Free Will and Evil

[Chriliman]

You're putting an awful lot of words in my mouth. I never said anything about controlling us in the slightest.

Okay, so why isn't it perfect to create beings in such a way that you can't directly control them, but you can influence them in a loving way and convince them of what is true and good, even though they make wrong choices?

Why do you view this idea of God as a loving and forgiving Father in a negative way? Why is it worthy of your opposition?

Why not let people believe it and stop trying to convince them it's not true?

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Thank you for the thoughtful reply.

I absolutely concede that God can simply be "omniscient" and that alone is consistent with humans having "free will." But He doesn't just know. I've already tried to clarify the other aspects of God's role in tandem with omniscience that lead me to my conclusion but if I've failed after all of those posts I don't see the point in continuing.

I honestly thought I'd get that married bachelor reply. I mean, it's clever. Clearly the reply indicates "married in one way while a bachelor in another way" which simply reframes it as not a paradox, and thus doesn't address the actual question. (Also, I apologize if I use those words incorrectly. )

Hmm...

I do think He is omniscient, and just "knows" things. In fact, I made a bold statement but I want to emboldened it even more: He knows every single iteration, and every single domain of a parameter such that He can determine with perfect precision and accuracy the events of every infinitesimal change in Creation.


This is not logical. Omnipresence and omniscience coupled make more sense - since "omnipresence" covers whatever isn't known through God's science. (Omnipresence would include existing in every single infinitesimal interval of time at every single point in all dimensions of Creation.) With that, you wouldn't have to necessarily know everything to know everything. But, I do think He is all (omnis.)

As far as the "can God do this" paradoxes, I liken it to this:

Can a "morally good" adult rape, torture and murder his or her own child? Of course s/he can! But, that person would NOT be a "morally good person"

God can do seemingly paradoxical things, but He would rather keep His throne as a Perfect, Holy, and Sovereign God.

 

[zippy2006]

This is such a bizarre thought, and I know it's plenty common among Christians. God would be just as happy if you were never born. Bizarre, truly bizarre.

Yes, God's happiness does not depend on me.

Evil cannot result through no action of God's though, can it? If He chose to do nothing, which apparently He would be just as happy to do, then evil would never exist. If He only chose to create unintelligent creatures then evil would never exist. So "allow" is much too passive. I won't claim you should say "creates" like Isaiah does, but it has to fall somewhere in the middle, at least.

God created certain conditions for the possibility of evil, but not evil itself.

No, God created intelligent beings in such a manner that He knew evil coming into existence was inevitable.

It was not inevitable. It was a free choice, and free choices are never inevitable.

Sorry, but you I let you define FW for the sake of the argument, and you chose a definition that explicitly states a balance between the amount of desire between two choices, remember:


Bolding added by me for emphasis.

How in the world are you going to tell me that ain't about a balance between desirability? You need to stick to the context of the discussion that you wrote.

I said that FWE depends on a similar desirability between an evil choice and a good choice, and then I went on to explain what an evil choice actually is. There is no contradiction. It is not a balance between a desire to do evil and a desire to do good, it is a balance in the desirability of a good and evil choice. Evil is never chosen because it is evil; it is chosen because it is good, albeit distorted. A man does not commit adultery because he thinks it is evil, he commits adultery because of his lust and the pleasure he believes it will bring. Pleasure is not an evil thing, but it can lead one to commit evil acts.

I disagree that there is no "most good thing" but I can't argue that God must do the best thing if He can choose to do nothing at all, so who cares about all this?

As in previous conversations, I am not sure where you are going with all of this. I am just answering questions.

No, my logic is that it is merit only, and not a gift at all. It can't be both,...

In claiming that it can't be both you are following the same premise as the Protestants, as already noted.

...and there are clear requirements to receive eternal life, so it is not a gift. Do I really have to link the definition of "gift" from any dictionary for you to see the other half of the definition that you're leaving off?

Salvation is a gift insofar as the principle of eternal life is given to us freely without any merit on our part. Salvation is a product of merit insofar as we cooperate with God, thus influencing the strength and nature of the principle of eternal life.

