A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum In our aim to exalt everything important, first and foremost, we seek to promote a clear understanding of Daniel, Revelation, the three angels' messages and the alpha and omega of apostasy.
Joined: 07 Jan 2005 Posts: 68 Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2005 10:40 pm Post subject: Re: You Answer me, ...then I'll answer you...
Quote:
First let me say that in that long winded reply to me you DID NOT answer ....my question to you...
Therefore... I will NOT answer your post...
My apologies. The evidence for free will in Scripture is that God gives people choices:
'Then Elijah stood in front of them and said, “How long are you going to waver between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him! But if Baal is God, then follow him!” But the people were completely silent.' (1 Ki 18:21, NLT)
Elijah obviously wanted the people to decide for God - instead, they refused to make a choice.
Dt 30:1-20 -- God gives his people a choice of either following God or rejecting God. Here's v. 15: '“Now listen! Today I am giving you a choice between prosperity and disaster, between life and death. ' (Dt 30:15, NLT)
'But if you are unwilling to serve the Lord, then choose today whom you will serve. Would you prefer the gods your ancestors served beyond the Euphrates? Or will it be the gods of the Amorites in whose land you now live? But as for me and my family, we will serve the Lord.”' (Jos 24:15, NLT)
Clear example of a man of God making a choice.
2 Samuel 24:11-17. Here is v. 12: '“Go and say to David, ‘This is what the Lord says: I will give you three choices. Choose one of these punishments, and I will do it.’ ”' (2 Sa 24:12, NLT)
What value are choices if a person doesn't have free will? Is God just playing tricks?
'Any money that is left over may be used in whatever way you and your colleagues feel is the will of your God. ' (Ezr 7:18, NLT)
Obviously, the choice was left to them.
'I have chosen to be faithful;
I have determined to live by your laws.' (Ps 119:30, NLT)
'But those who choose their own ways, delighting in their sins, are cursed. Their offerings will not be accepted. When such people sacrifice an ox, it is no more acceptable than a human sacrifice. When they sacrifice a lamb or bring an offering of grain, it is as bad as putting a dog or the blood of a pig on the altar! When they burn incense, it is as if they had blessed an idol. ' (Is 66:3, NLT)
'“Tell all the people, ‘This is what the Lord says: Take your choice of life or death! ' (Je 21:8, NLT)
'It was by faith that Moses, when he grew up, refused to be treated as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. He chose to share the oppression of God’s people instead of enjoying the fleeting pleasures of sin. ' (Heb 11:24-25, NLT)
'“If you fully obey the Lord your God by keeping all the commands I am giving you today, the Lord your God will exalt you above all the nations of the world. ' (Dt 28:1, NLT)
Clearly, the people had a choice.
'If you will only obey me and let me help you, then you will have plenty to eat. But if you keep turning away and refusing to listen, you will be destroyed by your enemies. I, the Lord, have spoken!”' (Is 1:19-20, NLT)
Obviously, these people had a choice.
'If I announce that a certain nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down, and destroyed, but then that nation renounces its evil ways, I will not destroy it as I had planned. And if I announce that I will build up and plant a certain nation or kingdom, making it strong and great, but then that nation turns to evil and refuses to obey me, I will not bless that nation as I had said I would.' (Je 18:7-10, NLT)
God's actions are dependent on a nation's choices.
'“Anyone who listens to my teaching and obeys me is wise, like a person who builds a house on solid rock. Though the rain comes in torrents and the floodwaters rise and the winds beat against that house, it won’t collapse, because it is built on rock. But anyone who hears my teaching and ignores it is foolish, like a person who builds a house on sand. When the rains and floods come and the winds beat against that house, it will fall with a mighty crash.”' (Mt 7:24-27, NLT)
People have a choice regarding how to respond to Christ's teaching.
'“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones God’s messengers! How often I have wanted to gather your children together as a hen protects her chicks beneath her wings, but you wouldn’t let me. ' (Mt 23:37, NLT)
Jesus wanted to welcome his people; but they wouldn't let him. God limits his actions on the basis of people's choices - God RESPECTS people's choices.
