 |
| 
Orpheus42
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 21
| Posted 3/7/2002 5:52 AM (GMT -6) |   | I'm sure I'm just missing something that's obviously there, I do that quite often (like when I have five minutes to get to class and I'm scrambling around trying to find my books! ;)), but could you show me the difference between libertarian free will and your idea of what constitutes the Biblical idea of free will?
There's some good stuff going on in Winghead's thread, and if I want to think about responding I need to have a better idea what your thought process is on the matter and I don't want to drag down the level of discussion in that thread by asking there. I always hate it when someone new comes into a discussion and throws in a tangent with his/her first post ;)
And just so you'll know in advance, I'm not planning on assaulting your beliefs- I'm quite undecided about the whole matter. That's one reason why I'm here :)
Peace, Love, and Jesus Christ,
Jason
God loves us exactly the way we are, but He loves us far too much to leave us that way. --- Leighton Ford | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/8/2002 4:08 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Jason,
Thanks for writing. I admire your desire to have things defined up front. That's a rare trait and there's not enough of that in discourse these days. You've asked quite a loaded question on a huge topic. Rather than trying to address all aspects of it, I will offer some brief remarks and then you can ask for clarification or elaboration as needed, OK?
Jason asks:[quote]"... could you show me the difference between libertarian free will and your idea of what constitutes the Biblical idea of free will?"
If I understand it correctly, libertarian free will refers to the idea that (a) people are completely free to exercise their will, AND (b) their will is not constrained in any way that has been determined in advance, AND (c) one's decisions (such as the decision to love or obey) cannot be predetermined in any way if decisions are to be regarded as genuine and veritable.
(If I have missed something or am in error on this, I welcome clarification from anyone who supports libertarian free will.)
Compatibilist free will describes the perceived freedom that a person exercises in his daily experience (Php 2:12,13 Eph 2:10 Ro 9:14-16). His decisions and all the mitigating factors that affect his decisions are foreordained by God, in perfect accordance with (a) His secret specific plan for individuals (De 29:29), and (b) His revealed eschatology (Mt 24:6). Man's freedom derives from God's absolute and truly libertarian freedom, Who alone is truly free. We must not confuse God's revealed decree(commands, examples, prophecies) and God's secret decrees, which no one knows in advance but God Himself.
I look forward to your participation in the aforementioned thread.
Feel free to IM me. My AOL IM screenname is Hilston1.
Hai dozo,
James Hilston
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston | | Back to Top | | |
|
writerdad
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448
| Posted 3/9/2002 11:41 AM (GMT -6) | | Most of us who believe in free will would define it as David Basinger defines it, saying when a person is free to perform an action, she "has it in her power to choose to perform A or choose not to perform A. Both A and not A could actually occur, which will actually occur has not yet been determined."
Having said this, it should be noted that no believer in Libertarian free will believes that there are not external influences on the will. There are many outside influences that can influence the decision of a person. But those who believe in libertarian free will believe that, ulitmately, it is within the agent's will to do either. Harold
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/9/2002 12:27 PM (GMT -6) | | Harold,
Thank you for your contribution. I have modified my statements. Let me know if they still need to be adjusted.
Libertarian free will refers to the idea that (a) people have it in their power to choose between two or more equally possible options, AND (b) their will is not constrained in any way that has been determined in advance, AND (c) one's decisions (such as the decision to love or obey) cannot be predetermined in any way if decisions are to be regarded as genuine and veritable.
Harold writes:quote:
There are many outside influences that can influence the decision of a person. But those who believe in libertarian free will believe that, ulitmately, it is within the agent's will to do either.
Aren't there internal influences as well? Such as preference, mood, chemical processes in the brain, indigestion, etc.?
Domo,
James Hilston
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston | | Back to Top | | |
|
alwyn
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 30
| Posted 3/9/2002 4:47 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi...a short comment here (hope it's relevant):
Aren't there internal influences as well? Such as preference, mood, chemical processes in the brain, indigestion, etc.?
Certainly there are. But I'd think that when we come to MORAL choices (presumably that which most matters in libertarian/non-libertarian debates) libertarian free-willers would hold that an agent's choices cannot be reduced a 'cause' other than him/herself. This is the crux of what it means to be 'take responsibility', 'be accountable', etc. In Dr.Boyd's words, there cannot be antecedent causes which make it INEVITABLE that ALL our moral choices go a certain way.
We must have the power to make actual what was only possible.
Rgds,
Al
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/9/2002 5:15 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Al,
Thanks for your comments.
Al writes:quote:
But I'd think that when we come to MORAL choices (presumably that which most matters in libertarian/non-libertarian debates) libertarian free-willers would hold that an agent's choices cannot be reduced a 'cause' other than him/herself.
Are you saying that only MORAL choices are cause-less?
Al writes:quote:
This is the crux of what it means to be 'take responsibility', 'be accountable', etc.