God can imbue knowledge of anything, in any creature, in an instant. What do you even mean by "reinforce"? And why is being in God's immediate presence an insufficient means to reinforce the concept that we depend on Him for existence?

Who knows? One of the "central truths" I referred to could well be the truth that we play a role in our destiny, that the labor of our hands contributes to creation for good or for ill. An unmerited 'reward' would exclude this truth.

 

[Moral Orel]

You allow your child to ride a bike knowing they will fall, but you put a helmet on them have a level empty parking lot and run to pick them up, knowing they cannot hurt themselves bad. A little knowledge (experience) of the consequences of their bad actions can help them do better in the future.

God is like the most wonderful Loving parent there could be but that does not mean He keeps us from sinning, since sin has purpose in helping the nonbeliever become a believer.

Difference is, as a father myself, there is a limit to the amount of pain I'll allow my kid to be at risk of to learn things. There is no limit (Hell) when it comes to God. Added to that, if I were God, my kid wouldn't need to learn to ride a bike. I would just make him know how from the start.

 

[Moral Orel]

Okay, so why isn't it perfect to create beings in such a way that you can't directly control them, but you can influence them in a loving way and convince them of what is true and good, even though they make wrong choices?

Why do you view this idea of God as a loving and forgiving Father in a negative way?

It's all about how God designed us. He designed us to want to do bad, and then chastises us for doing what we were designed to want to do.

 

[Moral Orel]

God created certain conditions for the possibility of evil, but not evil itself.

And one of those conditions, to borrow from something that you say later in this post, is to make evil choices desirable.

It was not inevitable. It was a free choice, and free choices are never inevitable.

It was inevitable. If God is omniscient, He knew it was going to happen, so it was inevitable. Now I'm not the sort to say that God knows what I'll do so I don't have a choice. I'm not, nor will I, argue that. Once God created Adam the way He did, and decided to let Him make His own choices, sin was inevitable, and God knew it.

I said that FWE depends on a similar desirability between an evil choice and a good choice, and then I went on to explain what an evil choice actually is. There is no contradiction. It is not a balance between a desire to do evil and a desire to do good, it is a balance in the desirability of a good and evil choice. Evil is never chosen because it is evil; it is chosen because it is good, albeit distorted. A man does not commit adultery because he thinks it is evil, he commits adultery because of his lust and the pleasure he believes it will bring. Pleasure is not an evil thing, but it can lead one to commit evil acts.

No. You have to desire to do bad things in order to do bad things. Sometimes people cheat for the purpose of hurting people when they find out about it. If not that, then they lack a desire to make the good choice of protecting others from suffering. Either way, the balance of desire we were designed with is askew from what it ought to be.

In claiming that it can't be both you are following the same premise as the Protestants, as already noted.

You said protestants think it's only a gift, I say it's only merit, that's the distinction.

Salvation is a gift insofar as the principle of eternal life is given to us freely without any merit on our part. Salvation is a product of merit insofar as we cooperate with God, thus influencing the strength and nature of the principle of eternal life.

Choosing to give salvation is a free choice, fine. That doesn't mean salvation is free. All gifts are free. In order to receive salvation, is there anything required of us? Jesus didn't pay the only price for our salvation, did He? Can I simply say, "Yes please, thank you for salvation" and then I'm instantly whisked away to Heaven for eternity? Of course not. You have to earn it. You don't earn gifts.

Who knows? One of the "central truths" I referred to could well be the truth that we play a role in our destiny, that the labor of our hands contributes to creation for good or for ill. An unmerited 'reward' would exclude this truth.

Who knows?! You're supposed to be answering this question, remember:

Okay, so God is perfect and doesn't have FW. The ultimate goal of humans is to give up our FW to the will of a being that does not have FW. So what is the point of FW? What makes it good to have if the perfect existence lacks it?

If you don't know the answer to the problem of evil, just say so. You claimed that our dependence on God needs to be reinforced, but when I ask "why?" you say "who knows?". You can't claim something needs to be without having a reason that it has to be that way.

Of course our actions play a role in our destiny, who said otherwise? The question is: why did God make choosing between good and evil something that we do?

