Free Will

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:32 am

Missionary wrote:

So, God creates a new environment and a being with free will. The environment must offer a genuine choice. That requires the illusion of utter freedom so that rejection is a viable choice. Influence is present from both sides drawing the decision; God and His adversary. Man, looking about and seeing no god believes he is free to do as he pleases but runs into laws that contain him. Within this boundary a choice is made: To listen to and believe his intellect and the influences of Lucifer or to listen to his spirit and the influence of his soul's Creator. This is the only choice that matters.

So we have a choice between two amorphous concepts that we cannot see and only have a compilation of writings that was written thousands of years ago to go on. Putting aside whether free will exists or not, how can we make an informed choice in the matter? It's like God's saying...

God: "I'll sit here away from sight and give them writings that are contradictory, and see if they believe them. If they do, then they can come to heaven, if not they can burn."

Sounds a little silly for an omnipotent God.

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:10 am

I will take a dissenting view here and say that i agree (somewhat) with missionary. Imagine a string of purely random events, totally uncaused, if there could be such a thing- maybe quantum flucuations or something. Those events would play out in some way over time. After they have happened we would know how, in fact, those events did play out. Our knowledge at that point had no influence over how those events played out. I dont see why it would be logically impossible for a being to know how those events will play out, like someone reflecting on something that just happened, and those events still be utterly random all along the way. It's difficult to image, yes, but im not sure its logically impossible.

Please note that i used hypothetical, uncaused events for my example. I do not believe that human actions are uncaused in that way (contra-causal free will). Im with mocking gods in the belief that the human decision making process does not operate free from external (and internal) causes. But, if totally random events are not incompatible, logically, with omniscience- and im not convienced that they are- then determinism wouldnt be incompatible either (clearly). So i dont think this incompatibility argument against god is a good one. I think there are much better ones.

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:49 am

bagnasty wrote:

I will take a dissenting view here and say that i agree (somewhat) with missionary. Imagine a string of purely random events, totally uncaused, if there could be such a thing- maybe quantum flucuations or something. Those events would play out in some way over time. After they have happened we would know how, in fact, those events did play out. Our knowledge at that point had no influence over how those events played out. I dont see why it would be logically impossible for a being to know how those events will play out, like someone reflecting on something that just happened, and those events still be utterly random all along the way. It's difficult to image, yes, but im not sure its logically impossible.

Please note that i used hypothetical, uncaused events for my example. I do not believe that human actions are uncaused in that way (contra-causal free will). Im with mocking gods in the belief that the human decision making process does not operate free from external (and internal) causes. But, if totally random events are not incompatible, logically, with omniscience- and im not convienced that they are- then determinism wouldnt be incompatible either (clearly). So i dont think this incompatibility argument against god is a good one. I think there are much better ones.

In the case of God, we're not talking about random, uncaused events. If God started the universe and created everything, then he is the penultimate cause of everything. I would agree with you if God wasn't omniscient. If he was not omniscient then he isn't ultimately responsible, because he might not have known what would happen when he began creation. If he is all-knowing, then he had to know what would happen. The mere fact that he created it all, knowing what would happen, means that he is responsible as the ultimate cause of everything.

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:33 am

Missionary wrote:

Free simply means freedom to choose between A, B, C or D.

According to your theology, only one option is ever actual. This is determinism, choice is illusion, freedom of choice is moot.

Quote:

Still, all these influence shape but do not cause or force a decision.

I'm thinking you understand this is bull shit, and that your magical "free will" is becoming more and more a naked assertion to further your theological agenda. Of course influences beyond our control shape our decision making processes, this is obvious. To say we can somehow internalize these stimuli and make decisions independent of them is simply ludicrous.

Quote:

We are not forced to conform no matter what chain of influential events takes place. This is our freedom. However, the choice of non-conformity has a negative consequence just as non-conformity to family, society, or law has a negative outcome.

