that corrupted the mind and beguiled the woman. And Paul has a fear that we might be corrupted in the same way.

2 Corinthians 11:3
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

You appear to be saying the woman did not have a choice in the matter, and could not exercise her freedom of choice... she had none.
Is that what you are saying?

I believe that the knowledge of good and evil gave the ability to see good and bad, as in judge and find fault, and subsequently experience pride and shame. For example, I see carnal vanity as comparing oneself with others and either feeling lifted up or put down in the process.

Are you saying the knowledge of good and evil was in the fruit, and when they ate it, that knowledge gave them an ability?

Let me say it this way: The Satan is the one that conveyed we have the choice/option to disobey God and not die. The Satan conveyed we could choose to eat. The Satan coveted God was lying to mankind. I don't believe the capacity to disobey God is a valid freedom because it's based on a corrupt image of god.

So, when God said, “From any tree of the garden you may freely eat; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for on the day that you eat from it you will certainly die.”
You are saying Adam did not have a choice to eat from all the other trees instead of that one God commanded him not to. Is that correct?

There is a premise that the serpent subconsciously introduces a false image of God to Eve through his subtilty. I'm saying Eve is not consciously aware that she is accepting a false premise. That hidden premise is (1) that God is a liar because he said you will die if you eat (2) God is keeping the man and woman down by forbidding them from knowledge that would elevate their status (3) They could be free from their blind servitude to God and become like gods themselves if they ate.

Cool.
That sounds like something I can agree with.
In other words, Satan introduce the idea of independence from God... sort of like the kids will tells someone they want to join them, 'You don't have o listen to your dad. I do what I want. You can too." Peer pressure. ..and what does the wise kid do? Give in? No, he chooses to do otherwise.

Could Eve had decided otherwise?

Therefore, I don't believe the capacity to disobey God is a valid freedom because it's based on a corrupt image of god that the serpent/the devil corrupted the mind with.

"the capacity to disobey God is a valid freedom"?
Could you please rephrase that. I'm not making sense of it.
Do you mean man is free to disobey God, and so that is freedom?

Joshua 24:15
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

There's only one God. There is no choice in monotheism. I think one has to have a corrupt image of god, to think it's evil to serve God. Just like the serpent beguiled Eve through introducing a corrupt image of god through subtlty.

Paul like wise feared someone would preach a different Christ

11 Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me.

2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

2 Corinthians 4:4
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

No. I don't think they were blind. The way I interpret it is I think they found no fault in being naked before they ate and then found fault in being naked after they ate.

I think their eyes being opened implies a realization. I think their feeling ashamed and wanting to cover their privates implies a carnal vanity.

A realization. Thank you.
A realization of what?

 

[CoreyD]

Free will
2 of 2

1
: voluntary choice or decision
I do this of my own free will


2
: freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention

Above are two Merriam/Webster definitions of free will. It matters what the term "free" implies.

The reason I only comment on the will in a moral/immoral context is to glorify God. The fruit of God's Holy Spirit are these:

Galatians 5:22-23
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance:

If we say we choose/decide to have these qualities of Character of our own volition, then we are denying that it's God's Spirit in us, which is irreverence/ungodliness

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

I appreciate your taking the time to look up the definition, and share it.
Would you mind putting the definition in your own words. Thanks.

Would you agree that atheists display these qualities in some measure - love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance:?
Do, we understand then that these qualities are of true value... that is, they refer to qualities of a godly nature, that are demonstrated to God's honor?

They are what God looks for in those who learn the Christ.
So, love shown by those in the world, is surpassed by love which is a quality of the spirit.

 

[childeye 2]

There was no contradiction... unless you mean they contradicted your wrong premises. That I would agree with.

You think being told to keep the commandments and live or not keep them and die is not a forced decision. When you're commanded to do something by an authority figure, it's NOT voluntary.