Oh, and an "unmerited reward" is better known as a "gift".

 

[Chriliman]

It's all about how God designed us. He designed us to want to do bad, and then chastises us for doing what we were designed to want to do.

So one reason you don't believe in God is because you believe he didn't design us correctly because he gives us the ability to understand good from bad and then follow whichever we desire?

That's not a reason to disbelieve in God, it's a reason to believe he went about things in the wrong way. Except you'd have no idea the difference between what's wrong and what's right if it wasn't for God's initial command.

 

[Moral Orel]

So one reason you don't believe in God is because you believe he didn't design us correctly because he gives us the ability to understand good from bad and then follow whichever we desire?

That's not a reason to disbelieve in God, it's a reason to believe he went about things in the wrong way. Except you'd have no idea the difference between what's wrong and what's right if it wasn't for God's initial command.

Again, that's not what I wrote. I never said anything about understanding. It's about want.

 

[SPF]

It's all about how God designed us. He designed us to want to do bad, and then chastises us for doing what we were designed to want to do.

I assume your referring to the Biblical story of Adam and Eve. If so, you'll find that you're incorrect. God did not design us with an inclination towards sin.

Choosing to give salvation is a free choice, fine. That doesn't mean salvation is free. All gifts are free. In order to receive salvation, is there anything required of us? Jesus didn't pay the only price for our salvation, did He? Can I simply say, "Yes please, thank you for salvation" and then I'm instantly whisked away to Heaven for eternity? Of course not. You have to earn it. You don't earn gifts.

Again, according to Scripture you're incorrect. Paul is very clear in Ephesians that Salvation comes to us VIA entirely the grace of God, through faith, which is a gift. Paul is very clear that there is no room for anyone to boast about their Salvation. Meaning, if my works played a part in my Salvation, I would have room to boast in my works. Salvation is a free gift. The catch of course, is that only those with faith accept it. So sure. You can say "yes please", but you will only do it if you actually mean it.

 

[SPF]

The question is: why did God make choosing between good and evil something that we do?

Because that's a necessary part of being a free willed creature.

 

[Chriliman]

Again, that's not what I wrote. I never said anything about understanding. It's about want.

Don't you want to understand?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Paul is very clear in Ephesians that Salvation comes to us VIA entirely the grace of God, through faith, which is a gift. Paul is very clear that there is no room for anyone to boast about their Salvation. Meaning, if my works played a part in my Salvation, I would have room to boast in my works. Salvation is a free gift. The catch of course, is that only those with faith accept it. So sure. You can say "yes please", but you will only do it if you actually mean it.

Ok...

If there's a literal hell with eternal torment, then I say "yes please" to salvation from such a thing. And I mean it wholeheartedly, as much as i can mean anything at all.

Now all I need is evidence that there's an actual gift there to accept instead of an empty box, because there's an infinite number of possible non-existent gifts. and it would be illogical to believe that all of them could be accepted.

 

[bling]

If I were an omnipotent father, I'd create a bike my son couldn't fall off of. I'm not a fan of my son suffering. In fact, if I were an omnipotent father, I would have created my son without the ability to suffer.

This reminds me of a Star Trek where Kirk goes to a world where only good happens and jumps a big hole in the ground on a horse and because of that decides he does not want to stay there, since he would not have made that jump back in the real world.

If you cannot “fail” how significant is the success?

If God wants us to Love Him with the kind of Love He has for us (undeserving, Thought-out, unconditional, a true choice with likely alternatives) then we must have made the choice with likely alternatives. Seeing others make the wrong choice with negative consequences can help us.

Falling while learning to ride a bike helps us realize our: limits, need for help, need for protection, need to listen more, it is a humbling activity, helps us in our maturing and provides a teachable moment.

The objective is to learn to ride a bike, so the objective is not to keep from ever falling (because you could stay off the bike forever and never fall from riding a bike or always have training wheels).

Man’s objective while here on earth was not to never ever sin.

Personally, I'm a big fan of evidence being the best way of believing in something.

By “evidence” people usually mean “knowledge” and in contrast to “faith”.