Way to totally avoid the point with more contradictory "free will" rhetoric. If some being creates something knowing all its future actions in advance, the only way to change the future actions would be for said being to either alter the creative event or alter what it has foreseen after said creation. Under either scenario, there can be no free action of the secondary agent.

Quote:

No. We were created without being asked. As created beings of the Living God we are given a choice to return His love or refuse.

So even this supposed free will is foisted upon us... some freedom that is. This god supposedly gave us something intentionally it knew beforehand would cause it to bring harm against us. This has to be one of the most ridiculous belief systems ever invented by humans.

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:56 am

bagnasty wrote:

Imagine a string of purely random events, totally uncaused, if there could be such a thing- maybe quantum flucuations or something.

I'm not certain, but I'd bet if you'd ask Missionary he'd say even quantum events are not beyond the predictive powers of his god. So while they may appear to us humans as random, they are in fact deterministic events according to his theology.

Quote:

I do not believe that human actions are uncaused in that way (contra-causal free will).

Yup, contracausal free will is only a messed-up, theological belief. It doesn’t show itself to be even moderately realistic from a practical standpoint.

Quote:

But, if totally random events are not incompatible, logically, with omniscience- and im not convienced that they are- then determinism wouldnt be incompatible either (clearly).

I guess it would depend on the level of omniscience we were considering. However, totally random events are beyond the purview of "will" and intent. Without intent, there can and should be no punitive action.

Quote:

So i dont think this incompatibility argument against god is a good one.

I agree; it would depend on the definition of said god. I'm however more interested in the free will debate in general, then how it relates to certain theological positions. The idea of “free will” many Christians hold is puerile and at the same time necessary to justify the horrible actions of themselves and their imaginary god.

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 8:18 am

Missionary wrote:

Influence is present from both sides drawing the decision; God and His adversary.

Wait a second, I thought our decision making process was immune to external influence. Now you're saying God and Satan can influence, I'm confused. “Influence” is the power of persons or things to affect others. This is evidence even you believe in a caused decision.

Let's look at this statement again...

Quote:

Still, all these influence shape but do not cause or force a decision.

When faced with a decision there is always a "cause" of the choice (unless it's purely random, which has nothing to do with "will"). External influence is itself a cause.

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 8:24 am

Seekah and Mocking Gods, i pretty much agree with you. It does, i think, depend on what god we are talking about. There would obviously be no possibility of anything occuring randomly in a universe with a god who is the cause of everything. Although it may be logically possible for a god to exist who creates a universe in which random, uncaused things do occur and this god knows how those things will occur in advance (im not certain something like that would be logicaly impossible), it doesnt help missionary because, whatever might be occuring randomly in our universe, if anthing, human decision making does not seem to be one of those things.

The Learned Joined: May 21, 2008 Posts: 128

I'm not one of those that goes along with the "wind her up and let her go" theologies. God is Sovereign and in complete control of the universe. Nothing is random. Everything has a purpose even if we are unable to discern that purpose. Even the seeming random event of a comet or space debris could be used in a cause-effect scenario to perform some function we can't fathom. While God still has control of our planet in it's relation to the solar system, the legal dominion of rule on earth is under control of the adversary.

MockingGods: Our decision making process is immune from external cause or determination. We aren't prescripted or programmed. Influence is entirely different. We are currently under the influence of our sin nature and the 'god' of this world. Therefore, we naturally gravitate toward immorality and rejection of God-Creator. God attempts to influence our decision by calling us. If we respond He reveals Himself and can claim us away from our current master. However, the decision is ours to make. It's like Jesus said, "we're already condemned"...He is saving us from that present and active condition.

I'm sure you've been in the middle of a dispute where two people were trying to influence your opinion on their position. The moral decision you are weighing is your decision to make regardless of their argument and evidence.

The Learned Joined: May 21, 2008 Posts: 128

Seekah wrote:

Missionary wrote:

So, God creates a new environment and a being with free will. The environment must offer a genuine choice. That requires the illusion of utter freedom so that rejection is a viable choice. Influence is present from both sides drawing the decision; God and His adversary. Man, looking about and seeing no god believes he is free to do as he pleases but runs into laws that contain him. Within this boundary a choice is made: To listen to and believe his intellect and the influences of Lucifer or to listen to his spirit and the influence of his soul's Creator. This is the only choice that matters.