Is a person any less "responsible" or "accountable" for amoral and "cause-ful" choices?
Al writes:quote:
In Dr.Boyd's words, there cannot be antecedent causes which make it INEVITABLE that ALL our moral choices go a certain way.
Why not?
Al writes:quote:
We must have the power to make actual what was only possible.
Power/ability is not inherent in any created thing. It is derived from God, whence all power/ability flows. We only have the power/ability that God has given and sustains. We have the temporal perception that we have the power to make actual what was ineluctably inevitable. Derived freedom is thus compatible with God's predetermined decrees.
Thanks for posting.
Oyasumi nasai,
James Hilston
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston | | Back to Top | | |
|
Jewgrass
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2001
Total Posts : 113
| Posted 3/9/2002 5:26 PM (GMT -6) | | Hilston, I would really like your comments on my "attack on determinism" on the other thread.
--Jewgrass
"[The Messiah] will take upon himself all the guilt of Israel... for on account of their sin he has died." --Moshe Alshekh, 16th century Jewish Rabbi | | Back to Top | | |
|
writerdad
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448
| Posted 3/10/2002 6:57 PM (GMT -6) | | Yes, there are both internal and external influences on a person, and a person may succumb to such influences. But it is not inevitable that a person does.
Moral choices are not causeless. They are caused by a person who God has given the power to cause. God has given the individual the power to make a choice apart from any cause other than that person's own will.
In another post you wrote to Jewgrass, do you ever not do what you desire? Sure. There have been times when I completely desired to sin and did not. There have been times when I didn't want to work out and did. The list could go on and on. There have been many times in my life when there was something I knew completely in my heart I wanted to do and did not do it. Harold
| | Back to Top | | |
|
writerdad
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448
| Posted 3/10/2002 7:02 PM (GMT -6) | | Who gives this "temporal perception?" Are you saying that we are basically deceived? Because it would see that if we have this "temporal perception," then it is nothing more than a lie to make us think we have freedom which we do not. And why have it in the first place? Is not your freedom the true freedom? Why would we need to think we can help actualize things, particularly if the scriptures tell us different? Harold
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/10/2002 8:07 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Harold,
Thank you for posting. You write:quote:
Yes, there are both internal and external influences on a person, and a person may succumb to such influences. But it is not inevitable that a person does.
Are you then saying that a person may make an influence-less choice?
Harold writes:quote:
Moral choices are not causeless. They are caused by a person who God has given the power to cause. God has given the individual the power to make a choice apart from any cause other than that person's own will.
I'm trying to understand precisely what you're saying. First, are you suggesting that a person's will can be exercised in isolation from all other influences, external and internal? And second, when a person's will (desire) is divided, such as in the case with temptation to sin, are you suggesting that the person's decision to sin or not to sin is made in isolation from everything except the person's willl (desire)?
Harold writes:quote:
In another post you wrote to Jewgrass, do you ever not do what you desire? Sure. There have been times when I completely desired to sin and did not.
Why didn't you?
Harold writes:quote:
There have been times when I didn't want to work out and did.
Why did you?
Harold writes:quote:
Who gives this "temporal perception?"
. It is not "given." It is the natural state of being finite.
Harold writes:quote:
Are you saying that we are basically deceived?
No. We are finite.
Harold writes:quote:
Because it would see that if we have this "temporal perception," then it is nothing more than a lie to make us think we have freedom which we do not.
It is a fundamental error to think that we have libertarian freedom. One ought not to be so bold as to think we have freedom in the first place. It is incumbent upon sentient human creatures to recognize God's absolute freedom and sovereignty together with our comcomitant derived (compatibilist) freedom. Thus we can have a coherent and balanced grasp of God's infinitude and our finiteness regarding the scope and boundary conditions of freedom.
Harold writes:quote:
And why have it in the first place?
Why not?
Harold writes:quote:
Is not your freedom the true freedom?
The true compatibilist freedom of finite creatures ought to be understood in the proper relationship to God's true absolute freedom.
Harold writes:quote:
Why would we need to think we can help actualize things, particularly if the scriptures tell us different?
It isn't a question of "need", but is rather question of our nature and our derived power to actualize as finite creatures, AND our recognition of the Creator as the ultimate and infinite Actualizer.
Thanks for the dialogue. I am enjoying this very much.
Domo,
James Hilston
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston | | Back to Top | | |
|
alwyn
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 30
| Posted 3/11/2002 5:52 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi James, hope u don't mind if I pose a few questions of me own:
H: Power/ability is not inherent in any created thing. It is derived from God, whence all power/ability flows.
Can God give creatures the ability to become 'causes' themselves? To do things apart from His will?
H: We have the temporal perception that we have the power to make actual what was ineluctably inevitable.
How do you know you are not being 'deceived' by your temporal perception? What makes you sure your perception of 'temporal perception' is accurate if, like you say, we are apparently misled to think that we have the power to 'make actual what was possible'.
