Freewill For Mankind-An Excuse For God

[Epiphoskei]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Do you hold that creation, or man, is a “holy” creation of God? Where did you learn that? It's not in scripture.[/FONT]

Both were created perfectly. That is in scripture. They cannot have fallen of their own free will any more than God can sin of his own free will.

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]I agree the analogy is imperfect, but in a different way. A machine is more free than a man according to Calvinism. A hard drive can (decide to?) crash; can simply stop working; a man cannot. A man can commit suicide, but will nonetheless “work” or “operate” forever in hell. So computers are limited to the nature of electronics, which are created by God, and man is limited directly to the nature of God. Therefore, being once removed, machines are actually one step freer than men. Make sense? No? Then neither does a rigid predestination.[/FONT]

Men aren't free if they can't commit suicide and actually destroy their soul, but if they exist forever in hell somehow they're less free than the material world, so I should dispense with predestination? You want to try that one again? Last time I checked, it isn't open to dispute within any orthodox branch of Christianity that men will exist forever in either glory or judgement, and that has nothing to do with predestination at all.

Nonetheless it is a non sequitur to say that because something which we are not like is limited, we are not limited. The difference between a human and a robot does not consist of a lack of limitation.

 

[JimfromOhio]

All creatures are subject to God's control and authority however. God is in control in all of His creatures activities even though they are "slave to sin". I truly believe that the Bible says that "our will" is a slave because we live in a sinful body. The question become when a Christian becomes a believer in Christ, Is he/she either a slave to sin, or a slave to righteousness (In Christ).

God gives every sinner just that freewill (bound to slave) and each sinners can take their sins as far as they want. Slave to sin gives each sinner that freedom. Augustine said, “Free will without grace has the power to do nothing but sin. Free will without grace has the power to do nothing but sin.” A sinner can choose his category but he can’t choose anything other than sin. A sinner cannot choose God until God convicts him/her of their sins. A sinner is saved when the Holy Spirit convicting a sinner to repent and help a sinner change their ways (not of your own). If they didn't feel the conviction and didn't have the motivation to change from "within", then their salvation might be in question.

 

[Chesterton]

Both were created perfectly. That is in scripture. They cannot have fallen of their own free will any more than God can sin of his own free will.

I don't know languages, but every English Bible I've read says "good", not perfect or holy. And good, perfect and holy are three different ideas.

Men aren't free if they can't commit suicide and actually destroy their soul, but if they exist forever in hell somehow they're less free than the material world, so I should dispense with predestination? You want to try that one again?

No, I think I got it right. But what I'd like you to try is to clarify exactly how you make any distinction between the material world and humanity. If I have no will, then I'm an organized group of atoms the same as any electronic device.

Last time I checked, it isn't open to dispute within any orthodox branch of Christianity that men will exist forever in either glory or judgement, and that has nothing to do with predestination at all.

No. That we exist forever does have something to do with predestination; and where we exist forever has even more to do with predestination.

Nonetheless it is a non sequitur to say that because something which we are not like is limited, we are not limited. The difference between a human and a robot does not consist of a lack of limitation.

No. Of course it consists of that. There's much more to it, but it at least consists of that much, so it's incomplete in that it's not a one-for-one comparison, but it's not a non sequitur.