So we have a choice between two amorphous concepts that we cannot see and only have a compilation of writings that was written thousands of years ago to go on. Putting aside whether free will exists or not, how can we make an informed choice in the matter? It's like God's saying...

God: "I'll sit here away from sight and give them writings that are contradictory, and see if they believe them. If they do, then they can come to heaven, if not they can burn."

Sounds a little silly for an omnipotent God.

Actually, the "compilation of writings" is secondary and only exists as confirmation of the primary spiritual/moral decision. That choice, which is to stay the course with our physical senses, desires, and pleasures or hearken to the internal metaphysical aspect of spirit and soul that desires it's Creator, is the entire purpose of free wil. The adversary can play that card with religion, and thus offers a certain satisfactory but artificial alternative to the authentic knowledge of the actual Creator-God that the soul is seeking. Religion is an intentional diversion.

The Learned Joined: May 21, 2008 Posts: 128

bagnasty wrote:

Seekah and Mocking Gods, i pretty much agree with you. It does, i think, depend on what god we are talking about. There would obviously be no possibility of anything occuring randomly in a universe with a god who is the cause of everything. Although it may be logically possible for a god to exist who creates a universe in which random, uncaused things do occur and this god knows how those things will occur in advance (im not certain something like that would be logicaly impossible), it doesnt help missionary because, whatever might be occuring randomly in our universe, if anthing, human decision making does not seem to be one of those things.

Then imagine a completely controlled universe with a small arena in the midst of it set aside as a free choice zone. The boundaries of that arena contain the inhabitants while providing an environment that appears to be free of spying meddling gods. Therefore we have the genuine choice of choosing wrong or evil, rejecting God as it appears there is no consequence. All the while both sides are actively influencing that moral choice.

Think of every moral decision you've struggled with over right or wrong. will I be exposed or can I get away with it? Is it worth it all or should I just do what's right? What's the up side/down side? gain/benefit or loss?

Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 8:22 pm

missionary wrote:

The boundaries of that arena contain the inhabitants while providing an environment that appears to be free of spying meddling gods. Therefore we have the genuine choice of choosing wrong or evil, rejecting God as it appears there is no consequence.

People reject belief in god because, for as long as people have been claiming a god or gods exist, no one has produced any evidence showing that one does. I think you acknowledge this dearth of evidence and are trying to explain it away in a bizzare way.

If im reading you right you seem to be arguing that it is very important to god that we choose to believe in him freely. This, apparently, means that we cant have strong evidence that god exists because then we would be compeled to believe in him on the basis of that evidence, just like the angels in the story of Job. So, in order for a choice between options to be a truely free choice it has to at least appear as though there are no consequences for choosing one over another. There also cant be strong evidence favoring one option over another. We cant be pushed or pulled. The options must (appear to) be equal. On what, then, is our decision to be based?

It has to be based on something. True belief cannot be willed it must be compelled by something. Something must tip the scales. So we cant have this sterile free choice zone that you are wanting. That being the case, heaven will not be filled with those who chose 'freely', but with those who were credulous enough to believe and were born in the right place.

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 2:23 am

bagnasty wrote:

Seekah and Mocking Gods, i pretty much agree with you. It does, i think, depend on what god we are talking about. There would obviously be no possibility of anything occuring randomly in a universe with a god who is the cause of everything. Although it may be logically possible for a god to exist who creates a universe in which random, uncaused things do occur and this god knows how those things will occur in advance (im not certain something like that would be logicaly impossible), it doesnt help missionary because, whatever might be occuring randomly in our universe, if anthing, human decision making does not seem to be one of those things.

I think it's unnecessary to deal with the problem of true randomness, as it calls into question the idea of what free will even means. We can confine the issue to whether things can turn out in more than one way or not. If there is an eternal omniscience, the answer is no.