H: Derived freedom is thus compatible with God's predetermined decrees.
But if God said He did NOT want something to be done and WE DID IT - isn' it easier to conclude that we acted against His will, than to say that He 'meticulously ordained' us doing it, only to scold us for it?
Can God determine that we are able to determine in a libertarian way? If not, why not?
Rgds,
Al
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/11/2002 7:22 AM (GMT -6) | | Hilston wrote: Power/ability is not inherent in any created thing. It is derived from God, whence all power/ability flows.
Al asks: quote:
Can God give creatures the ability to become 'causes' themselves? To do things apart from His will?
God, being infinite, is the ultimate Source of all causation. All power and authority originates with God and consist (i.e. holds together) by Him. No causes or effects occur apart from His transcendent decrees AND His immanent involvement.
Col 1:16 For by him [the Son] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Hilston had written: We have the temporal perception that we have the power to make actual what was ineluctably inevitable.
Al asks:quote:
How do you know you are not being 'deceived' by your temporal perception?
Because the Word of God and the witness of God to His self-attesting Word assure me that God is true and that His Word is true.
Al asks:quote:
What makes you sure your perception of 'temporal perception' is accurate if, like you say, we are apparently misled to think that we have the power to 'make actual what was possible'.
Please be careful not to put words in my mouth. I did NOT say we are misled. I do not believe we are misled. As far as I can tell at this point, those who believe they are libertarianly free are misled by erroneous presuppositions, not by God or the Scriptures.
Hilston had written: Derived freedom is thus compatible with God's predetermined decrees.
Al writes:quote:
But if God said He did NOT want something to be done and WE DID IT - isn' it easier to conclude that we acted against His will, than to say that He 'meticulously ordained' us doing it, only to scold us for it?
It is a common error to confuse God's commands with His secret will (Deu 29:29). E.g., God commands that children obey their parents, yet He has also decreed that many children will not actually do so.
Al asks:quote:
Can God determine that we are able to determine in a libertarian way? If not, why not?
No, for the same reason that God cannot create a rock too big for Him to lift. For the same reason that God cannot make a 4-sided 2-dimensional triangle or a round 2d square. For the same reason that He cannot make a contradiction true. Each of these things is contrary to God's nature, character and attributes.
Question: Do you believe that only MORAL choices are cause-less?
Al had writte:quote:
This is the crux of what it means to be 'take responsibility', 'be accountable', etc.
Is a person any less "responsible" or "accountable" for amoral and "cause-ful" choices?
Al writes:quote:
In Dr.Boyd's words, there cannot be antecedent causes which make it INEVITABLE that ALL our moral choices go a certain way.
Why not?
Thanks for your consideration of my questions.
Hai dozo,
James Hilston
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston
Edited by - Hilston on 03/11/2002 12:26:40 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
writerdad
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448
| Posted 3/11/2002 11:20 AM (GMT -6) | | James: yes, I do believe we can make a decision, without influence (I believe Satan is an example of this), that our will can stand alone. Why didn't I do what I desired to do? Because I choose not to. I believed that something was right and something was wrong and I chose that way, inspite of my desires. But I have to say there are times when I do things and I just choose to, I have no real reason why.
I do find it interesting that you see a "need" within us to be actualizers, even though we are not. It seems that there is a need within humans (that even you adknowledge) to have to believe we have libertarian freedom, even if we do not. Apparently, people must have it (or believe that they do), in order that there can be true meaning to their lives.
Finally, you continuely assert that it is an error to believe in libertarian freedom. But why? It seems, from your writings, that libteratian freedom to you somehow demeans God's absolute freedom. But how? It seems your view of freedom is wrapped up in how you view God's soveignity and if we can make our own choices that it takes away from that. I would disagree, I think it enhances God's soveign reign. Beyond that, though, I would disagree with you on God having absolute freedom. God does not have absolute freedom. He cannot do anything he wants, for he is limited by the nature of his person as God. There are many things God, as God, cannot do, just as there are many things we humans, as humans, cannot do. Every person has limitations. But just as God can makes true choices within his person as God, so we can make true choices within our own limitations as individuals. Harold
| | Back to Top | | |
|
writerdad
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448
| Posted 3/11/2002 11:26 AM (GMT -6) | | James: I do think you miss Al's point. Can God not give a person the power to act contrary to his will, even if that will gives the power? Surely, God is the source of all actions in the universe. But do all actions conform to God's ultimate will. That is something you have not proven.
"Because God's word assumes me," is wonderful, but you are not answering the question. You made a statement about temporal perception. What does the Bible assure you of? What it assures you of in the area of freedom does not assure other people, but the exact opposite. What you need to do is show how the Bible upholds your view of freedom, because what you are saying is that the Bible conflicts with human experience, whereas I would say that the two are in agreement because the Bible assumes liberatian freedom, as do people when they make choices. Harold
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Winghead
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 132
| Posted 3/11/2002 2:11 PM (GMT -6) | | Writerdad says:quote:
What you need to do is show how the Bible upholds your view of freedom, because what you are saying is that the Bible conflicts with human experience, whereas I would say that the two are in agreement because the Bible assumes liberatian freedom, as do people when they make choices. Harold
Yes! Excellent point. As I read the "arguements against" libertarian freedom, I am reminded of the many places in scripture that challenge people make choices, turn from out ways, to submit. All imply we exercise our will.