Cambridge dictionary
free will
noun

the ability to decide what to do independently of any outside influence::
Theories of criminal liability presume that we exercise free will.
Will artificial intelligences become endowed with free will?
of your own free will: No one told me to do it - I did it of my own free will.


Elsewhere, the OP is basically saying a free will means having your own will. You are conveying the Creator gave everyone their own will. The term free will in that sense means autonomy. See #2 below.

MerriamWebster

autonomy​

noun​

au·ton·o·my ȯ-ˈtä-nə-mē

pluralautonomies
Synonyms of autonomy
1
: the quality or state of being self-governing
especially : the right of self-government
The territory was granted autonomy.


2
: self-directing freedom and especially moral independence
personal autonomy

All the terms used agreed in the proper context.

Not really. The context of Jesus saying, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do", implies the character of the father manifests in the fathers children.

1 John 3
5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.

6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Why does it depend on the person?
Right is right and wrong is wrong, regardless of what a person knows, or has, isn't it.

Objectively there is One Way in monotheism. So subjectively speaking if we have a corrupt image of god/gods in our minds, what is right and wrong becomes subjective.

It does not matter what subjective view one has.
If God gives one a command, and one disobeys, one has done wrong... made the wrong choice.... regardless of what one think.
Sorry. I forgot to use 'one', instead of 'you'.

It matters greatly. Mankind was given over to uncleanness and to reprobate minds because of subjective imagery of god/gods.

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

I understand that many persons, like yourself, have this idea.

It's not an idea. It's the Christ that taught this. If the mind sees sin as freedom, it's not a mind in repentance for the remission of sins, it is a soul full of darkness.
Luke 11:34
The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.

Some people even believe that a perfect person cannot sin, and that is simply because they have the wrong concept of perfection.
Perfection is simply relative to the perfector.

We conform into the image God sent through the work of the Holy Spirit. The transformation from the carnal mind to the spiritual mind happens according to God's timetable and purpose.

In other words, it's perfect to the one who designed it, because it is made how he wants it.
You would hear a craftsman exclaim. "Perfect!" at one of his designs, and this is because it is just how he wanted it.
It does not mean it cannot break, or anything like that.

Yes, Adam was made without sin. It's not like God had bad breath when he breathed into Adam's nostrils and became a living soul. Adam was made from the earth and he was perfect for God's purpose, but he wasn't perfection. The second Adam, the Christ, is perfection.

Similarly, the idea that free will means freedom from sin, dictates that free will is absolute perfection.
This is a mistaken view, since free will is relative to the one who requires an exercising of that will. It's not a freedom from.
This is your mistake, which I an trying to get you to see.

I already see that, and I'm not disagreeing with you about that. I agree Adam was a corruptible soul in his innocence. The second Adam is perfection. The free will that is in Christ is not a will that thinks it has a freedom to sin, it's a will that is being set free from sin.

Here, take my $800.00 Van Heusen jacket. You are free to wear it.
Here are the keys to my brand new Mercedes Benz. You are free to drive it.
All of us are free to go jump off the highest cliff.
In all those cases, what are you free from?

When we limit word to one context, we can misunderstand their meaning.
Free will is not free from. It's free to. The God given gift to exercise one's freedom of choice without being forced.
Maybe that's what it's free from. force.

Unforced choice/decision? That would depend on knowledge. Doesn't knowledge and wisdom matter in the will? Doesn't the wise man make wise choices, and doesn't the fool make foolish choices? There are negative forces and positive forces.

I see Love as a positive force. For example, let's say I see someone cold or starving and I feel compassion, and I hurt with them, and I'm compelled to do something to alleviate the hurt. That doesn't happen because I choose to feel that way. It's a manifestation of the Spirit of God. Now I could choose to turn away, or I can choose to actually do something. But If I choose to turn away, it haunts me in my conscience. I don't choose to feel the guilt over how I betrayed my fellow man; I am forced to. I could have had joy and now I have misery.