“Knowledge” leads to self-reliance and can actually work against a saving “faith” trusting God. Knowledge can puff you up (knowledge is power) while faith is a very humbling activity (something the lowliest mature adult on earth can do).

Evidence of God’s existence is all around us if we are willing to accept the evidence.

 

[bling]

Yeah, I´m always baffled by the God-parent analogy.
Here we have an omnipotent, omnisicient guy who created each and everything (including the natural laws), and there we have guys who have to do their best to prevent the worst cases within this scenario invented and created by someone else.

If you cannot “fail” how significant is the success?

If God wants us to Love Him with the kind of Love He has for us (undeserving, Thought-out, unconditional, a true choice with likely alternatives) then we must have made the choice with likely alternatives. Seeing others make the wrong choice with negative consequences can help us.

Falling while learning to ride a bike helps us realize our: limits, need for help, need for protection, need to listen more, it is a humbling activity, helps us in our maturing and provides a teachable moment.

The objective is to learn to ride a bike, so the objective is not to keep from ever falling (because you could stay off the bike forever and never fall from riding a bike or always have training wheels).

Man’s objective while here on earth was not to never ever sin.

 

[bling]

Difference is, as a father myself, there is a limit to the amount of pain I'll allow my kid to be at risk of to learn things. There is no limit (Hell) when it comes to God. Added to that, if I were God, my kid wouldn't need to learn to ride a bike. I would just make him know how from the start.

From scripture there seems to be no degrees of reward in heaven, but there are degrees of punishment talked about. Hell from scripture would not have to be eternal torment for everyone and talks about annihilation.

Those that are annihilated in hell have repeatedly refused God's charity to the point they will never accept His charity, so these people would not be happy in heaven because it is a huge Love (Godly type Charity) Feast.

If you cannot “fail” how significant is the success?

If God wants us to Love Him with the kind of Love He has for us (undeserving, Thought-out, unconditional, a true choice with likely alternatives) then we must have made the choice with likely alternatives. Seeing others make the wrong choice with negative consequences can help us.

Falling while learning to ride a bike helps us realize our: limits, need for help, need for protection, need to listen more, it is a humbling activity, helps us in our maturing and provides a teachable moment.

The objective is to learn to ride a bike, so the objective is not to keep from ever falling (because you could stay off the bike forever and never fall from riding a bike or always have training wheels).

Man’s objective while here on earth was not to never ever sin.

 

[SPF]

If there's a literal hell with eternal torment, then I say "yes please" to salvation from such a thing. And I mean it wholeheartedly, as much as i can mean anything at all.

Unfortunately it doesn't work this way. On top of that, since you aren't even being genuine in your statement it certainly doesn't work that way. What separates Christianity apart from all other religions is that at the end of the day Christianity is not a religion, it's a relationship.

People who "become Christian" out of a fear of punishment, or because they want God to do something aren't actually "Christian" A Christian is a follower of Christ. A follower of Christ is someone who has recognized that they are a sinner and that not only do they need forgiveness, but that they want forgiveness and they want to turn away from their sin and know Christ. Becoming religious out of a fear of hell is worthless as far as Scripture teaches.

 

[quatona]

If you cannot “fail” how significant is the success?

If God wants us to Love Him with the kind of Love He has for us (undeserving, Thought-out, unconditional, a true choice with likely alternatives)

Not sure what particular god concept you personally hold, but the mainstream Christian god concept does not really picture his love as "unconditional", and neither as having the choice to fail).

then we must have made the choice with likely alternatives. Seeing others make the wrong choice with negative consequences can help us.

Sounds to me like God created a problem just so there could be a solution that would have not be needed hadn´t he created the problem.

Falling while learning to ride a bike helps us realize our: limits, need for help, need for protection, need to listen more, it is a humbling activity, helps us in our maturing and provides a teachable moment.

Yeah right: once there are challenges and problems it makes a lot of sense to try to solve them. This is, however, not really a good justification for creating problems.

 

[Moral Orel]

If you cannot “fail” how significant is the success?

God can't fail, does that make anything He does less significant?

 

[zippy2006]

And one of those conditions, to borrow from something that you say later in this post, is to make evil choices desirable.

