You have free will but are only free to follow the rules.

[cardero]

The Evelyonian writes: You make your own decisions in life rather than being forced to choose one path or another. That is free-will.

The $64,000 Question:
If you believe that God gave us free-will, is there a penalty/price/punishment (from God) on our decisions?

$120,000 Question:
What is the penalty/price/punishment (from God) for choosing a decision that is not agreeable to God?

 

[zenzero]

Friend Greatest I Am,

You have free will but are only free to follow the rules.

God is a universal consciousness.

If we are in God’s image and He in ours

Putting statements 2 & 3 together it simply means that all forms are nothing but *consciousness*' if so then what *rules* are you speaking off?

Consciousness is simply * consciousness*; where is the question of *rules* or *freewill* etc. coming from? Consciousness cannot be part of anything except as an illusion to be perceived by someone who is not conscious of that consciousness!

Love & rgds

 

[nameless]

Freedom of belief is a good example so I'll run with that. Now, freedom of belief implies that I can believe in anything I like. If I choose to believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn or Flying Spaghetti Monster, that's my choice.

you missed something, in freeom of belief (free-will) there wont be any consequences in future on selecting a will, no one is going to bother that, so there is freedom, but 'free-will' lacks this freedom.

Now, suppose that, all over the world, freedom of belief is revoked. Suddenly everyone, everywhere, must believe that Hank is god. How could such a measure ever be enforced? There's no way to absolutely force everyone to believe in Hank because they have free-will. They can choose not to believe in Hank.

so, it has to be said that 'no freedom of belief' is same as your definition for 'free will'

in 'no freedom of belief', one should only follow a particular faith, if he not obeys that he is liable for punishment, is this defintion wrong? do you see this different from your definition of 'free-will'?

Free-will goes beyond freedoms of law (like freedom of belief). Even if a freedom is revoked you can still choose to exercise it. There may be negative consequences but, ultimately, the choice is still yours.

free-will better than freedom of belief?

in 'free-will' you will be punishment if a particular faith is not followed, while in freedom of belief, no one is going to bother which ever faith you chose and there is no punishment, how free-will goes beyond freedoms of belief?

If free-will were done away with however then you would lose even the freedom to make your own choices. You couldn't decide for yourself whether or not to believe in Hank. The decision would simply be made for you and there would be nothing you could do about it.

and if you reject that choice, you will be punished, so it is same of no freedom.

Without free-will you wouldn't make your own choices regarding anything.

because there is punishment for that.

It wasn't meant to. I was simply answering a question of 'could a creator be insulted or offended by it's creation'. I never meant to say that disbelief was a crime and I apologize to you and anyone else who took it that way.

fine, anyway i would like to know your opinion on that, whether the creation deserves punishment if he rejects existence of creator, pls kindly let me know that.

 

[nameless]

In a limited freedom, you have the right to choose but there are many things which you can't control. For instance, you can't decide to be born into this life, and you can't know when you gonna die, but you can decide the path of your life, and most aspects of your life.

but, will there be any consequences for selecting path our life? if there is consequences for that, path selection will be 'limited freedom' or 'no freedom'?

 

[Greatest I am]

Yes, He is. There are two choices there. Which one you pick is up to you.

Simplistic.

How many insane people, facing a genuine God, would choose to burn in hell frever?

If you tell your children that they are free to make their beds or not but if not, they are grounded, is that giving them a free choice?

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

It's not the type of control you have imagined. It's a type of an interference, an inspiration of guidance which you can go with or reject.

My statement stands and you still have God interfering with our free will.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Friend Greatest I Am,







Putting statements 2 & 3 together it simply means that all forms are nothing but *consciousness*' if so then what *rules* are you speaking off?

Consciousness is simply * consciousness*; where is the question of *rules* or *freewill* etc. coming from? Consciousness cannot be part of anything except as an illusion to be perceived by someone who is not conscious of that consciousness!

Love & rgds

All forms are not consciousness.
My reference to in our image is the mental thinking image. We think the same way and can communicate.

The rules come from nature, man and God.

