...and now for something completely different: Free Will!

[QuestioningMind]

I remember sitting in a tree, rifle loaded, waiting for a deer to come walking through. Venison makes a great meal, and a single deer able to provide a few month's worth of food for myself and family. I gut shot my first buck. It took 2 hours to track him. We found him still alive attempting to lift himself up. I took one last shot.. The bullet hit him in the spinal cord round about the neck area ending his suffering instantly.

That was an evil experience for the deer, and I didn't enjoy seeing him suffer. I learned to aim better to lessen the suffering of my dinner. Evil is part of life. The benevolence of God has nothing to do with it, nor malevolence. Death is part of life, so is suffering. I think the issue comes down to society and what we accept as part of. What's permissible? Why? Why not? Penal systems and law become the vehicle of choice to counter things such as child rapists and murderers, but even then there's a societal demand for due process.

It sounds to me as if you agree that this god being wants there to be child murders in the world because death and suffering are supposed to be a part of how this god created life to be. So as human beings it comes down to us to fight against this god's desires and try to set up a system in which evil is brought to justice and contained to some degree.

 

[Wildswanderer]

That doesn't solve the problem. Given an omniscient and omnipotent god"
Such a being could create any world that they wish.
Such a being would know all events that would take place in the world they choose.
Therefore they chose to create this specific world. Which means that they are necessarily the author of all events that take place in that world. The good. The Bad. The indifferent.

If such a being created this world then he created the event where I would have chicken and waffles at brunch with three of my friends this morning. Those specific friends seated at that specific table in those specific seats.

Knowing and causing are very different things. Of course he created this world knowing everything that would ever be. Molinism addressed this by deciding God created the best of all possible worlds. So then, two options were available: God could have not created anyone, knowing many would do evil, or he could create anyway, on account of the good that would also happen. I for one am glad he chose to create us anyway.

 

[Wildswanderer]

But why would a loving and compassionate god only SOMETIMES strike down the evil? Why does he let these scumbags assault and murder dozens of innocent little children over the course of their long lives? Is there some reason that god WANTS them out there committing their vile and evil acts? Apparently he does, since he obviously COULD remove them from the equation at any time, but chooses not to. Thus I can only conclude that this is NOT a loving and compassionate god that we're talking about. This is clearly a god who wants at least some of his innocent creations to face evil and suffer.

Everyone suffers. It's part of life on the planet where we rebelled.
If you want God to eliminate all suffering, he would have to also eliminate all freedom of the will.
Most of us wouldn't like that.

 

[Balthazzar]

It sounds to me as if you agree that this god being wants there to be child murders in the world because death and suffering are supposed to be a part of how this god created life to be. So as human beings it comes down to us to fight against this god's desires and try to set up a system in which evil is brought to justice and contained to some degree.

Does it really? Really? That's the message you received from my posts? Really? I had a chip once too. I really big one. Burned bible pages, buried, thrown in trees, ripped pages, etc. At some point in life I simply accepted that life is life, and God doesn't even belong in the picture aside from life is and we are and an it's up to us mindset, hence the entire societal limitations and acceprence of certain behaviors, penal systems and law. BUT - it from what I've posted you stand on what you stated as the crux of you reception, then far be it from me to attempt to change your position.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Everyone suffers. It's part of life on the planet where we rebelled.
If you want God to eliminate all suffering, he would have to also eliminate all freedom of the will.
Most of us wouldn't like that.

I'm not talking about eliminating all suffering. I'm talking about a god being who can end the lives of any of his creations at any time without depriving them of their free will who chooses to allow a child murderer to claim a dozen victims before deciding to end the murder's life.

It's not as if god ending your life is a violation of your free will, is it? If that's the case then this god being violates virtually everyone's free will at the moment they die. Why would this god being allow this murderer to continue living, unless this god being wants all twelve of those innocent children to suffer and die?

 

[QuestioningMind]

Does it really? Really? That's the message you received from my posts? Really? I had a chip once too. I really big one. Burned bible pages, buried, thrown in trees, ripped pages, etc. At some point in life I simply accepted that life is life, and God doesn't even belong in the picture aside from life is and we are and an it's up to us mindset, hence the entire societal limitations and acceprence of certain behaviors, penal systems and law. BUT - it from what I've posted you stand on what you stated as the crux of you reception, then far be it from me to attempt to change your position.

Apparently you don't believe in an interactive god. The post I made that you responded to was to someone who does believe in an interactive god. From what you just wrote, I pretty much assessed your position correctly. If there is a god being, it doesn't really care about whether o not a child murderer continues to live or not and it's us to us to deal with the problem.

