Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[LifelongLearner]

Can we really exercise free will?

God could have created automated robots
He could have forced us to obey.
God could have forced the universe to praise him continually like a dictator

But that is not love.

God knew the beginning from the end when He gave us free will and He knew we would use it to sin. Knowing that sin would result God knew it would cost His Son. God was willing to allow free will even at the cost of giving His son on the cross.

If we do not have free will, then whoever is controlling us is guilty of sin.

Free Will makes evil possible, but it is also the only thing that makes love, goodness or joy that is of any true worth.

We must be free to voluntarily love our creator. Happiness that is forced is not real happiness.

We are createred with free will. We become slaves to sin but even then Jesus promises to set us free.

Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Can understand why you think that but us not having free will does not mean we're controlled at all. Have explained many times through this post that so many having competing choice/agency, is why free will is impossible.

We're really scratch each other backists, every dog has its day sort of thing.

 

[LifelongLearner]

I seems to me YOU do. You people can't seem to grasp free will DOES NOT = choice. Period. So your argument falls flat because no one is saying we don't have choice. I'm starting to think it's a spiritual thing and those who have not been born again in truth just CANNOT see it. It's just not possible. I just can not understand how this flies so far over your head. That goes for everyone that let their pride take over and have to add "our choice" into the mix as a requirement for salvation, that our choice is a boast worthy act on our part that God doesn't get the glory for. If we choose to be saved then we can choose to be unsaved. Neither is true. I think it's you that's confused and every one of the CDSC (Calvinist Derangement Syndrome Cult) as well.

We're on the same page for sure, excellent comment.

 

[Jimbone]

The manners may be baddish, but the theology is quite good IMO--and bad theology also makes Jesus look horrible.

Not as bad as the way you treat others that follow Jesus on this site, that is a direct slap to the face of the Man who said we should be known by our LOVE for each other. Christians are your main target, not atheist, not Hindus, Mormons, witnesses, or Muslims, nope your Holy Mission from God is to attack fellow believers in Jesus. You're the ultimate insult to everything Jesus taught so don't act as if you have some kind of moral high ground here. You expose yourself better that anyone could here every day with the way you speak to others. You're a joke everyone can see plainly, and it's sad not funny.

That's all I have to say to you, I dusted your mess off my feet a long time ago. Have a great day brother.

 

[HeIsHere]

Can understand why you think that but us not having free will does not mean we're controlled at all. Have explained many times through this post that so many having competing choice/agency, is why free will is impossible.

We're really scratch each other backists, every dog has its day sort of thing.

It would be the wrong definition to define "free will" as the ability to control outcomes.

One can argue on a philosophical or theological level but it is also part of neuroscience and I think the research there is pretty interesting.
I personally do not think that believing the Gospel message is a "free will" argument at all.

 

[SonJudgment]

Re "Eternal damnation is a reality and the scriptures are abundantly clear about this.": Not really, regarding this and many doctrines. Hence the bulk of CC.

Re "Have you considered that just by being forbidden that alone means there is no freewill. Firstly because God didn't give them a choice to eat or not to eat, he you know, forbade them to eat of the tree. Secondly God told them what the consequences would be and they were most certainly not free from those consequences.": Yes, I have, and this is what I concluded:

People who are mystified by evil and repulsed by its punishment do not realize that the essential aspect of being a human rather than a robot or subhuman creature is moral free will (MFW), which is what enables a person to experience love and meaning. This is what makes humans different from animals, whose behavior is governed mainly by instinct. This is what it means to be created in God’s image (GN 1:26-27; robot or responsible)?

God could not force people to return His love without abrogating their humanity. If God were to zap ungodly souls, it would be tantamount to forcing conversions at gunpoint, which would not be free and genuine. If God were to prevent people from behaving hatefully, then He would need to prevent them from thinking evilly, which would make human souls programmed automatons.

Even if God were to prove Himself to skeptics by means of a miracle, they might believe for awhile and then as their memories began to fade they would probably think that God had died and revert to their former doubt—necessitating an endless string of miracles for each generation (recapitulating the story of the Israelites on the way to Canaan after the exodus from Egypt).

However, for reasons we may understand only sufficiently rather than completely, God designed reality so that experiencing His presence is less than compelling, so that even Jesus (God the Son) on the cross cried out “My God [the Father], why have you forsaken [taken God the Spirit from] me?” (MT 27:46, PS 51:11) This phenomenon is sometimes called “distanciation”, because we experience God as distant from us and “unknown” (ACTS 17:23), even though He is close or immanent, “for in Him we live and move and have our being” (ACTS 17:28). Distanciation is not forsaken, but it does mean that we walk by faith, not by proof regarding ultimate reality, which allows souls to doubt the existence of both God and hell and thus choose what to believe.