'Do not let sin control the way you live; do not give in to its lustful desires. ' (Ro 6:12, NLT)
This advice doesn't make sense if we have no choice about it.
'So why do you condemn another Christian? Why do you look down on another Christian? Remember, each of us will stand personally before the judgment seat of God. For the Scriptures say,
“ ‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
‘every knee will bow to me
and every tongue will confess allegiance to God.’ ”
Yes, each of us will have to give a personal account to God.' (Ro 14:10-12, NLT)
Why would we have to give a personal account to God if we were not responsible for our choices?
'For we must all stand before Christ to be judged. We will each receive whatever we deserve for the good or evil we have done in our bodies.' (2 Co 5:10, NLT)
We can only be judged as deserving if we have been responsible for choosing.
'The Spirit and the bride say, “Come.” Let each one who hears them say, “Come.” Let the thirsty ones come—anyone who wants to. Let them come and drink the water of life without charge. ' (Re 22:17, NLT)
God invites those who want to come -- he doesn't force those who do not.
Quote:
a word begins with H ends with E and has a ypocrit in the middle that describes such a post...
Posted: Tue Sep 06, 2005 8:38 pm Post subject: Not good enough...
WillieH: Hello Spozz... grace be unto you...
To begin with, You cant help yourself either...
Again after that long winded post you still havent answered my question... I did NOT ask: Where is "Man's CHOICE" found in the scriptures... It was Show me BOOK... CHAPTER... and VERSE where it states that MAN has FREE WILL...
Choice is NOT ...FREE WILL... choice is the simply the power to pick between options PROVIDED...
FREE WILL is choice or will that is NOT affected by ANY OUTSIDE INFLUENCE... Only GOD has FREE WILL...
Man has PRIDE, and that is HIS WILL, which is to be jettisoned forever at the redemption...
It, though you may try in futility to locate it.. as I previously mentioned is NOT in the Word of GOD, ...as much ABSENT as the TRINITY, HELL, CHRISTMAS, EASTER, the RAPTURE, along with many other doctrines that most modern Christianity (SDA, Lutheran, Catholic, Pentecostal, Methodist, Baptist, etc..) is founded upon
You would NOT accept what I have said if CHRIST Himself stated it to you, so futility is the brand of communication that has developed here, so I bid you a farewell that prays your eyes be opened... that you continue to search... that you depend NOT upon EGW.. but GOD's Word ALONE... and I, along with ALL Humanity will see you in the Kingdom... for CHRIST is the SAVIOR of ALL MEN....
You said it before, ...I now agree... this conversation is over...
Joined: 07 Jan 2005 Posts: 68 Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2005 12:15 am Post subject: Re: Not good enough...
Quote:
To begin with, You cant help yourself either...
True... I guess that's why we need grace and forgiveness
Quote:
Again after that long winded post you still havent answered my question... I did NOT ask: Where is "Man's CHOICE" found in the scriptures... It was Show me BOOK... CHAPTER... and VERSE where it states that MAN has FREE WILL...
In my view, choice is nonsense without free will. Our capacity to make choices is evidence of our free will. You are asking for a single verse in the Bible that mentions free will. But that is like asking for a single verse that mentions the word "universalism". There are some understandings that we can derive from available evidence without the words actually being mentioned. I think free will is one of them. I am not saying our capacity to make choices is uninfluenced or perfect. In that sense, I could probably agree with you -- no choices are absolutely and perfectly free. But that doesn't mean they are completely determined either. I am just saying that God created human beings with the capacity to choose between alternatives -- just like Adam and Eve are said to have done in Eden. The whole thrust of the biblical narrative, in my view, demonstrates this.
Quote:
You would NOT accept what I have said if CHRIST Himself stated it to you
On the contrary - if I was sure that it was Christ speaking I would readily believe what he said.
Quote:
futility is the brand of communication that has developed here, so I bid you a farewell that prays your eyes be opened... that you continue to search... that you depend NOT upon EGW.. but GOD's Word ALONE... and I, along with ALL Humanity will see you in the Kingdom... for CHRIST is the SAVIOR of ALL MEN....