 

[Balthazzar]

Apparently you don't believe in an interactive god. The post I made that you responded to was to someone who does believe in an interactive god. From what you just wrote, I pretty much assessed your position correctly. If there is a god being, it doesn't really care about whether o not a child murderer continues to live or not and it's us to us to deal with the problem.

If there is -

Umm, do you think there is?
Those who may might wiggle around with the justifications, based on upbringing and conditioning. Your line of questioning is purposed for what exactly?

Vigilanteism is a good way to stand in front of due process and sincere efforts of truth and justice. It isn't condusive to much benefit aside from hostility from both potential victims and potential victims families.

In our hands? Yes, but what type of processes do you have in mind?

 

[QuestioningMind]

If there is -

Umm, do you think there is?
Those who may might wiggle around with the justifications, based on upbringing and conditioning. Your line of questioning is purposed for what exactly?

Vigilanteism is a good way to stand in front of due process and sincere efforts of truth and justice. It isn't condusive to much benefit aside from hostility from both potential victims and potential victims families.

In our hands? Yes, but what type of processes do you have in mind?

Umm, do you think there is?
I've yet to be presented with sufficient verifiable evidence to warrant belief in any god being that ever been proposed to me.

Those who may might wiggle around with the justifications, based on upbringing and conditioning. Your line of questioning is purposed for what exactly?
The purpose of my post was to respond to the individual who made a post claiming that god sometimes intervenes to prevent evil, but sometimes doesn't because of free will.

 

[Sheldon]

Once God created the physical world he created a situation where he could not do whatever he wants.

Then he's not omnipotent, clearly.

 

[stvdv]

Is this what you are referring to?
How Free is Free Will? - Sai Sarathi
I will give it a read.

I was not referring to this article, I never even read it until now, but that article does give a pretty good picture of how I see it. And I could not have explained it so well. It covers everything I ever need to know

Thank you for sharing this article.

Might be a tough read for those reading about Sai Baba His Teachings for the first time though, as the article covers so many other subjects as well, not just Free Will. A very complete article

 

[Balthazzar]

Umm, do you think there is?
I've yet to be presented with sufficient verifiable evidence to warrant belief in any god being that ever been proposed to me.

Those who may might wiggle around with the justifications, based on upbringing and conditioning. Your line of questioning is purposed for what exactly?
The purpose of my post was to respond to the individual who made a post claiming that god sometimes intervenes to prevent evil, but sometimes doesn't because of free will.

There's the wiggle I was speaking about - it's too inconsistent to warrant much consideration - if a single God being is what's in question. Otherwise. God both intervenes and doesn't, but not because of anything to do with free will unless higher orders are being honored by onlookers who are ... part of God. All is is my view, so "part" comes only as an individual aspect of the entire body of, like John or Joe and Jane.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

But why would a loving and compassionate god only SOMETIMES strike down the evil? Why does he let these scumbags assault and murder dozens of innocent little children over the course of their long lives? Is there some reason that god WANTS them out there committing their vile and evil acts? Apparently he does, since he obviously COULD remove them from the equation at any time, but chooses not to. Thus I can only conclude that this is NOT a loving and compassionate god that we're talking about. This is clearly a god who wants at least some of his innocent creations to face evil and suffer.

Speaking as a survivor of childhood abuse, I asked similar questions to yours before I finally decided to renounce my Christian faith a little over a year and a half ago. Despite my frantic prayers to God when I was a child, I suffered 13 1/2 years of abuse at home and constant bullying while I was in school. No one intervened to save me. Neither God nor my family or anyone else who knew about the abuse I suffered ever bothered to save me. I guess I wasn't worth the trouble, and I was left alone in a living nightmare of abuse and neglect for 13 1/2 years. Anyway, my story of abuse is intertwined with my decision to renounce my Christian faith and belief in God. As I explained before (see here), being a Christian was a terrible experience for me, and I'm determined to never be a Christian again.

 

[stvdv]

I don't mean to pry, but what is your theological teachings on free-will?

Is it libertarian?

No, definitely not, hence my reply #33 with "not correct", meaning: "All...Theists" is not correct, as the libertarian view makes no sense to me whatsoever, as a Theist

Is it like a deist kind of view or another?

I don't know the Deist kind of view that well

But probably also not Deist view

@Policy shared a link, which covers quite a lot on how I see things. Below link is my reply to his post. I could not have explained it so well and mine would be really short comparatively.

So if you want to know more, that article is quite a start I would say...maybe not easy for others, with all the concepts explained from Hindu POV though. But the Sanskrit words that are used are at least explained. And Free Will is not an easy thing to figure out after all.

...and now for something completely different: Free Will!

