God & Free Will

[Jesse Dornfeld]

It sounds like we are virtually on the exact same page. Hence, now we are up to speed, with what I asked another interlocutor - (with a slight twist for your specific case):

If one's will is taken away by God, as God causes the chosen to be inexorably drawn to Him, which-in-turn, is "the cause" for loving Him, why does it matter of their prior status? In such a case, all can be chosen.

[EDIT]

A) God chooses whom will be inexorably drawn to Him
B) Being inexorably drawn to God is the cause for truly loving God
C) Truly loving God is the criteria for salvation by God
D) Therefore, God decides whom will truly love Him

You are ignoring my full answers. Yes, the cause to loving God is God himself. This doesn't mean he takes away our will. In fact, and argument could be made that we are given a True Will after salvation.

Now, you will probably fight this distinction, in which I would say you never wanted to know my actual answer here as I invited you you ask me about my more detailed answer, which you don't seem interested in.

 

[cvanwey]

You are ignoring my full answers. Yes, the cause to loving God is God himself.

No I am not. I'm just trimming the fat. If God causes some to love Him, which you again just acknowledged, (and also prior in post #58), why not just cause all to love Him?

This doesn't mean he takes away our will. In fact, and argument could be made that we are given a True Will after salvation.

If God causes some to be inexorably drawn to Him, which is the reason you love Him, then He indeed took away your free will.

If you are given free will, "after salvation", are you speaking about after you ascend into Heaven?

Now, you will probably fight this distinction, in which I would say you never wanted to know my actual answer here as I invited you you ask me about my more detailed answer, which you don't seem interested in.

Your answer here does not address my OP. I told you prior, to start a new thread, and so did another interlocutor. If you read my OP again, you will see I acknowledge that 'free will' is a rather vast topic

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

No I am not. I'm just trimming the fat. If God causes some to love Him, which you again just acknowledged, (and also prior in post #58), why not just cause all to love Him?

Well, I think you are trimming the fat, so how do you suppose we come to an agreement?

If God causes some to be inexorably drawn to Him, which is the reason you love Him, then He indeed took away your free will.

That's not the theology I ascribe to. That might be how you personally understand it, but what you personally understand about things doesn't mean that is the only conclusion. The way I see it is that you are either a slave to sin or a slave to Christ. So while you might be right our will is not truly "free", this doesn't mean at any point our will is necessarily "free" it's just that it's a matter of what we are in service to. And that is where I would say being a slave to Christ means freedom, true freedom.

If you are given free will, "after salvation", are you speaking about after you ascend into Heaven?

See above. The question is a matter of who you want to serve. You can serve yourself, or you can serve Christ, but you are always serving someone. When I talk about salvation, as I have told you before (it might not have been you specifically, but I did say it) my position is that God DID save us is SAVING us and WILL save us.

Your answer here does not address my OP. I told you prior, to start a new thread, and so did another interlocutor. If you read my OP again, you will see I acknowledge that 'free will' is a rather vast topic

Fair enough. I would say if you actually care about this issue, you will take note of what I say.

 

[cvanwey]

Well, I think you are trimming the fat, so how do you suppose we come to an agreement?

Because you have not attempted to refute the logical conclusion posed in post #58. And since then, you have merely offered response(s) to reinforce post #58.

Thus, I politely ask you yet again.

Why not just cause all to love Him?

That's not the theology I ascribe to. That might be how you personally understand it, but what you personally understand about things doesn't mean that is the only conclusion. The way I see it is that you are either a slave to sin or a slave to Christ. So while you might be right our will is not truly "free", this doesn't mean at any point our will is necessarily "free" it's just that it's a matter of what we are in service to. And that is where I would say being a slave to Christ means freedom, true freedom.

Please see above.

See above. The question is a matter of who you want to serve. You can serve yourself, or you can serve Christ, but you are always serving someone. When I talk about salvation, as I have told you before (it might not have been you specifically, but I did say it) my position is that God DID save us is SAVING us and WILL save us.

You agree with me that God causes some to love Him. Thus, my only followup question, which was posed at the very bottom of the OP was, why not cause all to love Him?