Okay.

It was inevitable. If God is omniscient, He knew it was going to happen, so it was inevitable.

You're committing the same error that Variant has been making here. Knowledge does not imply inevitability or necessity. God foreseeing that Adam would sin does not imply that Adam had to sin. God foresees Adam's sin because Adam chooses to sin.

Now I'm not the sort to say that God knows what I'll do so I don't have a choice. I'm not, nor will I, argue that.

But this seems to be exactly what you are saying.

Once God created Adam the way He did, and decided to let Him make His own choices, sin was inevitable, and God knew it.

Sin was not inevitable, and God knew that it wasn't. That's why he punished Adam, because sin was not inevitable.

No. You have to desire to do bad things in order to do bad things.

Sure, but a desire to do bad things is not rooted in an innate desire to do evil. There is no innate desire to do evil. Evil things are done because they are thought to be good.

Sometimes people cheat for the purpose of hurting people when they find out about it. If not that, then they lack a desire to make the good choice of protecting others from suffering. Either way, the balance of desire we were designed with is askew from what it ought to be.

It is true that disordered concupiscence resulted from the Fall.

Choosing to give salvation is a free choice, fine. That doesn't mean salvation is free. All gifts are free. In order to receive salvation, is there anything required of us? Jesus didn't pay the only price for our salvation, did He? Can I simply say, "Yes please, thank you for salvation" and then I'm instantly whisked away to Heaven for eternity? Of course not. You have to earn it. You don't earn gifts.

"Salvation is a gift insofar as the principle of eternal life is given to us freely without any merit on our part. Salvation is a product of merit insofar as we cooperate with God, thus influencing the strength and nature of the principle of eternal life."

Suppose you're given a bonsai tree. It's given; perfectly free. Now suppose you water it, give it sunshine, and shape it. You're given an award for having a beautiful bonsai tree. Is the beautiful tree a gift, or is it a product of your work and merit? Both. The tree itself was a gift, and you would not have been able to beautify it at all if it wasn't given to you in the first place. Yet the state of the awarded tree is both a result of the gift and the work that you put into the tree. There is something meritorious about the beautiful tree, even though the entire thing was ultimately a gift.

If you don't know the answer to the problem of evil, just say so. You claimed that our dependence on God needs to be reinforced, but when I ask "why?" you say "who knows?". You can't claim something needs to be without having a reason that it has to be that way.

I said that, "meriting reinforces central truths of creaturely existence," and I gave dependence as one example. In my last I gave another example: production, contributing through our own effort. So you've been given two reasons, in addition to the ones given earlier.

Of course our actions play a role in our destiny, who said otherwise? The question is: why did God make choosing between good and evil something that we do?

To reiterate: free will on this side of heaven implies FWE. Free will is good because it gives us an opportunity to cling to God, to realize what is at stake, to merit, and to know that our actions have real consequences.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

This reminds me of a Star Trak where Curt goes to a world where only good happens and jumps a big hole in the ground on a horse and because of that decides he does not want to stay there, since he would not have made that jump back in the real world.

Either edit this post and change "Trak" to "Trek" and "Curt" to "Kirk" or risk being being belittled by geeks forever.

If you cannot “fail” how significant is the success?

I said "suffer", not "fail". Although if I were an omnipotent father, I would have created my child so that he isn't bothered by failure or concerned with the significance of his successes.

Falling while learning to ride a bike helps us realize our: limits, need for help, need for protection, need to listen more, it is a humbling activity, helps us in our maturing and provides a teachable moment.

All of which an omnipotent god could have instilled in us without suffering.

By “evidence” people usually mean “knowledge” and in contrast to “faith”.

“Knowledge” leads to self-reliance and can actually work against a saving “faith” trusting God. Knowledge can puff you up (knowledge is power) while faith is a very humbling activity (something the lowliest mature adult on earth can do).

If I were an omnipotent god I wouldn't requite faith.

Evidence of God’s existence is all around us if we are willing to accept the evidence.

Evidence of a god's non existence is all around us if we are willing to accept the evidence.

Personally, I try and accept evidence for good reasons.