 

[QuestioningMind]

Speaking as a survivor of childhood abuse, I asked similar questions to yours before I finally decided to renounce my Christian faith a little over a year and a half ago. Despite my frantic prayers to God when I was a child, I suffered 13 1/2 years of abuse at home and constant bullying while I was in school. No one intervened to save me. Neither God nor my family or anyone else who knew about the abuse I suffered ever bothered to save me. I guess I wasn't worth the trouble, and I was left alone in a living nightmare of abuse and neglect for 13 1/2 years. Anyway, my story of abuse is intertwined with my decision to renounce my Christian faith and belief in God. As I explained before (see here), being a Christian was a terrible experience for me, and I'm determined to never be a Christian again.

So sorry to hear about your horrible experiences.

It makes me wonder about people who are convinced that there is a god because they prayed to this god and this god intervened to help them overcome their drug addiction. Yet this same god completely ignores the desperate prayers for god to intervene in some way on their behalf from children being abuse for years on end .

 

[wellwisher]

Free will is the ability to make choices without any emotional or psychological cost or benefit. This is what makes it free. I can choose to eat hot peppers. This choice would be willful, but is not based on free will, since there will be cost in terms of my burning mouth.

If I had a choice between and apple or orange and I like both, equally, then there is no cost or profit choosing either. This would be an example of free will, that I could do with my eyes closed. But if I prefer the apple over the orange, neither choice i free will since one option will have a cost, and the other may turn a small profit, both of which make my choice closer to determinism.

Moderation in all things is how you train free will. One can switch back and forth and always be just as happy. One may need to overdo some things, to wear out their compulsion or revulsion, until the cost and profit become minor, so free will can appear.

When Paul said he became all things to all men, he had perfected his cultural free will and was no longer deterministic based on an initiation into his home culture.

In terms of walking into the open vault, free will ends when a cost appears. This may be different for each of us. If one had time to practice this day, so they can learn to deal with the various discomforts that will appear, then we can stay closer to free will for a longer period of time.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I'm not talking about eliminating all suffering. I'm talking about a god being who can end the lives of any of his creations at any time without depriving them of their free will who chooses to allow a child murderer to claim a dozen victims before deciding to end the murder's life.

It's not as if god ending your life is a violation of your free will, is it? If that's the case then this god being violates virtually everyone's free will at the moment they die. Why would this god being allow this murderer to continue living, unless this god being wants all twelve of those innocent children to suffer and die?

Again you can ask the same question about any suffering. Why is it only about children?
Does that mean God wants every other sort of suffering? Many adults suffer from cancer or mental illness or an abusive spouse. Also, if God delivers everyone from suffering he would deliver the murderer too.
And the Christian belief is that he will eventually deliver anyone who comes to him in faith.
But for now we make choices that determine our path for good or evil.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Then he's not omnipotent, clearly.

If he wasn't, he couldn't choose to limit himself.

 

[Trailblazer]

@Policy
Bob walks into a vault with an open door. At what point does he lose his free will?

You did not have the option I would have selected. I would select that Bob never lost his free will at any point.

 

[Bird123]

I am told by many persons that if their god were to stop someone from acting on their desire to hurt another, that said god would be interfering with the free will of the perpetrator. Protecting the free will of the victim is never presented as a priority. Even in cases of sexual assault.

I am curious. If one person were to restrain another, at what point would they no longer have free will? Please note the poll above.

Libertarian free will means that our choices are free from the determination or constraints of human nature and free from any predetermination by God. All "free will theists" hold that libertarian freedom is essential for moral responsibility, for if our choice is determined or caused by anything, including our own desires, they reason, it cannot properly be called a free choice. Libertarian freedom is, therefore, the freedom to act contrary to one's nature, predisposition and greatest desires. Responsibility, in this view, always means that one could have done otherwise.

https://www.theopedia.com/libertarian-free-will​

Free will has not been lost if one traps oneself in a vault. One can choose to leave the vault. If one chooses to leave the vault and is unable to leave because the door closed behind them, one still has the free choice to leave even if one is unable to solve their problem.

Have you ever tried to help someone but no matter what you did you could not help? God will not allow anyone to interfere with the lessons of another. It's just like the vault. One has the free will to choose regardless of whether that choice can be accomplished.

Did I miss the box to check where it said Bob never lost his free will or was there no way to answer the question correctly?

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Trailblazer]

Free will has not been lost if one traps oneself in a vault. One can choose to leave the vault. If one chooses to leave the vault and is unable to leave because the door closed behind them, one still has the free choice to leave even if one is unable to solve their problem.

Correct. One still has free will even if they cannot exercise that free will in order to get out of the vault.