And now, you want to speak about how God gives you the free will to choose whether or not to continue loving Him, after He chooses you to love Him??? Is this your ultimate follow up argument?

Fair enough. I would say if you actually care about this issue, you will take note of what I say.

Make a new post, if you wish. If it looks interesting, and/or if I disagree, and wish to engage, I likely will

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

Because you have not attempted to refute the logical conclusion posed in post #58. And since then, you have merely offered response(s) to reinforce post #58.

Thus, I politely ask you yet again.

Why not just cause all to love Him?

Because the default is that we sin and are hopelessly lost by ourselves. He doesn't "save everyone" because we are guilty by default, because of Adam, and it would mean God cannot exercise his justice of being a Holy God if he "saved everyone". The thing you are not seeing here, because you are not a Christian, is just how sinful mankind actually is. If you saw your sin, you would go to God for forgiveness. But you don't do that because you don't see the wrong you do or excuse it away.

And I have refuted your conclusions pretty much every step of the way. If you want to restate what your position is here, I can try and give a more "logical" answer based on how I see my theology. The thing is though, that you are not taking what I say about my theology into account but instead just sticking to your own way of seeing it.

You agree with me that God causes some to love Him. Thus, my only followup question, which was posed at the very bottom of the OP was, why not cause all to love Him?

See above.

And now, you want to speak about how God gives you the free will to choose whether or not to continue loving Him, after He chooses you to love Him??? Is this your ultimate follow up argument?

No. Again, you are asserting things about what I believe instead of being honest about what I am saying. If you actually cared, you would ask questions based on my PoV and not yours. But instead you try and hold the same narrative you have because you are trying to push a certain narrative of things without actually understanding what I am saying.

 

[Landon Caeli]

If you read my OP again, you will see I acknowledge that 'free will' is a rather vast topic

Indeed it is. My favorite is viewing it in a neuroscientific light.

 

[cvanwey]

Because the default is that we sin and are hopelessly lost by ourselves. He doesn't "save everyone" because we are guilty by default, because of Adam, and it would mean God cannot exercise his justice of being a Holy God if he "saved everyone". The thing you are not seeing here, because you are not a Christian, is just how sinful mankind actually is. If you saw your sin, you would go to God for forgiveness. But you don't do that because you don't see the wrong you do or excuse it away.

Looks like you agree with the interlocutor in post #10. God only causes the ones with the [correct deemed humility] to love Him. Which then begs a direct followup question to your line of reasoning. In which I'm also awaiting a response from this interlocutor, as well...

What is the explanation from the ones whom also profess being inexorably drawn to Him, whom did not first attempt to first "go to God"? If God only causes the ones whom do the specific task you described above, then we would not also have testimonials from former believers of other religions, agnostics, atheists, scoffers, and others.

And I have refuted your conclusions pretty much every step of the way.

My OP starts and stops with post #58. Most of which you have completely conceded. I now await an answer to the next organic follow up question above in red.

If you want to restate what your position is here, I can try and give a more "logical" answer based on how I see my theology. The thing is though, that you are not taking what I say about my theology into account but instead just sticking to your own way of seeing it.

You have given me no choice, thus far.

No. Again, you are asserting things about what I believe instead of being honest about what I am saying. If you actually cared, you would ask questions based on my PoV and not yours. But instead you try and hold the same narrative you have because you are trying to push a certain narrative of things without actually understanding what I am saying.

In post #61, you stated "an argument could be made that we are given a True Will after salvation."

In post #64, I stated "God gives you the free will to choose whether or not to continue loving Him, after He chooses you to love Him???"

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

Looks like you agree with the interlocutor in post #10. God only causes the ones with the [correct deemed humility] to love Him. Which then begs a direct followup question to your line of reasoning. In which I'm also awaiting a response from this interlocutor, as well...

Please repeat the "interlocutor".

Besides that, you don't know my whole position on God causes "the ones with the [correct deemed humility] to love him" so if you want to know, feel free to ask about this. Noteworthy, is that it adds to my perspective as it has to do with your conclusion on God drawing some and not others.