God’s normative means of conversion is persuasion rather than coercion (MT 12:39, 24:24, 1CR 1:22-23). This is seen very clearly in Jesus’ lament over the obstinacy of Jerusalem (MT 23:37). Two unusual theophanies included when God appeared to Moses (in a burning bush per EX 3:2-6), whom God wanted to establish the Jewish lineage for the Messiah (OT), and to Saul/Paul (as the resurrected Jesus in ACTS 9:3-6), whom God chose to establish the NT church of Christ. Miracles are rare (not normative). God's persuasion involves education or teaching souls their need for Him, which requires recording His Word in Scripture.

I don't have too much time before I have to leave so I have to be brief for now.

If you don't think it's pretty clear that scripture says there is eternal damnation that's frankly amazing to me considering a large chunk of the Bible speaks very explicitly about it. I think you should make a topic of its own about this though, I would definitely jump on that, that be something to spice up the incredible staleness of late in the BDF I suppose.

As for the error of freewill, ah it's so cliche when they try to justify evil with freewill which they don't even have and claim if they didn't have freewill and be evil like the serpent told them in the Garden that they would be a robot. God doesn't really need to persuade anyone, it's his way or the highway to hellfire, and there will be alot of creations of all sorts weeping and gnashing their teeth forever with the serpent that deceived them. It reminds me that there was old man at a church I used to go to and he pointed out one day that all the people that preach freewill never use their supposed freewill to obey God, it's always their excuse for why they disobey God. At the time I thought it was kind of a funny hot take, but over the years I have observed that man was very much correct.

 

[LifelongLearner]

Page 6, Post #112.

Well sorry to disappoint you, but it might just be you in that boat. To be really just be forward, I typically just throw my initial post to a BDF topic directly addressing the OP and then usually it turns into the reply chain and so I just merely reply out of courtesy until it either just devolves too far past the topic or the point gets so basically exhausted that I just am very monotonously repeating myself. To be really cut and dry about it, nothing anyone has said, both correctly or incorrectly, is anything new. The topic about the error of freewill itself and the side tangents are actually pretty common on this forum and other religious circles. I will probably just retire from the topic soon barring any interesting reply since it will just inevitably be destined to begin to loop into itself.

Agree, i'm pretty new to the forum too and Magenta also said free will pops up regularly in posts. Should have used forum search before posting this, very likely i'd have posted something else instead.

Oh well, lesson learned

 

[SonJudgment]

Agree, i'm pretty new to the forum too and Magenta also said free will pops up regularly in posts. Should have used forum search before posting this, very likely i'd have posted something else instead.

Oh well, lesson learned

Oh don't worry about it, you were meant to make this topic even if it is not immediately obvious to us mere mortals. How the unbreakable script of freewill topics will inevitably rule out freewill and instead prove destiny.

 

[LifelongLearner]

It would be the wrong definition to define "free will" as the ability to control outcomes.

One can argue on a philosophical or theological level but it is also part of neuroscience and I think the research there is pretty interesting.
I personally do not think that believing the Gospel message is a "free will" argument at all.

Personally think the idea we have free will is wrong but we do have some agency and choice. To my mind only God himself has free will, it isn't just making a choice but being able to fulfill it too.

There are approximately 8.2 billion people alive currently, often in very close proximity. Free will is impossible in such circumstances, as we must accommodate the choices of others too. Disagree with determinism too, think the world would be a kinder place if people respected the rights of others, as much as they do their own.

And of course, the world would be a much better place if Adam and Eve hadn't chomped on the apple.

 

[HeIsHere]

Personally think the idea we have free will is wrong but we do have some agency and choice. To my mind only God himself has free will, it isn't just making a choice but being able to fulfill it too.

There are approximately 8.2 billion people alive currently, often in very close proximity. Free will is impossible in such circumstances, as we must accommodate the choices of others too. Disagree with determinism too, think the world would be a kinder place if people respected the rights of others, as much as they do their own.

And of course, the world would be a much better place if Adam and Eve hadn't chomped on the apple.

Can you define what you mean by the term "free will?"

 

[LifelongLearner]

Oh don't worry about it, you were meant to make this topic even if it is not immediately obvious to us mere mortals. How the unbreakable script of freewill topics will inevitably rule out freewill and instead prove destiny.

Cheers for that, great reply, have an ear to ear wry grin on my mush at the moment

 

[LifelongLearner]

Can you define what you mean by the term "free will?"

Sorry, delayed reply as i confused user names. it's being able to make and execute a choice, without constraints or external influence. The only being who can do that in my opinion, is God himself, we need the good will of others to realise our choices.

We also have to recognise they have the same rights, not doing so is part of the reason why the world is largely harsh and unfair. Hope that makes some sense, i'm pretty tuckered out from repeating the same thing over on this post.

 

[LifelongLearner]

And i need to give my little cat her treats, she definitely isn't happy!

 

[BillyBob]

@LifelongLearner

Since you are new to Christianity, I would like to recommend that you download and study the Canons of Dort, (if you have not done so already).
This is one of my favorite documents to come out of the reformation. It is brief and has a wealth of information within its pages, some of which pertains to your topic. It not only addresses your topic, but backs up it up with Scripture.
Should you find it trustworthy and agree with its teaching, it is a nice document to have handy. If not, then you can always delete it.
If you decide to do so, simply do a search for "Canons of Dort". I like the document which is put out by the CRCNA. Not that it is different, I just like their layout.

 

[LifelongLearner]

@LifelongLearner

Since you are new to Christianity, I would like to recommend that you download and study the Canons of Dort, (if you have not done so already).
This is one of my favorite documents to come out of the reformation. It is brief and has a wealth of information within its pages, some of which pertains to your topic. It not only addresses your topic, but backs up it up with Scripture.
Should you find it trustworthy and agree with its teaching, it is a nice document to have handy. If not, then you can always delete it.
If you decide to do so, simply do a search for "Canons of Dort". I like the document which is put out by the CRCNA. Not that it is different, I just like their layout.

Real cheers BillyBob, heard of them but don't think i've read them. Still in my first year as a believer, recommendations are truly welcome, Blessings and all that's good for now.

 

[sawdust]

Well she still ended up having to die for eating the fruit so it's not like she's totally blameless, but you can't say she ate of it 100% voluntarily or of freewill, she ate because indeed the serpent tricked her and that's why he's called the Devil. Again the error of thinking God is ever in error is itself a massive error, God is the only one with a will and a right to do literally anything, whenever he makes a judgment his judgment is correct.

I can say she 100% voluntarily ate from the tree. She chose to base her decision on a lie. She knew God had said not to eat from the tree but she preferred the serpent's lie.

And no-one said anything about God being in error. As far as only God having a will? How you come up with that, is anyone's guess.
His judgements are correct but it's His power (grace) that gets that judgement done, not His will. If it were otherwise, the scripture would say the Gospel is the "will" of God unto salvation, but it doesn't.

Romans 1:16
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is God’s power for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

 

[lrs68]

Well you don't have to rely on the fables of the Pharisees to come to the easy conclusion that the reason Eve saw the fruit as good and that it would make her wise and that she desired it is because of what the serpent tells her directly before, and confirmed by both her words and God's judgment directly.

Considering that other Books existed before the Torah that king David, Joshua, and others mention reading that also describe the Garden scene it's not really a fable. It's a stone cold fact.

 

[GWH]

Not as bad as the way you treat others that follow Jesus on this site, that is a direct slap to the face of the Man who said we should be known by our LOVE for each other. Christians are your main target, not atheist, not Hindus, Mormons, witnesses, or Muslims, nope your Holy Mission from God is to attack fellow believers in Jesus. You're the ultimate insult to everything Jesus taught so don't act as if you have some kind of moral high ground here. You expose yourself better that anyone could here every day with the way you speak to others. You're a joke everyone can see plainly, and it's sad not funny.

That's all I have to say to you, I dusted your mess off my feet a long time ago. Have a great day brother.

I have no idea why you are angry with me so please explain. Thanks.

 

[sawdust]

Eh? That's just lukewarm air i'm afraid. They do believe in free will, albeit for themselves only and often are enabled by quislings to exert it.

What a person believes or doesn't believe does not dictate the truth of a matter. A non-believer's will is bound to the sin nature and only grace can set that person in the position of freedom so that their will can choose freely.

You make the error that God's will is self-fulfilling when it is His power that fulfills His will. We cannot fulfill our will because we lack the power, not because we lack freedom.

 

[LifelongLearner]

Sorry but you don't come across as the brightest bulb in the box and you actually demonstrate you have no idea what i think about these things.
I can't take such confirmation bias seriously and i do make plenty of errors like most people. However, the one you're waffling on about never even crossed my mind and need to sort out your own errors for sure.

 

[Magenta]

​

1) they heard The Truth { Of The Gospel Of The GRACE Of God }, Correct?

2) they did not understand The Truth, because according to some "they were not

spiritual-minded"??? Makes no sense, OR:​

I must apologize because I did not realize when I first responded to you the other day that I had removed the quote back to your post, which meant that you were not alerted to my response... But I would appreciate if you did respond to what I said, and I also wonder how you can rightly divide the word of Truth if you ignore what 1 Corinthians 2:14 says,

The natural man does not receive the spiritual things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him and he is NOT ABLE to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

Seriously it is your point number 2 that makes no sense in light of what Scripture explicitly states. In other words, it is not according to me, but according to God's Word.