But you know what? I'd rather thank God for that misery than to lose His Spirit and feel nothing.

There you go.
You misplaced free will because of misunderstanding.

All I did was post scripture showing two contrary wills/desires both called free. It's not a misunderstanding of the free will as pertains to a free agent.

Please explain how you arrived at that being a will. Are you redefining will?

See 2a disposition, inclination

WILL
2 of 3

noun​

ˈwil
1
: a legal declaration of a person's wishes regarding the disposal of his or her property or estate after death
especially : a written instrument legally executed by which a person makes disposition of his or her estate to take effect after death

2
: desire, wish: such as
a
: disposition, inclination
where there's a will there's a way

b
: appetite, passion
c
: choice, determination

Okay, but that does not explain what you are saying.
If you are talking about perfection, I can see what you are saying, but free will is not perfection.

It is perfection in the second Adam, the Christ.

Perfection, and free will, or freedom of choice are far from equal.

As a matter of impetus, a will headed into darkness is not the same impetus of a will headed back to the light.

Knowing good and evil was explained, to a degree, in the scriptures.
I'll return to this.

I see coming to know something the same as learning. As I said, the will headed into darkness is not the same will headed back into the light

Many people think that as well.
Would you agree, what we think, is not really important, but what the scriptures teach, is?

Our opinions don't give an account of anything, if that's what you mean.

How does knowing if something is wrong or right, depend on a serpent, death, and a false image of god?

Eve didn't know right or wrong, she trusted/believed God. The serpent was the manipulator that sowed distrust through an adulterated imagery of god/gods, which caused her to experience a false hope which brought death. None of that is in your analogy.

???
Eve repeated what God said.

Not accurately. God never said don't 'touch' it lest you die.

She, nor the scriptures do not say the reason both believed it was wrong to eat was because they would die.

I don't know why you would say that. Here's what God says--> But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: FOR in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

'For' means 'because'. Hence that's the reason.

That's something you think as well, isn't it?

I believe God wouldn't lie. I don't believe He sets people up to fail.

Why did they hide?
Genesis 3:8 Now they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.

D
9 And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?

10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. <--This is why the hid

I'm only going by what the scriptures reveal, or teach.

Did the angel that became Satan the Devil want to disobey God?
The Bible's answer: John 8:44 Yes, he did.

You're taking this out of context. Jesus is saying the children of the devil do what their father does.

Did Adam want to disobey God?
The Bible's answer: 1 Timothy 2:14 Yes, he did.

You're taking this Out of context. Paul is saying the woman should not usurp authority over the man because the man was not the one deceived. He's not saying Adam knew God was a liar.

Do many people today want to disobey God?
The Bible's answer: Romans 1:28-32 Yes, they do.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

These scriptures you listed above testify to the course of depravity in the flesh and shows the abominations we all will become when separated from God's Spirit. It actually begins with not esteeming God as God The Eternal Power.

This is why Paul says in the next verse --> Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

Something I hope you will eventually come to learn about me, is that I go by what the Bible says. Not by what I think.
What I think, is not important, because "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death". Proverbs 14:12

We're all doing our best to go by what the bible says. But your interpretations are incorrect.

I do not realize that, because it's not what the scriptures reveal.

It says it right here --> Romans 1:21
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

And here --> Ephesians 4:22
That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;

And here --> Hebrews 3:13
But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.

While that's what you think, the disciple James says this:
"...a man is tempted, being drawn away and being enticed by the own desire." James 1:13

What James is talking about is this --> Ephesians 2:1-3
1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

One of the things the scriptures reveal, is that God knows what's in the heart, and a thought, or desire that lingers there, is what develops into action.
Jesus said this, in agreement with his brother. Matthew 15:18-20

You're making my point. When we define a free will as a will free from sin, we can see this will is NOT a free will free from sin --> out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: <-- Do you actually think we just voluntarily choose to have horrible things like this in our hearts?

 

[childeye 2]

God knew what was in Eve's heart, before she went near the tree.

