Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
9 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,843 Year: 4,100/9,624 Month: 971/974 Week: 298/286 Day: 19/40 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Do I have a choice? (determinism vs libertarianism vs compatibilism)
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5876 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 36 of 210 (358188)
10-22-2006 8:01 PM


Humes Fork: Either our actions are determined, in which case we are not responsible f
That's really the issue with determinism isn't it? Are we, or are we not responsible? I have a solution that you may not like, but it is a solution. The only one I know of.
We have free will, and we don't have free will. God's will is not free for us really, but we can have it His way. if we choose not to have it, then we can have our way (whatever horror that brings).
As for the the outcome, it certainly pertains to the concept of sin... I ask you to take it seriously!
This is the situation with mankind. We are who we are because of our environment and our DNA. Richard Dawkins, the renowned naturalist at Oxford said, "There is no such thing as right and wrong, we're all just dancing to our DNA." That is, by the way, a Biblical doctrine called 'the natural and sinful man'.
So in light of Dawkins statement, how much more profound and up to date... are Jesus' words, "You must be born again!"
If the world is falling apart as the Bible says, and if the creation is in decay and we along with it, then we half rightly ask, ”how is it, that I am condemned for being what I have no control to be otherwise?’ If the whole universe is collapsing simply because one component (mankind) has failed in his divine duty, then how is that my fault?
It’s a good question .
But that is not the issue. The issue is that God has reached down from eternity, into our universe of finitude and decay, and offered His own right hand to pull us out, and we refuse!
He offers us a new birth into a living hope and we refuse!
And we do so because we have made peace with our sin and learned very quickly to enjoy it. We have become allied with evil and enemies of God by choice.
We confidently insist that we have it under control and will find the answer apart from God. In the mean time, we intend to take all that we can ”now’, and plunder whatever pleasures we can experience at the whim of our own will.
"In every guilty man, there is some innocence. This makes every absolute condemnation revolting." Albert Camus
Is Mr. Camus absolutely condemning the concept of 'absolute condemnation'?
He is! And he proves that justice must be absolute by imperitive and displays the irrationality that motivates a crowd to choose ignorance over reason when given the clearest of two options. Such a choice is the lesser of the two threats to the will of the crowd, who chooses to live their own way, absolutely.
Matthew 27: 21 "Which of the two do you want me to release to you?" asked the governor. "Barabbas," they answered. 22 "What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called Christ?" Pilate asked. They all answered, "Crucify him!" 23 "Why? What crime has he committed?" asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, "Crucify him!" 24 When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. "I am innocent of this man's blood," he said. "It is your responsibility!"
Such a scene is absolutism, condemning absolutism...
It is mankind, crucifying himself!

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by DominionSeraph, posted 10-22-2006 9:49 PM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5876 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 44 of 210 (358213)
10-22-2006 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by DominionSeraph
10-22-2006 9:49 PM


Dominionseraph writes:
The question is, are you your own creator? If you are, you're responsible. If not, you're not. Nothing else needs to be considered.
I agree that that does it... but I think your analysis is incomplete...
I am not my own creator, but I do have a choice to become something other than 'what I am now' according to God. Now if that is true, and if I choose to stay the way I am, then I become my own creator by imposition of my will and am guilty.
Now for many years I did just this. My conscious was like a huge spring that took all of my effort to intentionally hold down. I intentionally supressed the truth. Put it out of my mind clear into the subconscious for a long time until some Christian came along and hit me upside the heart with the sword of the Spirit. The truth was more powerful than my supression of it!
But that is the sin as Paul states clearly in Romans:
Romans 1:18
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
It's worth considering and not really very fundie...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by DominionSeraph, posted 10-22-2006 9:49 PM DominionSeraph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by DominionSeraph, posted 10-23-2006 12:15 AM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5876 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 51 of 210 (358238)
10-23-2006 1:16 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by DominionSeraph
10-23-2006 12:15 AM