What is the explanation from the ones whom also profess being inexorably drawn to Him, whom did not first attempt

to first "go to God"? If God only causes the ones whom do the specific task you described above, then we would not also have testimonials from former believers of other religions, agnostics, atheists, scoffers, and others.

I'm not sure you really understand what I am saying. I am saying a true Christian DOESN'T first attempt to "go to God". So it's not a question "which ones?" because I feel NONE of them FIRST go to God. I feel if someone humbles themselves before God, then it was God who instilled that in them. This was certainly the case for me as I had at one point called myself an agnostic, an atheist and a pantheist before actually becoming a real committed Christian.

My OP starts and stops with post #58. Most of which you have completely conceded. I now await an answer to the next organic follow up question above in red.

If you are saying I have mostly "completely conceded" what you are saying, then we have different ideas about what that actually means. From my PoV, I have been consistent in my beliefs, but you are only looking at the answers I give where I am playing your game, which I do out of good will, so that you actually understand, but you seem to only be taking the "later" answers rather than ALL my answers. Of course this makes it LOOK like I have "completely conceded" to you, when it is actually closer to the truth that you have asked the same questions over and over and when I have decided to be GRACEFUL in trying to "go along" with your presuppositions in the hopes that you might UNDERSTAND what I am saying, this was largely done because I tried to answer in different ways which you rejected because they don't fit your own narrative. I don't expect you to actually engage with what I am saying here, because it's an explanation, and you generally do not do well with explanations with things if they don't fit the precise way you are trying to finagle a narrative on things. so from my point of view, I haven't actually "completely conceded" anything any more than trying to explain things to you in terms you can understand as an act of good faith that you do the same with me. But what I see is that you REPEATEDLY choose NOT to try and meet me where I am at. So when I DO play your dichotomous game, you then feel I have "completely conceded" when I've already said many time to you that your dichotomous games don't reflect my beliefs. So you are using my good will toward you to say I have conceded, when I have actually just tried to work with you. But you still don't actually "get" my position because you have a certain specific way you want to view things that you don't want to budge from.

I would encourage you to actually try and stealman my position I have taken on things as that is what I have tried to do with you in answering your questions on this.

You have given me no choice, thus far.

I have not a single clue what you mean by this. Do you perhaps mean I have not instead thrown a "dichotomous choice" to you in response? That sounds unreasonable since I don't actually think in terms of dichotomies and you seem to want to do just that.

In post #61, you stated

"an argument could be made that we are given a True Will after salvation."

In post #64, I stated "God gives you the free will to choose whether or not to continue loving Him, after He chooses you to love Him???"

Yes, you will see I did NOT include the word "free" when I was talking about the "will" of a person.

Overall, I feel I have been VERY gracious towards you in hopes you can try and get outside of yourself and actually fairly engage with what I have said and I see VERY LITTLE of you actually trying to see things from my perspective rather than your own. I HAVE tried to see things from your perspective even going as far as going along with your dichotomies which I don't think actually reflect what I believe, but I've done so anyways in good faith which you then use to say I have "completely conceded" my position. It's this kind of way of approaching things that just further entrench your own biases about things that I think is a bigger deal here rather than any of the answers I actually give you.

 

[cvanwey]

you don't know my whole position on God causes "the ones with the [correct deemed humility] to love him" so if you want to know, feel free to ask about this. Noteworthy, is that it adds to my perspective as it has to do with your conclusion on God drawing some and not others.

I asked for your reason(s). You gave me the one you gave me. I then responded. And now you want me to keep asking you if this is your only reason, rather than you just giving me the full reason(s)?

In post #58, the conclusion stands that God chooses who will love Him. I can confidently conclude we both agree, as you have yet to try and deny this conclusion.

In post #65, you stated "If you saw your sin, you would go to God for forgiveness. But you don't do that because you don't see the wrong you do or excuse it away."

You are asserting/insinuating this is why God does not choose for me to love Him? -- That I do not acknowledge my 'sin' in the correct way. --- And this is why He won;t engage me. Welp, this would be incorrect, as I asked for Him for decades, as I told you in another thread.