Obviously, we will have to agree to disagree on this topic. I pray, too, that your eyes may be opened and that you continue to search. The Bible is my ultimate authority in doctrine and practice (I have no idea where you get the idea from that I rely on EGW). I, too, affirm with you, that Christ died for all humanity. I will see you in the kingdom along with all those who do not reject him.
Quote:
so long Steve...
So long...
Steve
PS: Are you aware of Neal Punt and Biblical Universalism? http://www.biblicaluniversalism.com/ It is pretty much where I come from on the matter of salvation.
I think for the moment I will avoid the debate and ask a follow-up question of AlphaWolf.
How can you posit free will from a materialistic framework? it seems that would be more difficult than for creationists. If everything is in fact materal and natural, then your point is even more true for evolutionists. There is no escape from the complex interactions of all your previous experiences. You are a complex reaction in all your actions and thoughts.
How do you posit a material basis for free will? And yet, even the ones who generally accept that logic also seem to think THEY have free will.
How can you posit free will from a materialistic framework? it seems that would be more difficult than for creationists. If everything is in fact materal and natural, then your point is even more true for evolutionists. There is no escape from the complex interactions of all your previous experiences. You are a complex reaction in all your actions and thoughts.
How do you posit a material basis for free will? And yet, even the ones who generally accept that logic also seem to think THEY have free will.
oh PLEASE. what the hell does evolution vs. creationism have to do with this? Don't be so damned obssesive and narrowminded.
I don't know, maybe we do maybe we don't. Did I mention i'm AGNOSTIC?
The only thing i'm saying with this is that the omnipotent/omniscient/omnieverything god that created everything and free will are incompatible.
Your missing the point. I am not being narrow minded, I am addressing what many philosophers have asked, and speaking to some of the issues you raised in your own argument--particularly, the inevitability of determinism when dealing with physical phenomena. If you only believe in natural material means, you have no MECHANISM for free will. how do you escape the cause-effect cycle? It is not just a question for you either, ADVENTISTS have the same problem because of our view of man. Most Christians posit a non-physical soul that acts on the physical outside of the limitations of a cause-effect relationship. But since we don't believe that (we hold that man is a physical unity without an outside soul) then we have also to wonder how there can be a free will process in physical terms.
Now of course, If Eugene is correct and there are elements of the physical process that we do not understand, perhaps that could account for it. And we certainly don't understand all of the intracacies of brain chemistry. But it is nonetheless a real question for both materialists and Adventists, and does impact on your discussion. I personally believe that God could do it, and we simply don't understand it. But it does raise issues for the materialist who sees things only in terms of cause and effect--which you yourself not only seemed to imply, but also seemed to want to tie Eugene into.
Moreover, some have resorted to idealism (the idea that we are all floating minds in a non-physical world where God, the ultimate mind has set up the rules, much like your computer analogy, but it avoids the whole limitations of physical cause and effect reactions. ) I don't believe in it, but at least it is logically consistent and allows for free will within parameters. In such a scenario physical nature is an illusion, things just happen according to God's (or the overmind's as some would prefer)) constraints. Within those set constraings minds still have the ability to determine what they do. But in any case a physical mechanism for free choice is both a challenge for materialists AND for Adventists because of our view of humanity.
And your ideas on God's foreknowledge barring free will doesn't seem logical. I have heard the argument before that foreknowledge means God dictates. But the two are not logically the same. Now when you say that there is no free will because God limits our environment, etc. then sure, I suppose we can't choose from limitless options. But that is hardly what is clasically meant by free will.
Let's take an example. You want to watch some sporting event, tape it because you are gone, and on the way home, despite your best efforts to prevent it, someone tells you the score. Does your knowledge of the outcome in anyway effect what happens when you watch the tape? Not last I checked. It would be the same whether you knew the score or not. Knowledge does not equal control. In the same way God can know all that happens, but doesn't have a direct role in DICTATING what happens, just as you had no control over the events at the game. Now of course as creator God does set some limits. So let's modify the situation. Let's say that you were the inventor of a new sport. You set the rules. Somoene taped a game. You had input on the rules, but you had NOTHINg to do with the game. So even if you heard the score, you did not determine the score. The athletes involved made choices that determined the outcome within your parameters. And even had you some way to know BEFORE what those choices would be, they were still the ones making them.