The Learned Joined: May 21, 2008 Posts: 128

Choice is not just important, it's critical to the harmony of eternity that those who exist in God's presence want to be there by their own free will. Otherwise, lucifer is correct that creation is bound by fear of God and not love for God. IF God is love then love MUST BE freely returned or it is not true love at all. Mutual true love must be a free choice between two parties.

The scales of belief are equal and the tipping is done by the individual dependent upon which way they gravitate. For example note these two passages:

Ecclesiastes 3:10-11 (NIV)
10 I have seen the burden God has laid on men.
11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the hearts of men ; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end.

This is the essence of our dilemma. We have knowledge of Him within us already but we trust our physical senses and logic:

Romans 1:18-20 (NIV)
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
19 since what may be known about God is plain to them , because God has made it plain to them.
20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen , being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse .

Lucifer has played this card by creating religion as a diversion to appeal to the spiritual side of mankind and keep him from the truth. Peopl fall into this trap and are satisfied that their spiritual needs are met not seeking any further. Others who continue seeking discover the emptiness of religion and abandon their faith in search of truth. Still others abandon the search for truth and become dependent upon their own physical senses, desires, and knowledge as the end of the search.

To the atheists credit, they have discovered the emptiness of religion. To their detriment, some have walled off the internal beacon that is the homing signal of their Creator.

The Learned Joined: May 21, 2008 Posts: 128

kmisho wrote:

bagnasty wrote:

Seekah and Mocking Gods, i pretty much agree with you. It does, i think, depend on what god we are talking about. There would obviously be no possibility of anything occuring randomly in a universe with a god who is the cause of everything. Although it may be logically possible for a god to exist who creates a universe in which random, uncaused things do occur and this god knows how those things will occur in advance (im not certain something like that would be logicaly impossible), it doesnt help missionary because, whatever might be occuring randomly in our universe, if anthing, human decision making does not seem to be one of those things.

I think it's unnecessary to deal with the problem of true randomness, as it calls into question the idea of what free will even means. We can confine the issue to whether things can turn out in more than one way or not. If there is an eternal omniscience, the answer is no.

If the starting point is A and the end destination is B, then some but not all will arrive at B. The fact that A and B exists is determined by God. The creation of the participants traveling from A to B is caused and determined by God. The path traveled and whether the destination is reached is dependent upon the traveler following the map. If the traveler doesn't like the map, doesn't believe the map, or picks up a fake map, that is up to the traveler. The traveler is responsible and accountable to arrive at B, quit, not care, or claim there is a C and D destination, or sit down on the road and laugh at the other travelers.

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 4:04 am

Missionary wrote:

kmisho wrote:

bagnasty wrote:

Seekah and Mocking Gods, i pretty much agree with you. It does, i think, depend on what god we are talking about. There would obviously be no possibility of anything occuring randomly in a universe with a god who is the cause of everything. Although it may be logically possible for a god to exist who creates a universe in which random, uncaused things do occur and this god knows how those things will occur in advance (im not certain something like that would be logicaly impossible), it doesnt help missionary because, whatever might be occuring randomly in our universe, if anthing, human decision making does not seem to be one of those things.

I think it's unnecessary to deal with the problem of true randomness, as it calls into question the idea of what free will even means. We can confine the issue to whether things can turn out in more than one way or not. If there is an eternal omniscience, the answer is no.

If the starting point is A and the end destination is B, then some but not all will arrive at B. The fact that A and B exists is determined by God. The creation of the participants traveling from A to B is caused and determined by God. The path traveled and whether the destination is reached is dependent upon the traveler following the map. If the traveler doesn't like the map, doesn't believe the map, or picks up a fake map, that is up to the traveler. The traveler is responsible and accountable to arrive at B, quit, not care, or claim there is a C and D destination, or sit down on the road and laugh at the other travelers.

God knew a 137 vigintillion googolplexes of eons ago that I would not believe in him and you expect me to believe I have a choice in the matter NOW?


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore