Free will. What is it?

[Eternally-Grateful]

Ok, then. I give up. Have at it, y'all. (Lol, seeings as how it has already started anyway).

i just have a problem when we try to put things in terms..

You may all understand what libertarian means. and most of you I am sure reject. Since I have never even heard ot it. How can I say I agree with it or not?

is it difficult to just listen to what a person says.

I don't think anyone here disagrees that we have (generally, except when things happen to us that we had no control over) "freedom to do whatever we want, or whatever we choose." In fact, I'm thinking, most of us insist on it.

Let me ask this, though —is the freedom to choose what we want mean that we understand what we think we want? For example, when one decides he wants Christ, does he understand the terms of that decision, or is it reduced to his little knowledge and little comprehension and momentary emotions?

is John 3: 10 - 19 so hard to understand that no one can understand it?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I think that a necessity, not just a highly commendable suggestion.

EVERY good case begins with defining its terms....... correctly.

the problem is everything thinks their definition is the correct one.

this thread is about seeing what people see so we can understand them,

not trying to decide who is right and who is wrong.

A lie never makes sense. Just saying.

Agree

but what makes you think your definition is true?

Welll... if the opening post's definition is incorrect then the thread was "ruined" before it started and that ruining did not occur at the hands of the respondents.

The definition of the word "free" (as I have already posted) is "autonomous" or "not subject to the power or control of other influences."

Does anyone here dispute that definition? Does everyone affirm that definition?

The definition of the word "will" is, "the faculty of faculty of wishing, choosing, desiring, or intending."

Does anyone here dispute that definition? Does everyone affirm that definition?

Put together, the two words form the phrase being discussed, "free will," which, according to the dictionary definition of the terms constituents means, "the faculty of wishing, choosing, desiring, or intending not subject to the power or control of other influences."

Does anyone dispute that definition? Does everyone affirm that definition?


I affirm every word of it AND I can make an impeccable case to prove there are many influences having power or control over every choice we make.

That is why I think "volitional agency" is the better, more accurate, more valid, veracious, efficacious, and wholly scriptural alternative. We can and do make choices, but they are never made without the power or control of outside influences.

I can see I am wasting my time here.

next.. for those who really want to discuss.. some users here are already determined they are right and everyone else is wrong. and sadly like many of these debates. have nothing really pertinent to add. just cut the other people down. and pump themselves up

 

[Josheb]

And I use "free to choose what we prefer" for that "volitional agency,"

No.

Use "able to choose what we prefer," AND necessarily understand that ability to choose what we prefer occurs in the context of are

1. able to choose what we think we prefer and
2. ablet to choose what we (think we) prefer within an array of controlling influences.

That is what scripture teaches. It is also what we experience and observe every day all day long. Once the predicates are understood it is also the logical necessity. The angel is in the details. As someone else has already observed no human will can ever defy God's will. Another poster has observed every human is enslaved by sin. There are many other powers and controls that influence every decision ever made. An ability to choose exists, but it is not free. Given the many, many, many forces bearing down on us every moment of every decision it is amazing that any ability at all persists.

That is a function of grace.

And most soteriological discussion of "free" will leave out that aspect of grace .

 

[Carbon]

And that is where the duality mentioned in another thread comes in. Either man has a will that is free, or he has no will at all. As though our will is an entity of its own, operating on its own. To say that man has a will does not automatically imply that the will is free. If it were, it would not actually be a will at all, since the definition of will would be negated.

I think free agency is probably the best word to describe what man has. He is a free agent.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Did Adam make that choice freely? Was that choice made free of the power and/or control of others?

Adam had the FREEDOM to chose to make decisions. He was not forced or coerced to make this decision. thats why HE (not eve) has the sad name of causing the fall of mankind

Eve was decieved. Adam knew what he was doing, knew it was sin, and did it anyway

Keep in mind Adam's choice was made prior to his act of disobedience. Abraham's choice, on the other hand, was made after Adam brought sin into the world and death passed to all men. Therefore.......,

Abraham could have said no.. why you can not see this. I can not understand.

Did Abraham make that choice freely?

Yes, he had the freedom to say Yes God. I will go. Or no God I do not want to do.

Was that choice made free of the power and/or control of others?

It was him and God.. in this case.

remember, Abraham also was so afraid he laughed at God and also said his wife was his sister.

Lastly, where might I and all the other participants in this thread look to find scripture explicitly attributing what happened to Adam's ability to (freely) choose? Where might we look to find scripture explicitly attributing what happened to Abraham's ability to (freely) choose?

where might I find in scripture dam had no ability to chose. or Abraham had no ability to chose?

 

[Carbon]

how do you define free will?

it does appear to go against the T in tulip..

Did you read what I wrote in this thread, explaining it?
Check back, if you cannot find it I will try to exlain again.

 

[Josheb]

Adam had the FREEDOM to chose to make decisions.

Prove it.

He was not forced or coerced to make this decision.

