Is free-will ever really an informed choice? IDK

[2PhiloVoid]

My point is that the final redaction of the Pentateuch is late and that certain legends have been incorporated that are not historically accurate or that represent a distorted interpretation of historical reality. Taking every word literally results in misunderstanding of God's character.


You, too.

You and I obviously haven't talked much. Otherwise, you'd know that I don't posit "standard notions" about how to engage the Bible. I very much have no woodenly literal expectations of any of the biblical texts and the kind of Hermeneutics I engage in takes the various tropes of Biblical Criticism --and the pros and cons of various sides within those same tropes--and thereby, however imperfectly done, takes what you're saying very much into account.

So, thanks for your time, though.

 

[bling]

Isn't a free-will choice like a shot in the dark?

Only God knows the end from the beginning of a thing.
How could we ever hope to make a right decision based on our human abilities to do so?

I know, I know... that's why we follow the teachings of the Bible. It's already figured out for us.
And we also have a God-given conscience to guide us. Not to mention the indwelling Spirit.

The most catastrophic example I can think of is Adam. (the first Adam)

In the Genesis account, God tells Adam not to eat of the tree, or he will certainly die.
What did that mean to Adam? Did he have any idea what death was?

After that discussion with God, Eve was taken out of Adam via his rib.
Since Eve hadn't been there for the "do not eat" discussion, Adam needed to misinform her.
Yes, misinform. Where did, "not even touch it" come from? Not from God.
According to the text, anyway.

So, how informed was Adam's free-will choice?

Is free-will ever really an informed choice?

Would you honor the misinformed free-will choice of your own child if you knew it would cause them harm?
What about the Father of all fathers? Better informed than any human father. What would he do?

We never have all the information, but we can be judged for the choices we make given the information we have. Look at the older son in the prodigal son's parable, he does not have all the possible information he available to him, but does he have all he needs to make the choice to join or not join the party? Would the father threatening the older son help him to happily go to the party? Would the father having servants drag the son to the party help him to enjoy the party? Is it an educational issue or a heart issue? God is judging the hearts of people.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

A free will choice only makes a difference if you can actually do the thing you are choosing to do. You have the free will to choose to make the moon into a giant pizza. But since you are powerless do actually do it, it makes no difference.
What are people actually choosing when they are presented the gospel? They do not choose to believe. That is not how belief comes. Belief comes by revelation and revelation comes by a spoken word from Christ. It is little more than awareness.
What we choose to do is to begin to act in accordance with the truth we are aware of. It would be insane to act the opposite of what you know to be true, especially if it involved a cost. Pretenders do not confess Jesus if it means they will be rejected by family, friends, or co-workers. Your choice narrows down to this. If you hold that Jesus is Lord, the Bible is His word, and Righteousness is the way... then you will act in accordance with those facts. If you do not, then you will not. The choice is the corresponding actions, and they are the pudding proof.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Would you honor the misinformed free-will choice of your own child if you knew it would cause them harm?
What about the Father of all fathers? Better informed than any human father. What would he do?

Temporal harm, or eternal harm?

 

[Mark Quayle]

A free will choice only makes a difference if the you can actually do the think you are choosing to do. You have the free will to choose to make the moon into a giant pizza. But since you are powerless do actually do it, it makes no difference.
What are people actually choosing when they are presented the gospel. They do not choose to believe. That is not how belief comes. Belief comes by revelation and revelation comes by a spoken word from Christ. It is little more than awareness.
What we choose to do is to begin to act in accordance with the truth we are aware of. It would be insane to act the opposite of what you know to be true, especially if it involved a cost. Pretenders do not confess Jesus if it means they will be rejected by family, friends, or co-workers. Your choice narrows down to this. If you hold that Jesus is Lord, the Bible is His word, and Righteousness is the way... then you will act in accordance with those facts. If you do not, then you will not. The choice is the corresponding actions, and they are the pudding proof.

Your description bases on the aware intelligence of the actor. But one also acts by the mere nature of the actor. And that does not deny 'free will' as defined by 'real choice' and 'one's inclinations'.

 

[Saint Steven]

Temporal harm, or eternal harm?

I'll go with temporal, if those are my only two choices.
Like any physician. It might hurt to get the help you need.

 

[Diamond72]

That a perfect and sinless man would have to die to pay the penalty of death for them? Doubtful.

We are told that Abraham was the first to realize that. He understood that God would provide the sacrifice.