Finally, if you are agnostic, why do you care whether God allows for free will? I would think you would be more interested in understanding how a materialistic world allows for free will since last I checked it fit your world view better. And if you check my posts in other areas of the forums, you will see I post on a number of subjects :) I don't think I ever posted on evolution before your arrival. In fact, I prefer prophecy, biblical exegesis etc. ,but ...unfortunately no one is posting on that lately. They are all on more divisive topics. So I just jump in to what is available. (come to think of it, I really should look into WilleH's stuff on universalism..so I guess I might post there :)
Your missing the point. I am not being narrow minded,
no, you missed the point. I wasn't calling you narrowminded because of that, but because you think it has something to do with evolution and creationism.
If you hadn't noticed, most people who accept evolution are christians. I believe only 10% of the population in america is atheist/agnostic. about 50% of the population overall accept evolution. assuming all agnostic/atheists accept evolution, that leaves 40% of religious people. Now, I don't know the statistics, but most people in the US are christians.
They may not be very religious christians, because basically only smart people accept evolution (since others don't understand it they don't accept it), and there is an inverse corrolation between religiousness and intelligence, but most people who accept evolution are christians.
Quote:
If you only believe in natural material means, you have no MECHANISM for free will.
i'm agnostic btw.
Quote:
Finally, if you are agnostic, why do you care whether God allows for free will?
Because i'm agnostic. That's what I do. I think about possibilities, rule out some, and end up not knowing. :P I ruled out the possibility of an all knowing, all powerful, etc. god who CREATED ALL the universe AND us. I want to tell everyone why I ruled it out, and what to hear arguments against it because it stimulates my brain.
Quote:
And your ideas on God's foreknowledge barring free will doesn't seem logical
because IF god also created the whole universe and us, then he knew exactly what we would do if he set the universe a certain way. He chose this way, so he chose what we do.
Quote:
Now when you say that there is no free will because God limits our environment, etc. then sure, I suppose we can't choose from limitless options. But that is hardly what is clasically meant by free will.
I don't care what is classically meant by it, since classically when people say monkey, they may also mean ape even though it's two different things. I care what it MEANS.
I know why you called me narrow minded. However it DOES have something to do with it. materialists posit only natural means for everything.
Yes, yes we got the memo that you are agnostic. However since everything but your theoretical discussions here are based on a materialistic model i will assume that is still your underlying world view.
And
a. He knows what we will do, but not because of the basic rules, but because of Him being outside of our understanding of time..."knowing the end from the beginning" as He puts it.
b. Setting up rules does not determine the game. And if you only mean that because there is ONE restriction on totally doing anything you want, then why even bother discussing this. It is a goofy definition. To say that because there are some restrictions on behavior means we have no choice whatsoever is hardly a logical conclusion.
However it DOES have something to do with it. materialists posit only natural means for everything.
no it doesn't.
Quote:
Setting up rules does not determine the game
Don't break things up. You need to see the WHOLE picture.
Quote:
And if you only mean that because there is ONE restriction on totally doing anything you want
there are many other restrictions. From our very brain not being able to remember very well (relatively speaking), to not being able to teleport to mars.
Quote:
To say that because there are some restrictions on behavior means we have no choice whatsoever is hardly a logical conclusion
if you look at the big picture, not just a tiny piece of what I said, it would mean we have no choice.
but since i'm tired of explaining it over and over again in every possible way so people understand me, I won't explain it anymore.
But... even if you COULD choose in that scenario (omni everything god that created everything), you still can't choose about everything. Can you choose to have more memory? no (well, you can increase your memory a little but not like i mean) Can you choose to live in a world without disease and all that? no. those decisions are FORCED into you. you HAVE to do this, you HAVE to live here, you HAVE to loose your memory, etc. even is something, anything, is forced into you when there COULD be a choice, you just CAN'T have REAL free will.
