How does free will work with God?

[BigV]

God is aware of all prayer, this does not mean God says "yes" to every request, prayer is not a means of getting ones own way.

Sin causes a state of separation from God, yes God knows if you are separated from Him or not. God knows if you care about separation from from Him or not. This is far more significant than any "record keeping".

Well, if God is aware of prayers and needs, then it makes him even more culpable. Think about it. Imagine you have the power to stop a murder of a child, you hear the scream for help, and yet, you do nothing except record the name of the perpetrator. Doesn't this make you guilty?

Same with God. If he is just some uncaring and weak creator force, then it's understandable why he doesn't intervene. But being that he is a caring person....

 

[MrsFoundit]

Imagine you have the power to stop a murder of a child, you hear the scream for help, and yet, you do nothing except record the name of the perpetrator. Doesn't this make you guilty?

This is not how free will works.

But being that he is a caring person....

God is not "a person".

 

[MrsFoundit]

I think this is just politics. Someone else must always be blamed.

You were comparing your ability to "rule the world" with God.

"Truth be told, this is exactly how I rule the world. And this is also the way my neighbor's dog runs the world too."

So I said "Yes, God is not the ruler of this world."

So you neither you nor God are ruler of this world.

 

[topher694]

Let's say a person "A" wants to seriously injure or kill person "B" or persons "B", "C" and "D".

Let's also assume that persons "B", "C" and/or "D" who have no desire and no will to be injured.

In cases where a person "A" succeeds, as is often the case, unfortunately, whose free will does God honor? And how does God decide on these things? Hopefully those of you who have a personal relationship with God can help decipher this for the rest of us.

There is a difference between will and desire. You are conflating the two. Will requires action. The only one to act in your scenario is A. A is free will, B, C & D are desire.

Additionally, free will is not a guarantee of outcome (success), only the availability of opportunity to act.

 

[thomas_t]

Imagine you have the power to stop a murder of a child, you hear the scream for help, and yet, you do nothing except record the name of the perpetrator. Doesn't this make you guilty?

and then you imply that a caring God MUST help.
But that's not the story as I know it.
When A kills B, there are usually a million of people who need to make a decision of how to deal with murder from within their society. It isn't just a story of A,B,C and D being involved. If someone dies through murder, the entire people (E) is involved.

So, when it comes to free will.... God needs to respect the free will of E, too, in my opinion. If they decide to do nothing about murder, then God honors this kind of free will, too, I think.
In my opinion, we need to know how E reacts to murder in general and then retell the story.

 

[BigV]

There is a difference between will and desire. You are conflating the two. Will requires action. The only one to act in your scenario is A. A is free will, B, C & D are desire.

I think you are splitting hairs. If B is fighting for their life and end up succumbing to A's desire to kill them, then they had a will to live too, per your definition. And all was done under God's watchful eye, who desires to honor free will of everyone, or so we are told.

 

[topher694]

I think you are splitting hairs. If B is fighting for their life and end up succumbing to A's desire to kill them, then they had a will to live too, per your definition. And all was done under God's watchful eye, who desires to honor free will of everyone, or so we are told.

*I* am the one splitting hairs? That's... entertaining. Regardless I answered this in the second part of my statement. Free will is not a guarantee of outcome only the opportunity to act. If party A attacks and party B defends themselves, both have exercised free will regardless of the outcome.

This is not just a Bible thing. This is secular dictionary thing too.

 

[BigV]

*I* am the one splitting hairs? That's... entertaining. Regardless I answered this in the second part of my statement. Free will is not a guarantee of outcome only the opportunity to act. If party A attacks and party B defends themselves, both have exercised free will regardless of the outcome.

Does the 'opportunity to act' includes 'opportunity to live'? If so, party B is denied their opportunity to act by the actions of party A. And God, who is so concerned with 'free will' just watches and takes notes.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Does the 'opportunity to act' includes 'opportunity to live'? If so, party B is denied their opportunity to act by the actions of party A. And God, who is so concerned with 'free will' just watches and takes notes.