I'm not sure you really understand what I am saying. I am saying a true Christian DOESN'T first attempt to "go to God". So it's not a question "which ones?" because I feel NONE of them FIRST go to God. I feel if someone humbles themselves before God, then it was God who instilled that in them. This was certainly the case for me as I had at one point called myself an agnostic, an atheist and a pantheist before actually becoming a real committed Christian.

Please take note of the bold red above.

Okay, so you were not humble, and God made you humble. So why does He not do this to everyone? Please remember, I actively sought His presence for decades. I confessed my sins for decades. Heck, I was even raises Catholic, prior to converting to a non-denom...

If you are saying I have mostly "completely conceded" what you are saying, then we have different ideas about what that actually means. From my PoV, I have been consistent in my beliefs, but you are only looking at the answers I give where I am playing your game, which I do out of good will, so that you actually understand, but you seem to only be taking the "later" answers rather than ALL my answers. Of course this makes it LOOK like I have "completely conceded" to you, when it is actually closer to the truth that you have asked the same questions over and over and when I have decided to be GRACEFUL in trying to "go along" with your presuppositions in the hopes that you might UNDERSTAND what I am saying, this was largely done because I tried to answer in different ways which you rejected because they don't fit your own narrative. I don't expect you to actually engage with what I am saying here, because it's an explanation, and you generally do not do well with explanations with things if they don't fit the precise way you are trying to finagle a narrative on things. so from my point of view, I haven't actually "completely conceded" anything any more than trying to explain things to you in terms you can understand as an act of good faith that you do the same with me. But what I see is that you REPEATEDLY choose NOT to try and meet me where I am at. So when I DO play your dichotomous game, you then feel I have "completely conceded" when I've already said many time to you that your dichotomous games don't reflect my beliefs. So you are using my good will toward you to say I have conceded, when I have actually just tried to work with you. But you still don't actually "get" my position because you have a certain specific way you want to view things that you don't want to budge from.

Again, I'm only asking participants to respond to what I asked in post #1. If you want to go deeper, or 'flesh it out', make a new post. You already acknowledged this a while back.

Again, does the logical conclusion follow, in post #58? Please stop accusing me of dichotomies. It's a yes or no question. I even acknowledge how false dichotomies work, in the OP, FYI. And once you likely acknowledge yes once and for all, we can hash out the bottom of the OP.

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

I asked for your reason(s). You gave me the one you gave me. I then responded. And now you want me to keep asking you if this is your only reason, rather than you just giving me the full reason(s)?

Yes, not my only reason, my only explanation. You don't know my full explanation because when I asked you if you wanted to know my full explanation, you declined to ask me, which leads me to believe you don't actually care about my explanation, but only your own understanding of my explanation.

In post #58, the conclusion stands that God chooses who will love Him. I can confidently conclude we both agree, as you have yet to try and deny this conclusion.

We don't both fully agree on this because, as I said, some people are not drawn to God automatically. That was what I wanted you to ask me about if you actually wanted to know what my explanation was, which you declined in asking.

In post #65, you stated "If you saw your sin, you would go to God for forgiveness. But you don't do that because you don't see the wrong you do or excuse it away."

You are asserting/insinuating this is why God does not choose for me to love Him? -- That I do not acknowledge my 'sin' in the correct way. --- And this is why He won;t engage me. Welp, this would be incorrect, as I asked for Him for decades, as I told you in another thread.

First of all, I don't know what you asked God. I know you didn't ask in faith, that much has been pretty well confirmed from my point of view. You can say you asked God things, but I don't know what you actually asked God. You can say you asked God lots of things, but that still doesn't tell me what exactly you asked God. So when I say God did not choose for you to love him, it means I am talking about how you didn't prayed to God acknowledging your sin in a faithful way. And to be sure, this can be amended at any point. The question, in the matter of acknowledging your sin, is whether or not you actually feel remorse over your sin to God, and you can't actually feel remorse over your sin to God if you are not acknowledging your sin in a way you think God is actually real, and asking in faith. I can very well vainly ask God to eliminate the suffering of the whole world, but this isn't an honest request because I could not ask God this with faith because I have to ask God things according to His Will and not mine. And since I don't feel it is God's Will to eliminate the sufferings of the entire world, it would mean I would not be asking God in faith.