YBIC,
Winghead
"...you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.’ The second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ No other commandment is greater than these.”
Mark 12:30-31 (NLT)
Edited by - Winghead on 03/11/2002 7:12:00 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/11/2002 5:11 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Harold,
Thanks for responding. Comments/questions below:
Harold writes: quote:
yes, I do believe we can make a decision, without influence (I believe Satan is an example of this), that our will can stand alone. Why didn't I do what I desired to do? Because I choose not to.
But wait, you still did what you desired MORE, that is, your desire to abstain from something prevailed over your desire to indulge. Either way, you do what you desire. You are not free from your desire, and in the case of a dilemma or temptation, there will be conflicting desires, one of which will influence you more than the other. There is no way around the influence of desire.
Harold writes:quote:
... But I have to say there are times when I do things and I just choose to, I have no real reason why.
If you cannot pinpoint why you make one particular decision instead of another, how can you be so dogmatic about the non-irresistibility of the option you choose? You clearly chose precisely according to the influence of your desire. I don't know how anyone can rationally deny that. Even at gunpoint, a person chooses to comply with the gunman or die. Whichever choice is made, it is made either out of a desire to comply, or a desire to choose death over compliance. Desire influences the decision.
Harold writes:quote:
I do find it interesting that you see a "need" within us to be actualizers, even though we are not.
No, Harold, I didn't say that, nor do I share this "need within us to be actualizers." It is not a delusion or a lie, but rather a consequence of being finite. We can only perceive cause and effect. We cannot see the future or all the cause-effect nexi in the universe. It is simply the nature of our limited purview. The jungle seems thick, invariant, indistinguishable and unnavigable to a person who is inexperienced and "unenlightened" to the ways of the jungle. Surely, no one could make it through such a forest without getting lost. The very notion of a person who can make his way through it at all, let alone being blindfolded is inconceivable, that is, until one witnesses ease with which a blindfolded jungle guide can get from point A to point B. Similarly, it appears you assume things based on what you think is possible based on your limited experience and purview. Despite the demonstrated wisdom of the jungle guide, it seems you still wish to insist that the thickness and seeming chaos of the jungle is impossible to surmount.
Harold writes:quote:
It seems that there is a need within humans (that even you adknowledge) to have to believe we have libertarian freedom, even if we do not.
I didn't say that. Please be careful to recall our previous dialogue. You wrote:quote:
Why would we need to think we can help actualize things, particularly if the scriptures tell us different?
I replied:It isn't a question of "need", but is rather question of our nature and our derived power to actualize as finite creatures, AND our recognition of the Creator as the ultimate and infinite Actualizer.
Harold writes:quote:
Apparently, people must have it (or believe that they do), in order that there can be true meaning to their lives.
I disagree and so do the scriptures. In your view, if I understand it correctly -- please correct me if I'm wrong -- there are decisions that are made that are not part of God's plan. This view robs them of meaning, which is ironic given the typical complaints of Open Viewists. True meaning can only be had in the context of a proper view of God's meticulous sovereignty. Every decision we make is meaningfully used and intended for God's ultimate plan and purpose.
Harold writes:quote:
Finally, you continuely assert that it is an error to believe in libertarian freedom. But why?
It is incompatible with reality as revealed in scripture.
Harold writes:quote:
It seems, from your writings, that libteratian freedom to you somehow demeans God's absolute freedom. But how?
They are as mutually exclusive concepts. Even atheists understand this logic, which is why they enjoy asking, "If God is all-powerful, can He create a rock so large that He can't lift it?" It is an impossibility. So it is with the alleged co-existence of absolute Divine freedom and libertarian human freedom. They are mutually exclusive concepts. It seems your view of freedom is wrapped up in how you view man's culpability and if God is absolutely sovereign that takes away from that (I've borrowed your sentence structure to make a point; see below).
Harold writes:quote:
It seems your view of freedom is wrapped up in how you view God's soveignity and if we can make our own choices that it takes away from that. I would disagree, I think it enhances God's soveign reign.
Of course you disagree. This is the crux of the discussion. Your presuppositions require that conjecture and thus you are satisfied with that explanation because it fits your presuppositions, regardless of its incoherence (viz., sovereignty that is not sovereign).
Harold writes:quote:
Beyond that, though, I would disagree with you on God having absolute freedom. God does not have absolute freedom. He cannot do anything he wants, for he is limited by the nature of his person as God. There are many things God, as God, cannot do, just as there are many things we humans, as humans, cannot do.