Apparently, God intervenes only to thwart the will of the weak.

 

[topher694]

Does the 'opportunity to act' includes 'opportunity to live'? If so, party B is denied their opportunity to act by the actions of party A. And God, who is so concerned with 'free will' just watches and takes notes.

Are you interested in all in actually hearing anyone's response or just criticizing them? You keep changing your own words then criticizing. Not very intellectual at all.

 

[topher694]

Apparently, God intervenes only to thwart the will of the weak.

Oh cool, let's just pop in and say something snarky that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic or question. You must feel smart.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Oh cool, let's just pop in and say something snarky that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic or question. You must feel smart.

Oh, it absolutely has to do with the topic and question.

This is about God not intervening in Person A raping Person B because God doesn't want to violate A's freewill. But, hey, who cares about B when they don't have the upper hand.

 

[MrsFoundit]

Does the 'opportunity to act' includes 'opportunity to live'? If so, party B is denied their opportunity to act by the actions of party A.

Yes, as you have already been told people can impose on each other.

And God, who is so concerned with 'free will' just watches and takes notes.

No, free will does not mean everyone can always have exactly what they want. It means God cannot always have what God wants, and people cannot always have what they want. Because one person can impose onto another, regardless of God and regardless of the other.

John 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

God is not the ruler of this world, and free will is applicable to why not. Free will means people can disobey God, are free to do so.

It does not mean "everyone always gets what they want."

 

[BNR32FAN]

Let's say a person "A" wants to seriously injure or kill person "B" or persons "B", "C" and "D".

Let's also assume that persons "B", "C" and/or "D" who have no desire and no will to be injured.

In cases where a person "A" succeeds, as is often the case, unfortunately, whose free will does God honor? And how does God decide on these things? Hopefully those of you who have a personal relationship with God can help decipher this for the rest of us.

Everyone has free will and is responsible for their own actions. That’s why everyone is held accountable for their actions.

 

[MrsFoundit]

This is about God not intervening in Person A raping Person B because God doesn't want to violate A's freewill. But, hey, who cares about B when they don't have the upper hand.

It is not because God doesn't want to violate A's freewill. It is just a fact we have it. It is universal, not selective. Yes, it is not fair. Free will is why life on earth is not fair. Christianity does not include a claim to making life perfectly fair on this earth.

 

[topher694]

Oh, it absolutely has to do with the topic and question.

This is about God not intervening in Person A raping Person B because God doesn't want to violate A's freewill. But, hey, who cares about B when they don't have the upper hand.

No it doesn't. Go back and read the original question. It says nothing about God intervening. Unless you are saying the original poster was being dishonest or disingenuous in their post.

 

[Tinker Grey]

No it doesn't. Go back and read the original question. It says nothing about God intervening. Unless you are saying the original poster was being dishonest or disingenuous in their post.

Yes, it does.

Either God intervenes or he does not. Apparently, he does not in order to allow A's free will. Apparently, B's free will is of no consequence.

This is always the excuse. God is always on the side of the winners. Just ask sports teams, Oscar and Grammy winners.

 

[topher694]

Yes, it does.

Either God intervenes or he does not. Apparently, he does not in order to allow A's free will. Apparently, B's free will is of no consequence.

This is always the excuse. God is always on the side of the winners. Just ask sports teams, Oscar and Grammy winners.

There is no excuse. It is a different topic with a different foundation. Partially related to this, yes, but more involved. And since the original question is built on false premises and moving goal posts, I wouldn't be so quick to ridicule.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I wouldn't be so quick to ridicule.

That’s the whole purpose for any of his threads.

 

[topher694]

That’s the whole purpose for any of his threads.

I've noticed. Drive by insults. You'd think with all the practice he'd be better at it. What a sad way to live.