Free will - not in scripture

[stranger]

Having imagined choices does not demonstrate freedom of will .

Consider more deeply , man is not indeterminate at all...

We call ourselves 'intelligent' because we react to circumstance , that is determinacy, not indeterminate ...

Paul put it very clearly I think about the will of men , do you then disagree with this?

Rom 7: 14 ¶ For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

- Are som saying then that Paul got it wrong, just to preserve their personal need to think their will is free? ... that there is no determinate law as Paul describes here binding men to sin ,and that man's will is unable to break?

- What does John say of those who follow Jesus, are they born by their own will ? ...they are NOT! :-

John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

- Is man saved from death by the will of man? Again the scripture is quite explicit :-

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

- Who then by free will can choose to be the image of Jesus ? Again the scripture is clear , God has done the choosing, from the beginning :-

Rom 8:29 ¶ For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

 

[kedaman]

I don't think Paul is saying that we have no free will, but he is talking about his carnal self that must die. Which of the laws you delight in that is up to you.

 

[Cerberus~]

If there is no free will, then how did Eve eat of the tree? How can she choose to break the law, but cannot choose to follow it?

If there is no free will, how are any of us responsible for what we do? How can your God send us to Hell if we had no choice in the matter? How can such a Being be called "loving", "just", or "merciful"?

 

[kedaman]

Certainly he would not be just to send people to hell if they lacked free will in the first place.

 

[Norseman]

Certainly he would not be just to send people to hell if they lacked free will in the first place.

Maybe he doesn't send them to hell.

 

[SackLunch]

If there is no free will, then how did Eve eat of the tree? How can she choose to break the law, but cannot choose to follow it?

If there is no free will, how are any of us responsible for what we do? How can your God send us to Hell if we had no choice in the matter? How can such a Being be called "loving", "just", or "merciful"?

Can of worms alert! This is a centuries-long debate, that's for sure.

I agree about the Adam & Eve thing. God created them with a free will, not just to blindly to God as if they had no brains. Why would God create man with no brains? He wouldn't. He gave man a free will to choose.

 

[levi501]

If there is no free will, how are any of us responsible for what we do?

ultimately we aren't.

How can your God send us to Hell if we had no choice in the matter?
How can such a Being be called "loving", "just", or "merciful"?

exactly he can't, therefor hell doesn't exist.

 

[cobaltburrito]

When you think about it free will doesn't really exist regardless of what any religion says.
The decisions you make are influenced by the actions of those around you, that makes bias toward one choice or the other. If you actively choose to disgard the influence and go with the other one you are still being influenced by the other party(you are choosing the other choice to have an effect on the other party.....i.e you are being controlled by your perception of what they want..)
Not very clear and probably wrong but thats my HO.

 

[Blackguard_]

If there is no free will, then how did Eve eat of the tree? How can she choose to break the law, but cannot choose to follow it?

basically, god wanted it to happen. He engineered events so that the serpent would tempt her and she would fail, maybe he hardened her heart like Pharoh?

And even if A and E had free-will, they lost it about the time they ate the fruit and became enslaved to sin.

If there is no free will, how are any of us responsible for what we do? How can your God send us to Hell if we had no choice in the matter? How can such a Being be called "loving", "just", or "merciful"?

Romans 9
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

The decisions you make are influenced by the actions of those around you, that makes bias toward one choice or the other. If you actively choose to disgard the influence and go with the other one you are still being influenced by the other party(you are choosing the other choice to have an effect on the other party.....i.e you are being controlled by your perception of what they want..)

Mere influence is no where near the Determinism you seem to be hinting at. If influence can be ignored, the choice is still free as you made the choice between the two even if there are things influencing the decision as it is ultimately up to you to choose. Ability to choose between the options means the will is at least partially free.

"the decsions you make are determined by the actions of those around you" would be a better phrasing if you are a Determinist.

 

[cobaltburrito]

I am not exactly sure what a determinist is, could you explain?

 

[Blackguard_]

I am not exactly sure what a determinist is, could you explain?

A determinist believes events are all part of a causal chain, everything that happens is determined by a prior cause which was determined by prior cause itself and so on. It came out of the 17-18th century view of a clockwork physical universe, and was a simple extension of that to pschological phenomena. In other words, they see pschology as being just like Newtonian physics where events are determined based on casues, laws, etc. The mind is no more free to go where it wants than a ball on a pool table is free to go where it wants when hit by the cue, they are both slaves to cause and effect and laws that determine what they will do.

hope that helps.

 

[kedaman]

A determinist believes events are all part of a causal chain, everything that happens is determined by a prior cause which was determined by prior cause itself and so on. It came out of the 17-18th century view of a clockwork physical universe, and was a simple extension of that to pschological phenomena. In other words, they see pschology as being just like Newtonian physics where events are determined based on casues, laws, etc. The mind is no more free to go where it wants than a ball on a pool table is free to go where it wants when hit by the cue, they are both slaves to cause and effect and laws that determine what they will do.

hope that helps.

A determinist doesn't have to make such assertions about the mind.

 

[Blackguard_]

A determinist doesn't have to make such assertions about the mind.

really? what would they say about the mind?