You apparently misunderstand God's nature and the real "limits" upon Him. The "limits" upon God's nature and character are things that are not the same as the actual limitations upon humans. We are truly limited because we are finite. God is not limited (He is infinite) because the created reality reflects His attributes and characteristics. He alone is infinite and transcends creation. The so-called "limitations" upon God are, simply stated, those things with are not coherently possible, such as a square circles, 4-sided triangles and rocks He can't lift.
Harold writes:quote:
Every person has limitations. But just as God can makes true choices within his person as God, so we can make true choices within our own limitations as individuals.
I don't disagree with that sentence as it is stated. It is when you impose limitations upon God that I have a complaint.
Harold writes:quote:
I do think you miss Al's point. Can God not give a person the power to act contrary to his will, even if that will gives the power?
Please elaborate or clarify your question. It's a bit difficult to parse.
Harold writes:quote:
Surely, God is the source of all actions in the universe. But do all actions conform to God's ultimate will. That is something you have not proven.
The principle is taught throughout scripture. Even evil actions are intended by God to bring about His purposes. The evil which Joseph's brothers committed against him were intended by God to save the nation of Israel from famine. The evil of Saul of Tarsus was used by God to humble the regenerated Paul. The messenger of Satan that tormented Paul was intended to keep Paul from glorying in the great visions he was shown by God in the third heaven. The evil of Judas and his defection to Satan was used by God to bring about the redemption of sinners by the betrayal of Christ.
Harold writes:quote:
"Because God's word assures me," is wonderful, but you are not answering the question. You made a statement about temporal perception. What does the Bible assure you of?
I did answer your quesiton. You asked how I know I am not being 'deceived' by my temporal perception. I answered your question. How do you know you're not just a brain in a vat?
Harold asks:quote:
What it assures you of in the area of freedom does not assure other people, but the exact opposite.
Of course; and neither is that the standard for evaluating truth. We ought not go around thinking, "I will evaluate truth claims according to what gives assurance to other people." Some people find assurance in the daily horoscope.
Harold writes:quote:
What you need to do is show how the Bible upholds your view of freedom, because what you are saying is that the Bible conflicts with human experience, ...
First, we should not gauge or evaluate truth on the basis of our human experience. The Word of God is the sole arbiter of truth claims, regardless of our experience. Second, your sentence begs the very question. You claim that what I am saying is that the Bible conflicts with human experience, when in actuality I am saying that the Bible makes human experience meaningful and actually defines the reality within which all of our human experience makes sense. It seems, however, because of your presuppositions about libertarian freedom and the priority of human experience, you then interpret the scriptures on that basis, which will inevitably result in a skewed perception of God's true sovereignty and His absolute and infinite freedom.
Harold writes:quote:
... whereas I would say that the two are in agreement because the Bible assumes liberatian freedom, as do people when they make choices.
See what I mean: You must view it this way because you insist on libertarian freedom as a non-negotiable premise. It then seems you interpret the scriptures on this basis. This, of course, functions as a lens through which you perceive human choice. It apparently affect how you even perceive the choices made in the Bible, even Judas's "free" choices which were foreordained and locked in prophetic history hundreds of years earlier. I do not view human choice the way you do, so I don't have a problem with the so-called "problem verses" that Open Theists have.
Oyasumi nasai,
James Hilston
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston
Edited by - hilston on 03/11/2002 10:14:35 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
alwyn
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 30
| Posted 3/11/2002 5:35 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Hilston...here we go again (smile):
H: Power/ability is not inherent in any created thing. It is derived from God, whence all power/ability flows.
Agree. But can God give His creatures the power to act in a libertarian way? Why do you equate this to the 'square circle' thinggy? (I notice you've only asserted this point; I don't see any evidence/argument which suggests that people acting 'libertarian-ly' contradicts God giving them derived power or God being the source 'whence all power/ability flow')
H: God, being infinite, is the ultimate Source of all causation. All power and authority originates with God and consist (i.e. holds together) by Him. No causes or effects occur apart from His transcendent decrees AND His immanent involvement. Col 1:16 For by him [the Son] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
I appreciate the verse. But you haven't explained why you think God can't create beings with the power to go against Him. Your statements presume that He cannot/does not do this. But you haven't explained why this is the case, and the Col passage is neutral with respect to the 'libertarian' debate.
H: Please be careful not to put words in my mouth. I did NOT say we are misled. I do not believe we are misled. As far as I can tell at this point, those who believe they are libertarianly free are misled by erroneous presuppositions, not by God or the Scriptures.
But are YOU not under this 'temporal perception' as well? And do you not formulate your presuppositions WITHIN this temporal perception? And does it not effect you? How come it doesn't?
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. Because you wrote thatWE have the temporal perception that we have the power to make actual what was ineluctably inevitable., I assumed that:
a) being under the perception that 'we have the power, etc.' entails a misleading of ourselves BY our temporal perception (given that we don't REALLY make a difference but only think we do)
b) you were included in the 'we' - aren't you? (Don't you think you make a true difference in reality by your choices, at least SOMETIMES?)