Are you defining free will as the capacity to choose to do anything at anytime without any constraints whatsoever?
well, maybe not anytime... but yes about anything.
Think about it. If you have free will, you can supposedly choose from two things right? OK, we can't freely choose about EVERYTHING. We don't have free will in those instances, so we can't have true free will.
You can't say you have true free will if you can only choose about certain things when it is posible to choose about more things.
it's like... if some things are forced onto you, you don't have FREE WILL, you just have SOME will.
you will continue to have to explain yourself as long as you keep insisting on your definition of free will which almost no one uses.
By your definition, sure we don't have it. But that is only by your definition. The rest of us are quite convinced we do have free will under most definitions.
And yes, materialistic understandings of the world do have something to do with the general question, though perhaps not your definition. But since materialists have no concept of anything except what is, and what is material, they could never have a situation where your definition could come about because the restrictions of a material world preclude it.
Joined: 07 Jan 2005 Posts: 68 Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:28 am Post subject:
TheAlphaWolf wrote:
Quote:
Are you defining free will as the capacity to choose to do anything at anytime without any constraints whatsoever?
well, maybe not anytime... but yes about anything.
Hi AlphaWolf,
Well... I can see why you would conclude that humans don't have free will on this definition. But, in my view, you are using a definition that is not usually meant when people discuss free will. I thought I'd do a bit of a survey of dictionaries I had to see how they define the concept of free will. Here's what I found:
'... human freedom to choose between good and evil...' Cooper, JC 1986, 'Free Will', in WH Gentz (ed.), The Dictionary of Bible and Religion, Abingdon, Nashville, pp. 373-4.
'... a capacity to choose between good and evil...' Langford, M 1983, 'Free Will', in A Richardson & J Bowden (eds), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, SCM Press, pp. 218-9.
'The concept that human choices and actions are self-determined.' Erickson, MJ 1986, Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
'The belief that human behavior is self-caused.' Grenz, SJ, et al. 1999, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois.
The denial '... that human actions are necessitated.' Harvey, VA 1964, A Handbook of Theological Terms, Collier Books, New York.
The '... fundamental characteristic of human beings that they are capable of taking decisions about what they should do, and carrying them out.' Helm, P 1988, 'Will', in SB Ferguson & DF Wright (eds), New Dictionary of Theology, Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, England, pp. 722-3.
'... the belief that man determines his own behavior freely, and that no causal antecedents can sufficiently account for his actions.' Geisler, N 1984, 'Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism', in WA Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, pp. 428-30.
The ability of humans to '... sometimes choose whether to act in a certain way or not; ... that we are responsible for so acting or refraining from action; ... that for those parts of our history which do not lie within our choice we cannot be held responsible.' Urmson, J 1989, 'Freedom of the Will', in J Urmson & J Ree (eds), The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy & Philosophers, Unwin Hyman, London, p. 113.
These are just a few... I could multiply them endlessy. In no case is free will understood to mean that a person can do anything at anytime without constraint. It means that a person can make a choice between (realistic) alternatives. In other words, it is about the ability of a person to alter their own behaviour.
It seems to me that, if a discussion of free will is to be productive, we need to use the term as it is generally understood by those who argue for it. Otherwise, we just end up committing the strawman fallacy.
No, not how it is generally understood. and btw, I think some of the definitions you posted are like mine.
People say poisonous when they mean venomous. The two are very different. People say theory when they mean hypothesis. TOTALLY different.
Of course they're going to think it means that, otherwise there could be no free will. They MAKE the two ideas not conflict with each other by defining free will as just that.
So let's look at dictionaries. Most say something to the effect of "The power of making free choices that are unconstrained by external circumstances or by an agency such as fate or divine will"
key word: unconstrained Don't you agree that the laws of nature (external forces) are constraining you? you COULD choose otherwise but you just can't. Therefore you don't have the freedom to choose. it's as simple as that.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 3 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