 

[kedaman]

really? what would they say about the mind?

That depends on the determinist in question. They may be compatibilists or incompatibilists.

 

[levi501]

Either an event is determinate(caused) or indeterminate(uncaused)... this includes human cognition.
Compatibilists is a position of emotion veiled in pragmaticism that still fails to explain how an event could be uncaused.

 

[Blackguard_]

They may be compatibilists or incompatibilists.

Oh, you're right. i forgot about the compatablists. Then again I see choice as the primary action of a free-will and a Determined will can't choose.

 

[kedaman]

Either an event is determinate(caused) or indeterminate(uncaused)... this includes human cognition.
Compatibilists is a position of emotion veiled in pragmaticism that still fails to explain how an event could be uncaused.

A compatibilist doesn't have to explain how an event could be uncaused. They don't have to claim that there are such events.

 

[Simonline]

Having imagined choices does not demonstrate freedom of will .

Consider more deeply , man is not indeterminate at all...

We call ourselves 'intelligent' because we react to circumstance , that is determinacy, not indeterminate ...

Paul put it very clearly I think about the will of men , do you then disagree with this?

Rom 7: 14 ¶ For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

- Are som saying then that Paul got it wrong, just to preserve their personal need to think their will is free? ... that there is no determinate law as Paul describes here binding men to sin ,and that man's will is unable to break?

- What does John say of those who follow Jesus, are they born by their own will ? ...they are NOT! :-

John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

- Is man saved from death by the will of man? Again the scripture is quite explicit :-

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

- Who then by free will can choose to be the image of Jesus ? Again the scripture is clear , God has done the choosing, from the beginning :-

Rom 8:29 ¶ For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

So you must then, by definition, believe that God's judgment is a monumental travesty of justice, a 'kangeroo court', since God has absolutely no right to judge any man who is not free to make any kind of moral choice. That's like God judging you and condeming you to the everlasting Lake of Fire simply for breathing (a function over which (like sin) you have absolutely no control).

You can't eat your cake and have it?!

Stop looking at just one side of the coin and turn it over!

Simonline.

 

[TexasMike]

LOL, you all are making this way too complicated. 1st off either you believe or you dont, plain and simple.

As far as free will, its the whole reason we were created in the 1st place. We are created in his image, he is similar to us, but perfect in every way. We laugh, he laughs, we cry he cries, we are jealous he is jealous, we need love, he needs love. Now the angels were created specifically to worship him. Yes, there was a time when an angel went against his very nature and thought he could be God. God being an actual creature, no one else can be God becuase HE is God just like I am me and you are you.

Anyway,
God wanted to create a creature that loved him by choice, just exactly the same way that we want someone(s) to love us just becuase they do and not by force. Well, to give choic he had to give choices. Stupid thing is that EVE and Adam KNEW God and still chose not to trust him, so by our own choices came sin, sorrow, pain, death, all theses things. None of it would have been necessary had we not made the wrong choice.

So then God tried to just give it to us plain and simple to live by, and there was the 10 commandments. We blew that and even though GOD wrote on stone with his very finger RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM they still blew it.

Then came Christ, a Lamb, a Shepherd, all man, all GOD,,,simply living the WORD and fulfilling the law so that he could become "the gift of GOD" fpr us. This elminated the need for everything except a simple belief that 1. God Created us,2. We failed him, 3. He created a perfect sacrifice that was enough to cover every sin, past, present and future. Jesus had the right and ASKED to be this perfect sacrifice against the will of his own body, selflessly, so that we would have a simple chance to reconcile with God. A simple choice, back to the basics, just about where Adam and Eve were we have a choice... All we wants to know is do you (really, in your heart of hearts) believe in me? do you love(really, in your heart of hearts) me? do you trust(really, in your heart of hearts) me?

He gave us a GIFT, you cant work for a gift, its GIVEN to you, free of charge. You dont have to pay for it, you cant possibly earn it.. Its a GIFT for goodness sakes. The only wages the bible speaks of are the WAGES of sin, and we all know what the bible says about that. But the next phrase is the key. The "Gift of God" was Christ and his sacrifice. Its sitting there, right in front of you. All you have to do is take it and unwrap it and call it your own..

If there is no free will then how does this scripture work? It is not my will that ANY man should perish but that ALL should come to repentance. If GODs will always prevailed and we have no chioce, why waste the time to even make such a statement? Why even have a Bible, lets just run amock because if you are screwed you are screwed and if you are destined for heaven nothing is going to keep you from it. Lets just all go nuts and follow our carnal desires! Whats it gonna hurt?? WOOOHOOO!

15 So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." He said to him, "Feed My lambs." 16 He said to him again a second time, "Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?" He said to Him, "Yes, Lord; You know that I love You." He said to him, "Tend My sheep." 17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus said to him, "Feed My sheep. 18 Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish." 19 This He spoke, signifying by what death he would glorify God. And when He had spoken this, He said to him, "Follow Me."

 

[levi501]

A compatibilist doesn't have to explain how an event could be uncaused. They don't have to claim that there are such events.

that's right a compatibilist just moves the goal posts by using a different deffinition of freewill.