Regards
DL

 

[zenzero]

Friend Greatest I Am,

All forms are not consciousness.

Consciousness is part of all forms and no-forms.
Only humans are either conscious or unconscious of it.

Love & rgds

 

[Greatest I am]

Friend Greatest I Am,



Consciousness is part of all forms and no-forms.
Only humans are either conscious or unconscious of it.

Love & rgds

Consciousness thinks.
Rocks are a form. They seem to think poorly.

Am I missing something?

Regards
DL

 

[Willamena]

Consciousness thinks.
Rocks are a form. They seem to think poorly.

Am I missing something?

Regards
DL

What form do "rocks" have? rock.
What form does "consciousness" have? consciousness.

 

[Greatest I am]

What form do "rocks" have? rock.
What form does "consciousness" have? consciousness.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Regards
DL

 

[The_Evelyonian]

you missed something, in freeom of belief (free-will) there wont be any consequences in future on selecting a will, no one is going to bother that, so there is freedom, but 'free-will' lacks this freedom.

I've already said several times that free-will does not equal freedom from the consequences of your actions. Free-will is simply the freedom to make your own choices.

so, it has to be said that 'no freedom of belief' is same as your definition for 'free will'

in 'no freedom of belief', one should only follow a particular faith, if he not obeys that he is liable for punishment, is this defintion wrong? do you see this different from your definition of 'free-will'?

See the above answer.

free-will better than freedom of belief?

in 'free-will' you will be punishment if a particular faith is not followed, while in freedom of belief, no one is going to bother which ever faith you chose and there is no punishment, how free-will goes beyond freedoms of belief?

Because if a freedom of law is taken away you can still exercise it. If free-will is taken away, you can't.

and if you reject that choice, you will be punished, so it is same of no freedom.


because there is punishment for that.

No, Imagine a fork in the road, one path going left and one going right. Now, I can tell you to take the left path and, because of your own free-will, you can say, "No, I'm going to take the right path." and there would be nothing I could do about it.
Now, if I were to somehow remove your free-will and tell you to take the left path then you'd have no choice. You'd take the left path, not because you feared punishment for not doing it, but because, without free-will, the left path would be your only option. It would be as though the right one did not exist at all.

fine, anyway i would like to know your opinion on that, whether the creation deserves punishment if he rejects existence of creator, pls kindly let me know that.

Do I feel that one should be punished for being an Atheist? No, I do not. I was an Atheist at one time. It was not out of any kind of malice toward God or my fellow man. It was simply that I did not have sufficient evidence at that time to warrant a belief in God.

To me, the only crimes that deserve punishment are those that harm another person or another living thing and, in my opinion, Atheism does not even come close to fitting that description.

 

[Willamena]

Thanks for clearing that up.

Regards
DL

So, now, what do you really think of "Consciousness is part of all forms and no-forms"?

 

[The_Evelyonian]

If you tell your children that they are free to make their beds or not but if not, they are grounded, is that giving them a free choice?

No, you are not. Free-will and free choice are two different things. Free choice is no consequences either way. Free-will is simply the ability to make your own choices. Those choices may still have consequences but the decision, A or B, is still yours to make.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

The $64,000 Question:
If you believe that God gave us free-will, is there a penalty/price/punishment (from God) on our decisions?

Yes.

$120,000 Question:
What is the penalty/price/punishment (from God) for choosing a decision that is not agreeable to God?

I don't know. I'm not God.

 

[Greatest I am]

So, now, what do you really think of "Consciousness is part of all forms and no-forms"?

Not much.
It does not stand up to logic.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

No, you are not. Free-will and free choice are two different things. Free choice is no consequences either way. Free-will is simply the ability to make your own choices. Those choices may still have consequences but the decision, A or B, is still yours to make.

Treat your children better.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Yes.



I don't know. I'm not God.

You mean you do not believe in hell?

Regards
DL

 

[The_Evelyonian]

Treat your children better.

It was your example.

 

[The_Evelyonian]

You mean you do not believe in hell?

I do. I just don't feel that Atheism alone is worthy of it.