Please take note of the bold red above.

And I would say I don't believe God "chooses" in the way you may think. I think God "Wills" things to happen, but this is actually independent of "choice" meaning, God doesn't choose based between one thing and another, but that He "decides" things independent of a dichotomous "choice".

If you want to know what my position is on God and his Will, you can read what I said about God's Will, and how I negated that it needs to be "Free" in my thread seen here. You will see there how I see our Free Will vs. God's Providence. You will not be able to engage in THAT thread because it is in a Christian section, but feel free to ask questions about it in THIS thread and I can try and give you an answer.

Okay, so you were not humble, and God made you humble. So why does He not do this to everyone? Please remember, I actively sought His presence for decades. I confessed my sins for decades. Heck, I was even raises Catholic, prior to converting to a non-denom...

I don't know why you are lumping in the question of why God doesn't make EVERYONE humble with your own experience. I would guess it would be because there is some connection here between the two, such as that God didn't make you personally humble and that is why you are asking why God doesn't make everyone humble. That's the link I see, but feel free to correct me.

And I don't really care about what denomination you are. God can work withing any denomination as far as I am concerned but that doesn't mean God DOES work in every domination in every instance regarding individuals. Personally, I think there are a LOT of people who THINK they are Christians because they believe THAT Jesus forgives them of their sins, but this doesn't mean they believe IN Jesus forgiving them of their sins.

Here's an article about this second paragraph in this section:
February Monthly Report - William Lane Craig
The relevant part is in Saving Faith and Secular Faith and the rest of the article.

Again, I'm only asking participants to respond to what I asked in post #1. If you want to go deeper, or 'flesh it out', make a new post. You already acknowledged this a while back.

I've already done this but it is addressed to Christians and not non-Christians. You can still comment on that post if you want here, but you will have to look at the link I provided.

Again, does the logical conclusion follow, in post #58? Please stop accusing me of dichotomies. It's a yes or no question. I even acknowledge how false dichotomies work, in the OP, FYI. And once you likely acknowledge yes once and for all, we can hash out the bottom of the OP.

How can I say this any more clearly. Your dichotomies do not fit my position. As such, answering yes or no does not actually accord with my perspective. You are even admitting here that you just want me to say yes, hence, you are not actually looking to understand my perspective, but just want me to agree to your terms. I already answered post 58 so there nothing left to say about it. If you don't like my answer to that post, then perhaps you need to adjust the method that you are trying to understand me. This is as clear as I can make it to you.

If the answer is B), not only does this negate the 'free will' argument, but also implies that God imposes His own will on some, to be drawn to Him, and not others. Why not impose on all humans?

No, it does not mean he takes away our "Free Will" in EVERY instance, which is the conclusion you are trying to smuggle into this. I've already explained that we have Free Will SOME of the time, but not ALL of the Time. So from my perspective, we still have the ability to make "Free Will" choices SOME of the time regardless of if we are drawn to God or not by His Will and that just because God draws some to Himself outside of our "Free Will" or not does not mean there are not OTHER "Free Will" choices that we can make. I don't know how I can make this more clear. Your proposition assumes we either have "Free Will" in EVERY case or we do NOT have "Free Will" in EVERY case and I am trying to say that God can draw us to Himself or not and this does not have an impact on ALL our "Free Will" choices because we do not have UNLIMITED "Free Will" in the case that God draws us to him or not. More to the point, if we have Free Will in EVERY case or not, then your conclusion would hold weight. But I don't believe we have Free Will in EVERY case or not on either side of God drawing us. So God drawing us is only ONE instance of relating to our Free Will and is not EVERY instance of our Free Will since we still have choices to make that are not necessarily based on God drawing us or not.

 

[cvanwey]

@True Counterphobia

In respect for what you stated to me, long ago, I'm giving you an 'out'

You stated you do not like to go 'tit for tat'. Most the the OP, we agree. We just have the very bottom to resolve.

I'll start anew, as you look to have changed your reasoning a bit, to this portion?

Why doesn't God make everyone love Him?

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

I'll start anew, as you look to have changed your reasoning a bit, to this portion?