Rewording the claim does not prove it correct. Moving the goalpost away from Adam to Abraham (or Eve) does not prove the claim correct, either.

where might I find in scripture dam had no ability to chose. or Abraham had no ability to chose?

That is not an answer to the question asked.

Where might I and all the other participants in this thread look to find scripture explicitly attributing what happened to Adam's ability to (freely) choose?

Just show me the scripture. Nothing more is asked.

 

[Carbon]

so God caused Adam to eat of the forbidden fruit that caused the fall of mankind?

God caused people like Hitler. who brutally murdered millions to start WW2.

God caused the person who raped a young girl he kidnaped while walking home?

I can go on and on..

did God cause us to do what he determined?

or did he give us the freedom to chose what we want to do?

Of course, God caused none of this.

 

[Carbon]

agreed, He did not force you to not be regenerated either.

We are saved by grace. Let that sink in for a while.

 

[Carbon]

I disagree..

Ok.

I agree he can not see or understand the things of God only a child of God can understand,

Yes, because the things of the Spirit are spiritually discerned.

But it does not mean he is not free to chose to understand he is lost with no hope. and when offered by God chose to receive this gift of life.

So, you are saying someone who does not understand the things spiritually discerned, can choose to understand things that are spiritually discerned? It is just a choice?

 

[Josheb]

where might I find in scripture dam had no ability to chose. or Abraham had no ability to chose?

That is a shifting onus. That question attempts to shift the burden of proving the op's assertion onto someone else to prove an alternative. That is fallacious. The new forum rule requires me to prove the fallacy so HERE and HERE are two sources defining the fallacy. It is up to you to prove scripture attributes what happened in Genesis 3:6-7 to Adam's free choice, not up to me to prove something different.

So, please either provide the scripture requested, or correct the fallacious statement (or both).

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Please ask her to explain how it is an oxymoron. I don't think she meant to just blow you off.

And thank you for so-far being non-aggressive. Most who counter our general views here are usually rather 'encumbered-upon' sounding, in their delivery.

sadly, alot of these Christian chatrooms have some who just can not seem to listen or understand another view. they have to push.. And I can sometimes overreact. I hope if I do people forgive me Just like if someone overreacts when I get proud. I will forgive them.

 

[Carbon]

read the passage again

whoever believes (this happens first)

is born of God.

Read it again. Whoever believes. Is what?
If someone believes, you can be sure they are a child of God. It's past tense. They believe because they are a child of God.

they are not born first. then believe, this does not make sense in my view

That's fine.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

No. . I am not able to choose to be sinless, so my will is not free to choose everything.

choosing to be sinless is an oxymoron..

If you choose it, you prefer it at that moment for whatever the contingency may be.

Have you ever chosen something against your will. because you had to serve someone?

 

[Carbon]

Man is a slave to sin (Jn 8:34). Slaves are not free.

I'm glad we agree.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

@Eternally-Grateful,

@makesends is making an important point. This forum is heavily populated (by design) with monergists. You entering this forum and attempting to dispute the majority-held viewpoint places a burden on you. You feeling defensive is not going to help you make your case. By my count, there are ten respondents to this op (not counting you) and nine of the ten say there is no free will. Nine of the ten limit the human will in one way or another or, like me, deny its existence entirely. Most of the monergists here are also very skilled apologists. That means you are in the position to prove your point of view correct to 90% of those in the conversation and you started it . That's okay because the forum exists to discuss all our individual viewpoints and sharpen our apologetics.

Being aggressive won't help your case. Feeling "encumbered" as @makesends put it, won't help, either. ALL of us here will agree THE single best case ANY of us can EVER make is.......,

a polite and respectful, reasonable and rational, cogent and coherent topical case of well-rendered scripture.

Yes?

That is all anyone is asking AND that is what we each endeavor to provide for you BUT this is your op, not ours. The op is yours to prove and to prove by overcoming all that every respondent brings to bear on it without shifting the onus onto others. You could prove me, and all the other eight dissenters wrong but that would still not prove the op correct. A number of challenges have been provided for your consideration. Scripture, not doctrine, is the arbiter.

see this is what I mean

I am not here to discuss calvinism, armenianism, monergism or any ism.

We all supposedly belong to the church. it is obvious we all do not agree with everything, but if we try to

1. Put everyone up on a charge as they are arminian, or they are calvin, or they are catholic
2. take offence to anyone who does not agree with us.

the only option will be large fights. large division.. the world will see how divided we are. and I believe we walk right into satan's trap.

 

[Carbon]

uncaused?

What caused Evil to attack a nation?

could Hitler have decided not to attack that nation?

For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Rom 9:17. Would you explain Pharoah's free will choice?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I think free agency is probably the best word to describe what man has. He is a free agent.

but he still has the freedom to chose does he not?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Did you read what I wrote in this thread, explaining it?
Check back, if you cannot find it I will try to exlain again.

I will go back.

 

[Carbon]

so using your defenition.

what happens if a person stops believing?

Then they were never a believer in the first place.

are they unborn? is salvation lost?