DominionSeraph writes:
Whatever is at the beginning of the chain of creating/fiddling is responsible for your will being the way it is.
Ok, I'll accept that!
God created Satan, so that makes Him accountable.
But if we're given a choice to change, who is responsible then? The sin is that you want to keep doing what is wrong, not so much the wrong itself. Yu are using your freedom to stay a slave to your own will when you can call on Him to redeem you.
God offers His will to you...
Also, there is only one faith in the world in which God Himself took that responsibility; Christianity.
He paid the price on the cross. Justice and mercy all satisfied in one perfect sacrifice.
Now do we hate Him for that, or follow Him?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by DominionSeraph, posted 10-23-2006 12:15 AM DominionSeraph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Parasomnium, posted 10-23-2006 5:01 AM Rob has replied
 Message 74 by DominionSeraph, posted 10-24-2006 12:14 AM Rob has replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5876 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 58 of 210 (358278)
10-23-2006 9:41 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Parasomnium
10-23-2006 5:01 AM


Re: Contortionist rhetoric about free will
You're free to keep believing that, like a true believer. I am not going to try and change your mind because you have free will. I spent too much time in the past trying to argue. Do what you don't have to do now if you have to. But when you put time into the equation, or eternity, then it's not such a conundrum. It may be, that in time, you'll have to do something else.
Your choice, at the appropriate time (which is not your choice).
So many of us, trapped here in finitude, and actually believing we are God. Isolated in a universe so vast, and we cannot even escape our own Solar system. Yet we think it is our life, to do with as we please and make havoc out of reason.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Parasomnium, posted 10-23-2006 5:01 AM Parasomnium has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by AdminJar, posted 10-23-2006 10:47 AM Rob has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5876 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 75 of 210 (358442)
10-24-2006 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by DominionSeraph
10-24-2006 12:14 AM


Are you choosing for me?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by DominionSeraph, posted 10-24-2006 12:14 AM DominionSeraph has not replied

  
Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5876 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 94 of 210 (358503)
10-24-2006 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by JavaMan
10-24-2006 4:09 AM


Re: Free Willy
OFF TOPIC - DO NOT RESPOND

Tusko said:
I see free will as something that relates not to the universe as a whole but to a very specific subset of the whole - beings with the ability to reason.
Javaman said in response:
I'd agree with this, apart from the limitation of 'beings with the ability to reason'. I'd change this to 'beings with the ability to choose' - reason is only a very small factor in most of my choices; there seems to be a whole realm of unconscious processing in there.
I would like to quote something from Lewis for both of you.
"Nowadays, when we talk of the "laws of nature" we usually mean things like gravitation, or heredity, or the laws of chemistry. But when the older thinkers called the Law of Right and Wrong "the Law of Nature," they really meant the Law of Human Nature. The idea was that, just as all bodies are governed by the law of gravitation and organisms by biological laws, so the creature called man also had his law--with this great difference, that a body could not choose whether it obeyed the law of gravitation or not, but a man could choose either or obey the Law of Human Nature or to disobey it.
We may put this in another way. Each man is at every moment subjected to several sets of law but there is only one of these which he is free to disobey. As a body, he is subjected to gravitation and cannot disobey it; if you leave him unsupported in mid-air, he has no more choice about falling than a stone has. As an organism, he is subjected to various biological laws which he cannot disobey anymore than an animal can. That is, he cannot disobey those laws which he shares with other things; but the law which is peculiar to his human nature, the law he does not share with animals or vegetables or inorganic things, is the one he can disobey if he chooses.
This law was called the Law of Nature because people thought that every one knew it by nature and did not need to be taught it. They did not mean, of course, that you might not find an odd individual here and there who did not know it, just as you find a few people who are colour-blind or have no ear for a tune. But taking the race as a whole, they thought that the human idea of decent behavior was obvious to everyone. And I believe they were right. If they were not, then all the things we said about the war were nonsense. What was the sense in saying the enemy were in the wrong unless Right is a real thing which the Nazis at bottom knew as well as we did and ought to have practiced? If they had no notion of what we mean by right, then, though we might still have had to fight them, we could no more have blamed them for that then for the colour of their hair.
(C.S. Lewis / Chapter Title: Right and wrong as a key to understanding the universe / 'Mere Christianity')
Thought it was worth noting since you both have found your way onto that same ground.
Edited by AdminNWR, : off topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by JavaMan, posted 10-24-2006 4:09 AM JavaMan has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024