Hilston had written: Derived freedom is thus compatible with God's predetermined decrees.
Of course it is. But i think we differ on what God's predetermined decrees are, the scope, and the contingent nature of it (if any).
H: It is a common error to confuse God's commands with His secret will (Deu 29:29). E.g., God commands that children obey their parents, yet He has also decreed that many children will not actually do so.
I think you'll need to rethink your position here, Hilston. Because if you equate God's 'secret will' with every instance it goes AGAINST His revealed will - it really isn't so 'secret', is it?
So when God tells His people that "I didn't send the false prophets", it REALLY was the case that God DID send them? So He's - err - lying? (Same thing with Him saying, "I repent", isn't it?)
But then again the secret things 'belong unto the Lord', so how come you know so much about it? Yet you're so sure He acts in contradiction to what He reveals about Himself?
But couldn't this just reflect your errorneous presupposition that God MUST control EVERYTHING without which He can't be God? But, again, why ought this be the case?
H: Al asks:Can God determine that we are able to determine in a libertarian way? If not, why not? No, for the same reason that God cannot create a rock too big for Him to lift. For the same reason that God cannot make a 4-sided 2-dimensional triangle or a round 2d square. For the same reason that He cannot make a contradiction true. Each of these things is contrary to God's nature, character and attributes.
Beg to differ. I don't see anything contradictory/meaningless in creating beings with the power to make actual what was only possible without being predetermined to do so.
H: Question: Do you believe that only MORAL choices are cause-less?
No. Do you believed that you are caused to sin? What part does your choice play then (if any)?
H: Is a person any less "responsible" or "accountable" for amoral and "cause-ful" choices?
Yes. If I invented a robot and programmed (i.e. caused) it to kill someone, is the robot responsible? Or am I? If the robot 'thinks' it's sentient - when it really isn't - does that make it responsible?
H: Al writes:In Dr.Boyd's words, there cannot be antecedent causes which make it INEVITABLE that ALL our moral choices go a certain way.Why not?
If someone threw a stone at you which hurt you, who/what would you hold repsonsible? The stone or the person? And why?
Regards,
Al
| | Back to Top | | |
|
writerdad
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448
| Posted 3/11/2002 6:17 PM (GMT -6) | | James: God doesn't have limits? God cannot sin. God cannot be contained. God cannot make himself not exist. The list goes on and on. God is infinite as far as he will always exist, but he certainly has limits as to what he can do (that is if you want to continue to believe in a perfect God). Everything that God knows will happen will happen. He cannot know a false happening. The list goes on.
Point two, I do not insist on liberatian freedom and then interpret scripture through that prism. I find liberatian freedom found in scripture. That is where it is located and I try and understand how God's sovereignty works in the context of what God has revealed about the true freedom he has given us. I can go that route with you as well. You see God's sovereighty as all controlling and are binding scripture to that. It works both ways.
As far as desire, no, I did not in the circumstances I noted desire more not to do what I did. I simply went contrary to what I desired. People do that all the time. They totally desire to do something yet understand it would be harmful to them or something else and don't do it.
Sorry, but I do not believe God's freedom and our liberatian freedom are mutually exclusive concepts. I believe God can grant us true freedom to choice and still be in control. I see no problem there. Harold
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Orpheus42
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 21
| Posted 3/12/2002 5:23 AM (GMT -6) | | Thanks for your answer, I think I understand some of your arguments more clearly now. I apologize for not responding earlier, things are pretty busy around here right now. As soon as school starts winding down I'll be more active on the board :)
Carry on, guys ;)
Peace, Love, and Jesus Christ,
Jason
God loves us exactly the way we are, but He loves us far too much to leave us that way. --- Leighton Ford | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/22/2002 1:49 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Winghead,
You wrote:quote:
As I read the "arguements against" libertarian freedom, I am reminded of the many places in scripture that challenge people make choices, turn from out ways, to submit. All imply we exercise our will.
Your remark here betrays an inadequate understanding of compatibilist freedom. I do not deny people make choices to turn from their ways and to submit to the Lord. I do not deny that we exercise our wills.
I encourage you to read up on the distinctions between libertarian and compatibilist definitions.
Oyasumi nasai,
Jim Hilston
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston
Edited by - hilston on 03/22/2002 6:50:11 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/22/2002 2:56 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Al,
Al writes:quote:
But can God give His creatures the power to act in a libertarian way?
No. The idea is logically incoherent.
Al writes:quote:
Why do you equate this to the 'square circle' thinggy? (I notice you've only asserted this point; I don't see any evidence/argument which suggests that people acting 'libertarian-ly' contradicts God giving them derived power or God being the source 'whence all power/ability flow')
You seem to be unaware of the implications of absolute vs. subordinate freedom. There are no such things as "equal ultimates." This is why egalitarianism is a flawed concept. Absolute freedom and absolute equality are mutually exclusive concepts. You can't have both. Since God is absolutely free, no one else can be.
