 |
| 
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/27/2005 7:24 PM (GMT -6) |   | | Hi all-
I'd like to know what folks think are THE best defenses of LFW out there, in books or articles.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 5/28/2005 12:17 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Tom,
TGB said...
I'd like to know what folks think are THE best defenses of LFW out there, in books or articles.
I like this one!
Revelation 3:21 To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne.
Which must imply choosing as Jesus chooses, and he had real authority (Jn. 10:18; Mt. 28:18), real choices can be made within God's will:
1 Corinthians 7:38 So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better.
So the better choice is not the only choice, and God's will is not a monorail.
1 Corinthians 9:1 Am I not free?
Though you must know I don't hold that unbelievers can choose! They are blind, slaves to sin and the devil, dead in sins, even, where not much by way of choosing can be done...
Blessings,
Lee
P.S. A cigar, by way of consolation, for putting up with me... 
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/28/2005 2:26 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 5/29/2005 6:37 PM (GMT -6) | |
Lee Merrill said...Hi everyone,
Starkman said...
Tell me what my future says I will do (exhaustively, of course), and I won't be able do what I'm told I'm going to do even if I tried to. Even if I'm Peter, trying all I can not to deny Jesus? Blessings, Lee
Lee, note my post: Tell me what my future says I will do (exhaustively, of course) . . . "
It wasn't that Peter didn't have free will—Jesus did not tell Peter, "Sorry, dude, but your future is set, determined and settled...every part of it, as a matter of fact." Peter didn't walk away thinking to himself, "Well, that's it. Determined and settled; I'm going to deny Jesus, whether I want to or not. Couldn't change it if I wanted to. It's been known since eternity past that this was going to happen."
What Jesus was telling Peter was that He (Jesus) knew Peter's heart better than Peter knew it himself, and that Peter wasn't up to the staying power that he thought he was. That's all that's going on with Jesus' declaration to Peter. So, I still contend that the future is not exhaustively settled, because I couldn't live it the way it's supposed to happen if I tried to.
Starkman
My teacher used to say that whenever he read Scripture, he would always ask the question, "What does this have to say about the character of God?" Working off his thinking, as I read Scripture, I have come to ask, "What does this have to say about the heart and passion of God's desire for relationship for us? | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 6/1/2005 12:35 PM (GMT -6) | | Here are some I haven’t yet read but am planning to as soon as I can afford them!
An Essay on Free Will (1986), by Peter Van Inwagen
Agents, Causes, and Events: Essays on Indeterminism and Free Will (1995), ed. Timothy O’Conner
The Significance of Free Will (1998), by Robert Kane
Free Will (Blackwell Readings in Philosophy) (2001), essays by Robert Kane
The Oxford Handbook of Free Will (Oxford Handbooks in Philosophy Series) (2002), ed. Robert Kane (collection of previously unpublished articles/essays)
Free Will (Oxford Readings in Philosophy) (2003), ed. Gary Watson
Free Will: A Very Short Introduction (2004), by Thomas Pink (have read; is a nice short intro)
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 6/1/2005 1:19 PM (GMT -6) | |
TGB said...
Free Will: A Very Short Introduction (2004), by Thomas Pink (have read; is a nice short intro) Can I borrow this when you show up?
I have Graham Priest's VSI on Logic.
Very Short Introductions of Complex Topics For People With Extremely Short......
what was I talking about?
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 6/1/2005 8:29 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi everyone,
Various folks said...
Even if I'm Peter, trying all I can not to deny Jesus?
Starkman: Lee, note my post: Tell me what my future says I will do (exhaustively, of course) . . . "
Oops, I missed that part...
Starkman said...
What Jesus was telling Peter was that He (Jesus) knew Peter's heart better than Peter knew it ...
And also his memory, too? That Peter would not remember, the first time the rooster crowed, and that he would remember, the second time?
Muz said...
To me, sin is the best evidence for LFW. The existance of sin, the act of making oneself the very enemy of God, must take place freely and against the will and plan of God.
Unless God's command for "all men everywhere to repent," if God's word here has a purpose to bring about repentance, and will accomplish that purpose...
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
themuzicman
Always ready for lunch and the weekend
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 48
| Posted 6/2/2005 7:35 AM (GMT -6) | | Lee Merrill said...Muz said...
To me, sin is the best evidence for LFW. The existance of sin, the act of making oneself the very enemy of God, must take place freely and against the will and plan of God. Unless God's command for "all men everywhere to repent," if God's word here has a purpose to bring about repentance, and will accomplish that purpose... Blessings, Lee
God makes us sin, so that He can make us repent? 
Muz
"God is dead" - Nietzsche
"Nietzscheis dead" - God | | Back to Top | | |
|
ThatDarnCat
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2005
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 6/2/2005 12:48 PM (GMT -6) | |
Lee Merrill said...
themuzicman said...
God makes us sin, so that He can make us repent? Well, conversion is called being born again, now have we ever heard of a teenager saying to their parents, "I didn't ask to be born"? Why don't people have the same theological objections to physical birth, may I ask?
Some do, it's called suicide.
(Just do a google search on "I didn't ask to be born")
Just as there is spiritual suicide:
"....Whoever has sinned against Me, I will blot him out of My book....."
"....He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life....."
"....You have rebuked the nations, you have destroyed the wicked; you have blotted out their name forever and ever...."
Post Edited (ThatDarnCat) : 6/2/2005 4:01:34 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
AtTheWell
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2004
Total Posts : 133
| Posted 6/3/2005 9:00 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi Lee,
- if you click the google address pasted by TDC and check out thefriendsociety link- Why Are We Here? You will see an article that describes a very dissatisfied persons "theological" objection to physical birth. (Fair warning, this guy is colorfully linguistified) He, however, has a deterministic view of God. Open theists just don't have any reason to object in this way. 