No, I have not "changed" anything about what I believe in the course of this thread.

Why doesn't God make everyone love Him?

I already answered this very explicitly when you asked this explicitly. I have not changed my position on this. There might be more to say about it, but this doesn't mean I haven't given you my perspective on this. The question you should ask is, "In the case of X and Y in what you have said about God making everyone love him, how do you explain the differences between X and Y?" And I would probably have to ADD MORE of my perspective given you do that. But as it is, I don't know what the discrepancy is between what you think I am saying in X and Y so I can't comment on that.

Please point out the differences in X and Y that you think I have "changed" and I will try and give more of an explanation on what I believe.

 

[Moral Orel]

Good questions, and actually here even the lead in question is a moment when a significant answer, the most key answer, already is -- it's the situation of the.... ....(looking for a wording).... (maybe this wording is imperfect, but I'll try it) -- the natural urge of the growing/maturing organism/being/self to try to take the reins, not only for some things one has already mastered (that's so key, not just for what we are able!)...

From my perspective, an omnipotent God designs reality to work however He pleases. Rain naturally falls down, but that's because God designed it that way. If we naturally gravitate towards evil, then God designed us that way. There's no logical reason He couldn't design creatures to gravitate towards good.

 

[Halbhh]

From my perspective, an omnipotent God designs reality to work however He pleases. Rain naturally falls down, but that's because God designed it that way. If we naturally gravitate towards evil, then God designed us that way. There's no logical reason He couldn't design creatures to gravitate towards good.

I don't think we gravitate towards evil, but instead inevitably try it out and then continue often in it, which isn't gravitation, but more like...habituation.

 

[Moral Orel]

I don't think we gravitate towards evil, but instead inevitably try it out and then continue often in it, which isn't gravitation, but more like...habituation.

Meh, however you want to phrase it is fine with me. Why did God design creatures so that they inevitably try out being evil?

 

[cvanwey]

No, I have not "changed" anything about what I believe in the course of this thread.

I already answered this very explicitly when you asked this explicitly. I have not changed my position on this. There might be more to say about it, but this doesn't mean I haven't given you my perspective on this. The question you should ask is, "In the case of X and Y in what you have said about God making everyone love him, how do you explain the differences between X and Y?" And I would probably have to ADD MORE of my perspective given you do that. But as it is, I don't know what the discrepancy is between what you think I am saying in X and Y so I can't comment on that.

Please point out the differences in X and Y that you think I have "changed" and I will try and give more of an explanation on what I believe.

1. You conceded God is the cause for some to be inexorably drawn to Him.
2. You then conceded being inexorably drawn to Him is the cause for loving Him.

Why doesn't God cause everyone to love Him?

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

1. You conceded God is the cause for some to be inexorably drawn to Him.
2. You then conceded being inexorably drawn to Him is the cause for loving Him.

Why doesn't God cause everyone to love Him?

Because the default is that we sin and are hopelessly lost by ourselves. He doesn't "save everyone" because we are guilty by default, because of Adam, and it would mean God cannot exercise his justice of being a Holy God if he "saved everyone". The thing you are not seeing here, because you are not a Christian, is just how sinful mankind actually is. If you saw your sin, you would go to God for forgiveness. But you don't do that because you don't see the wrong you do or excuse it away.

 

[Pommer]

Because the default is that we sin and are hopelessly lost by ourselves

It seems odd that God created human beings with the capacity for free will and then condemn them for using it.

 

[Jesse Dornfeld]

It seems odd that God created human beings with the capacity for free will and then condemn them for using it.

That's where I would say we are just creatures meant to give God glory. It's about Him, not us. That is probably not convincing, but it's how I see it. If God is real, I wouldn't expect reality to be about the creation, but the creator.

 

[Pommer]

That's where I would say we are just creatures meant to give God glory. It's about Him, not us. That is probably not convincing, but it's how I see it. If God is real, I wouldn't expect reality to be about the creation, but the creator.

Doubly odd that God should give us a brain that can conceptualize there being a “god” then?
If I devote myself to understanding (as much as I am able) God but have “chosen” the wrong god, are my efforts in understanding God fruitless?