Hilston wrote: God, being infinite, is the ultimate Source of all causation. All power and authority originates with God and consist (i.e. holds together) by Him. No causes or effects occur apart from His transcendent decrees AND His immanent involvement. Col 1:16 For by him [the Son] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Al writes:quote:
I appreciate the verse. But you haven't explained why you think God can't create beings with the power to go against Him.
It is an atheistic pseudo-reasoning that asks why God can't create a rock too big for Him to lift. God can't make contradictions true without violating His own nature and character. So it is with freedom. To create libertarianly free individuals would be to make a rock too heavy to lift; in other words, it is an impossibility.
Al writes:quote:
... the Col passage is neutral with respect to the 'libertarian' debate.
Actually, it's not. "He is before all things, and by him all things consist." This means there cannot exist a rock too big for Him to lift, there cannot exist a true contradiction, there cannot exist libertarian freedom, there cannot exist a triangular 2d rectangle.
Al writes:quote:
But are YOU not under this 'temporal perception' as well? And do you not formulate your presuppositions WITHIN this temporal perception? And does it not effect you? How come it doesn't?
Of course it affects me and in acknowledging the reality of God's sovereign meticulous control, the activity of prayer makes sense, my decisions in light of the Creator/Sustainor become intelligible and coherent, the existence of evil is no longer a problem, as it is with libertarian theologies.
Al writes:quote:
a) being under the perception that 'we have the power, etc.' entails a misleading of ourselves BY our temporal perception (given that we don't REALLY make a difference but only think we do).
You've misstated the premise. It does not require us to mislead ourselves, because we can fully acknowledge God's sovereign meticulous control as we make decisions. We really DO make a difference, and it is precisely the difference that God decreed in advance that we would willingly make.
Al writes:quote:
... (Don't you think you make a true difference in reality by your choices, at least SOMETIMES?)
Not just sometimes; all the time. Every choice we make has a true effect upon reality -- precisely the effect that God decreed in advance it would have.
Hilston wrote:It is a common error to confuse God's commands with His secret will (Deu 29:29). E.g., God commands that children obey their parents, yet He has also decreed that many children will not actually do so.
Al writes:quote:
I think you'll need to rethink your position here, Hilston. Because if you equate God's 'secret will' with every instance it goes AGAINST His revealed will - it really isn't so 'secret', is it?
It appears you need to study the verse I cited. The distinction is made between those things that are revealed and those things God keeps to Himself. As His plans unfold (that which was previously kept to Himself), the secret things become revealed. The Mystery of Eph 3:3-9 is one such example. It was held-in-silence (Ro 16:25), not revealed until the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. Even after it is revealed, Paul refers to it as The Mystery.
Al writes:quote:
So when God tells His people that "I didn't send the false prophets", it REALLY was the case that God DID send them? So He's - err - lying? (Same thing with Him saying, "I repent", isn't it?)
This kind of puerile treatment of scripture holds no water and is self-refuting. The figurative language emphatically demonstrates God hatred of false prophets (in the former case) and idolatry (in the latter case). To miss the linguistic figure is to render the scriptures incoherent and to do violence to logic.
Al writes:quote:
But couldn't this just reflect your errorneous presupposition that God MUST control EVERYTHING without which He can't be God?
No. It reflects the verse I quoted above. Col 1:16,17.
Al had asked: quote:
Can God determine that we are able to determine in a libertarian way? If not, why not?
Hilston replied: No, for the same reason that God cannot create a rock too big for Him to lift. For the same reason that God cannot make a 4-sided 2-dimensional triangle or a round 2d square. For the same reason that He cannot make a contradiction true. Each of these things is contrary to God's nature, character and attributes.
Al writes:quote:
Beg to differ. I don't see anything contradictory/meaningless in creating beings with the power to make actual what was only possible without being predetermined to do so.
Of course you don't. Your presuppositions are like spectacles you've cemented to your face. You have a cataract that supplants the force of logic.
Hilston asked: Question: Do you believe that only MORAL choices are cause-less?
Al replies:quote:
No. Do you believed that you are caused to sin? What part does your choice play then (if any)?
I am caused to sin by innumerable influences, one of which is my desire to sin. I sin deliberately and with compatibilistic freedom. My choice plays a huge role in whether or not I sin.
Hilston asked: Is a person any less "responsible" or "accountable" for amoral and "cause-ful" choices?
Al writes:quote:
Yes. If I invented a robot and programmed (i.e. caused) it to kill someone, is the robot responsible? Or am I? If the robot 'thinks' it's sentient - when it really isn't - does that make it responsible?
The robot is responsible if you choose to hold him responsible, regardless of whether the robot is sentient or not. You're not held responsible by the robot (you may be held responsible by the authorities, however). How can you be held responsible by something you created?