What makes you think that?

To think About...
Why did Eve not tell Adam anything, if she did not want to act on her own desires?

This makes no sense. The serpent's words created the desire. Who said she didn't want to act on them?

Adam was her head... was he not? If she is so innocent, why is she not submissive to her head, but listens to a serpent who tells her to disobey something that her husband told her, or that God repeated in their presence?

I like this question. First off innocence means ignorance of the knowledge of good/evil. So until she eats, she is ignorant of that knowledge.

Why is she not submissive to her Adam? We don't know. My personal opinion is that Adam told her what God had told him and that's why we suddenly see her saying she's not supposed to even touch it lest they die. God never said that to Adam. Maybe she touched it and nothing happened, so she began to wonder if Adam knew what he was talking about. We can't be sure. But we can be sure that the serpent talked as if he knew God and gods better than they did.

Questions we can ask ourselves, lest we forget that unless we have all the facts, forming opinions can lead to wrong conclusions.
The serpent did not give Eve life. She came from Adam's rib, and Adam knew this, and no doubt, like we would, told her about this and the other magnificent things her maker did.
Why did she disobey God - her creator (not a serpent), if she did not want to?

We've all done it, why did we do that? I didn't want to disobey God, but I did. We're going to be judged by what measure we judge others, so we'd better start forgiving and showing mercy and understanding instead of accusing and incriminating.

I asked the Holy Spirit about that. He said that everyone comes to sincerely regret bad things they do once they see the suffering they caused others. A true repentance is a godly sorrow that sees that had they known then what they do now, they would not have done it in the first place.

I'd bet God sees some people who are sorry they got kicked out of paradise, and some people are sorry they ever hurt God by not believing Him.

He caused her...? Do you mean, as in, "The Devil made me do it"?

I mean the devil began the chain of events.

You appear to be saying the woman did not have a choice in the matter, and could not exercise her freedom of choice... she had none.
Is that what you are saying?

The scripture is saying she was deceived into doing it. You know that don't you? It's not like she would volunteer to be deceived. Did you know that Jesus came down to destroy the works of the devil?

Are you saying the knowledge of good and evil was in the fruit, and when they ate it, that knowledge gave them an ability?

I'm saying that's what I see scripture is saying.

So, when God said, “From any tree of the garden you may freely eat; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for on the day that you eat from it you will certainly die.”
You are saying Adam did not have a choice to eat from all the other trees instead of that one God commanded him not to. Is that correct?

That's not what I'm saying. Here is what I want you to get in vold

childeye 2 said:
Let me say it this way: The Satan is the one that conveyed we have the choice/option to disobey God and not die. The Satan conveyed we could choose to eat. The Satan conveyed that God was lying to mankind.

Therefore --> I don't believe the capacity to disobey God is a valid freedom because it's based on a corrupt image of god.

Cool.
That sounds like something I can agree with.
In other words, Satan introduce the idea of independence from God...

Yes, exactly. But not only that. He planted a false image of God that is a tyrant Boss, in the psyche. A self-serving Boss who would sacrifice all those beneath him to preserve his status over them.

It's all in this one line --> And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

That's why the Christ Image comes as a lowly servant who sacrifices himself to save all others; to destroy the false image planted by Satan. And this is the power of revelation in the Gospel. The god of this world is Satan's false image of God, and his children are sired through that false image.

2 Corinthians 4:3-5
3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake

2 Corinthians 4:6
For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Could Eve had decided otherwise?

No, she didn't see through the lie, just like people still don't.

"the capacity to disobey God is a valid freedom"?
Could you please rephrase that. I'm not making sense of it.
Do you mean man is free to disobey God, and so that is freedom?

No, I DON'T BELIEVE the capacity to disobey God is a valid freedom --> because it's based on a corrupt image of god that the serpent/the devil corrupted the mind with.

A realization. Thank you.
A realization of what?

A realization that they were naked.