Seriously though, what would those objections look like to you?
and...
-how is it you don't have the same theological objections to physical birth as Josh (with more refined terms, of course)?
Peace,
ATWPost Edited (AtTheWell) : 6/3/2005 9:03:37 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 6/3/2005 9:24 AM (GMT -6) | |
AtTheWell said...Hi Lee, - if you click the google address pasted by TDC and check out thefriendsociety link- Why Are We Here? You will see an article that describes a very dissatisfied persons "theological" objection to physical birth. (Fair warning, this guy is colorfully linguistified) He, however, has a deterministic view of God. Open theists just don't have any reason to object in this way.
The guy should ask to be born, as in born again.
Contradictions if well understood and managed can spark off the fires of invention. Orthodoxy whether of the right or of the left is the graveyard of creativity. Post Edited (sparknheart) : 6/3/2005 9:30:18 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
AtTheWell
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2004
Total Posts : 133
| Posted 6/3/2005 9:50 AM (GMT -6) | |
sparknheart said...
AtTheWell said...Hi Lee, - if you click the google address pasted by TDC and check out thefriendsociety link- Why Are We Here? You will see an article that describes a very dissatisfied persons "theological" objection to physical birth. (Fair warning, this guy is colorfully linguistified) He, however, has a deterministic view of God. Open theists just don't have any reason to object in this way.
The guy should ask to be born, as in born again.
I agree Spark, all the hurt underneath that profanity  - his experience of the message of the gospel is sadly perverted to be that of a God who purposely chooses some and not others, that created us so he could control the whole fiasco for some unknown purpose that doesn't include him, etc., etc... 
let's pray for Josh, hopefully despair hasn't had complete victory over him.
Peace, ATW | | Back to Top | | |
|
ThatDarnCat
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2005
Total Posts : 82
| Posted 6/3/2005 11:44 AM (GMT -6) | |
JEE said...
The Calvinist's comparison of physical birth to spiritual birth misses an issue of absolutely fundamental importance--the difference between the physical world and the spiritual world, as well as the obviously metaphorical nature of the term, "born again." Clearly, spiritual rebirth is LIKE physical birth, but it is certainly not analogous in every way.
John, I find it is analogous in a way that the determinists didn't anticipate.
When you're physically born, it's not your choice.
When you're physically born, your name is entered in the Lamb's Book of Life. This is not your choice, either.
This is not a book of Sin, but a book of Life. Everyone born, their name is entered in it.
At the end of your Life, if you have chosen to rely on Jesus' salvation AND have persevered to the end, your name is still in the Lamb's Book of Life.
But if you have chosen to sin and NOT rely on Jesus' salvation and have not persevered to the end, your name will have been blotted out of the Lamb's Book of Life.
"....Whoever has sinned against Me, I will blot him out of My book....."
"....He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life....."
"....You have rebuked the nations, you have destroyed the wicked; you have blotted out their name forever and ever...."
"....Let them be blotted out of the book of the living....."
Just as you can choose suicide to remove your physical life, you can analogously choose to sin and persevere in it and not accept Jesus' salvation, a spiritual suicide, removing yourself from the Lamb's Book of Life.
At the end, if your name is not in the Lamb's Book of Life, you're eternally separated from God.
The analogy holds on how you entered physical life and how you entered the Lamb's Book of Life, neither case by choice.
The analogy holds on how you can remove yourself from physical life and remove yourself from the Lamb's Book of Life, both by choice.
The analogy holds on how you can persevere in your physical life, by choice, and how you can persevere in Christ's life, by choice.
Post Edited (ThatDarnCat) : 6/3/2005 12:27:05 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
markporter
Fire over Oxford
Date Joined Oct 2003
Total Posts : 263
| Posted 6/6/2005 4:39 PM (GMT -6) | | | A lot of Kane there Tom, I'm pretty sure I read an article by him a while back which tried to defend some kind of indeterminate freedom - but as far as I could see it fell a long way short of LFW as a Christian would like to understand it - it seemed to be about randomness rather than about genuine choices. | | Back to Top | | |
|
rossfadeinout
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 428
| Posted 6/17/2005 9:34 AM (GMT -6) | | | Dang, how did I miss this thread?
I've read the intro on Free Will by Pink (at Tom's recommendation) and I thought it was pretty good, although I was a bit confused by his terminology at the end --he says that choices are not "causal", but they are done for reasons.
I would say that the best overview of the subject I have came across is Chapter 2 of Doc's SATPOE. Lots of good stuff there, and lots of further reading in the footnotes.
Responding to Mark, Doc uses alot of Kane in his chapter. I think that Kane is right on with the why of free will, but not the how. Here's what Doc says,
In my estimation, Kane's depiction of freedom reduces it to an epiphenomenal reality--persons experience neuronal indeterminacy as morally responsible freedom-- but he has not yet explained how such indeterminacy could make one genuinely responsible.... Nevertheless, Kane's analysisof what needs to be true if morally responsible free will is to be rendered intelligible is most helpful. (pg 57, note #10)
If anyone is interested in some good online articles on free will from arguably the foremost defender of LFW out there, check Tim O'Connor's website. Here's the link.
Peace, Ross
"Let us remember how common the folly is of going from one faulty extreme into the opposite." -Thomas Reid | | Back to Top | | |
|
Acolyte
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2005
Total Posts : 42
| Posted 6/20/2005 5:47 PM (GMT -6) | | Robert Kane's The Significance of Free Will, is the best philosophical defense of LFW.
Joseph Farrell's, Free Choice in St. Maximus the Confessor, is the best theological defense bar none of LFW. | | Back to Top | | |
| 27 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:49 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|