Al writes:quote:
If someone threw a stone at you which hurt you, who/what would you hold repsonsible? The stone or the person? And why?
I would hold the person responsible because the scriptures say we ought to hold other humans accountable for their actions against other humans.
Oyasumi nasai,
Jim Hilston
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston
Edited by - hilston on 03/22/2002 8:01:05 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Winghead
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 132
| Posted 3/22/2002 4:35 PM (GMT -6) | | Hilston,
quote:
Your remark here betrays an inadequate understanding of compatibilist freedom. I do not deny people make choices to turn from their ways and to submit to the Lord. I do not deny that we exercise our wills.
Help me out. What is your understanding of compatibilist freedom? Can you provide me with a brief definition, or remind me where you might have given that definition?
In Christ,
Winghead
"...you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.’ The second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ No other commandment is greater than these.”
Mark 12:30-31 (NLT)
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/22/2002 4:50 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Winghead,
I'm happy to give the definition, but frankly I'm baffled by how many Open Theists jump into the controversy without a firm understanding of these basic terms of the debate. I suppose it gives me hope that maybe once some OV-ists understand what true Biblical freedom entails they'll jettison the incoherent and self-agrandizing errors of the Open View.
Here the definition I proffered in my first posting in this thread:quote:
Compatibilist free will describes the perceived freedom that a person exercises in his daily experience (Php 2:12,13 Eph 2:10 Ro 9:14-16). His decisions and all the mitigating factors that affect his decisions are foreordained by God, in perfect accordance with (a) His secret specific plan for individuals (De 29:29), and (b) His revealed eschatology (Mt 24:6). Man's freedom derives from God's absolute and truly libertarian freedom, Who alone is truly free. We must not confuse God's revealed decree(commands, examples, prophecies) and God's secret decrees, which no one knows in advance but God Himself.
I don't claim to fully understand OV theology, and I'm slowly making my way through Greg Boyd's and John Sanders's books. But from what I've absorbed thus far, and from the kinds of arguments presented to me thus far, I'm beginning to think that one must be willing to sacrifice one's logical faculties on the altar of libertarian freedom in order to accept the logical incongruities and puerile interpretations of scripture espoused by this theology.
Sayonara,
Jim
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.icubed.com/~hilston | | Back to Top | | |
|
Winghead
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 132
| Posted 3/22/2002 8:05 PM (GMT -6) | | Jim,
quote:
Compatibilist free will describes the perceived freedom that a person exercises in his daily experience (Php 2:12,13 Eph 2:10 Ro 9:14-16). His decisions and all the mitigating factors that affect his decisions are foreordained by God, in perfect accordance with (a) His secret specific plan for individuals (De 29:29), and (b) His revealed eschatology (Mt 24:6).
Can you a scripture verse that shows a person's "decisions" are foreordained by God? De 29:29 does not say that.
quote:
I don't claim to fully understand OV theology, and I'm slowly making my way through Greg Boyd's and John Sanders's books.
An honest statement, which I can respect.
quote:
But from what I've absorbed thus far, and from the kinds of arguments presented to me thus far, I'm beginning to think that one must be willing to sacrifice one's logical faculties on the altar of libertarian freedom in order to accept the logical incongruities and puerile interpretations of scripture espoused by this theology.
Allow me to ask you a couple "puerile"  questions:
What is your opinion of the Arminian position?
Why be so derogatory -- can't you just disagree without lifting your nose high?
In Christ,
Winghead
"...you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength.’ The second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ No other commandment is greater than these.”
Mark 12:30-31 (NLT)
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Hilston
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 103
| Posted 3/22/2002 10:32 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Winghead,
You asked:quote:
Can you a scripture verse that shows a person's "decisions" are foreordained by God? De 29:29 does not say that.
Our decision to accept Christ as Lord and Savior was predestinated from before the foundation of the world.
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
His good pleasure to save us is intertwined with His good pleasure to work in us, in our wills and actions. Php 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
Our decisions to believe in Christ, being a work in itself (Jn 6:29), did not save us. It was by grace through the faith of Christ that saved us. Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Our decisions to do good works after regeneration were also foreordained. Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Winghead asks:quote:
What is your opinion of the Arminian position?
It is soteriologically bankrupt; it divides the triune Godhead; it usurps the authority of God in salvation; it is logically untenable and scripturally convoluted. I could go on, but I'll spare you for now, unless you have more specific questions. :)
Winghead asks:quote:
Why be so derogatory -- can't you just disagree without lifting your nose high?
I didn't intend to give that impression. I admit frustration with the doctrine and I care about the people who espouse it. My harsh words are not intended to disparage individuals, or to elevate myself, but were rather a reaction to what I've seen presented. Please forgive my abrasive words. You've been gracious and I do not want to show disrespect, or to give such an impression.
Domo arigato,
Jim
hilston1@aol.com
http://www.tgfonline.org | | Back to Top | | |
| 43 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:10 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 |
|
|