Does God have free will?

[blase6]

God does not change what he wills, because what he wills is good. He is free to do good, and he wills to do it, nothing compels him. He does good because he is free to do so. As Imelahn and others have pointed out, you are transferring human necessity for thinking about alternate choices to God. But God is not like us, he doesn’t have to puzzle over things. He knows eternally what is good and wills eternally to do what is good. He doesn’t have to but he does, so he is free.

Pax
Linus2nd

No. I understand that God exists outside of time, and thus his acting is eternal. The order with which he proceeds is not within time. To say that God has free will, you must assume that his will determines how he will act, and is not determined by other than his will. You must also assume that the possibility for alternate action exists. It is reasonable to say that God’s will is determined by his nature, so saying he has a “choice” means nothing if the choice is only made actual according to what is other than the will, (his nature). Also, it appears to me that the concept of possibility is meaningless, and that only actuality exists. If that is so, then all events are necessary.

 

[NeuralMonk]

Cause and effect is a very simple philosophical concept that can be observed in both the physical world and the spiritual world. It is one of the biggest issues to resolve with free will.

You have revelation beyond that of any mortal to know with such certainty that Causality works exactly the same way in the spiritual world as it does in this world. How did you come upon this knowledge? Isn’t this just faith? You never address this point. You keep making the same assumption which you have NEVER given any reason to sustain.

Your philosophy is faintly Lutheran and I see your Hawking’s deterministic bent. I think just casually stating free will is an illusion is no more than an opinion needed to support Hawking’s mess of theological propositions which have no basis in reality. He is very gifted in science, but for his much learning, he makes himself foolish in theological issues.

I do agree that free will for humanity has still to be resolved. I would be surprised you have solved it.

I also see you didn’t give me any GOOD answers to human free will (physical determinism via causation is so very troubled), much less deistic free will. So my point stands it seems.

 

[NeuralMonk]

No. I understand that God exists outside of time, and thus his acting is eternal. The order with which he proceeds is not within time. To say that God has free will, you must assume that his will determines how he will act, and is not determined by other than his will. You must also assume that the possibility for alternate action exists. It is reasonable to say that God’s will is determined by his nature, so saying he has a “choice” means nothing if the choice is only made actual according to what is other than the will, (his nature). Also, it appears to me that the concept of possibility is meaningless, and that only actuality exists. If that is so, then all events are necessary.

States the person inside time about the person outside time.
States the person inside causation by the person causing it.
States the person with a fractured will about the person who created free will.
States the finite to the infinite.
States the creation about the one who created it.

Rather than listen to Him.

Because you don’t see the other possibility does not mean it doesn’t exist. Because you cannot understand it, does not make it yours to contradict.

“Seeing is not believing, believing is seeing.” - The Santa Clause

 

[blase6]

You have revelation beyond that of any mortal to know with such certainty that Causality works exactly the same way in the spiritual world as it does in this world. How did you come upon this knowledge? Isn’t this just faith? You never address this point. You keep making the same assumption which you have NEVER given any reason to sustain.

Your philosophy is faintly Lutheran and I see your Hawking’s deterministic bent. I think just casually stating free will is an illusion is no more than an opinion needed to support Hawking’s mess of theological propositions which have no basis in reality. He is very gifted in science, but for his much learning, he makes himself foolish in theological issues.

I do agree that free will for humanity has still to be resolved. I would be surprised you have solved it.

I also see you didn’t give me any GOOD answers to human free will (physical determinism via causation is so very troubled), much less deistic free will. So my point stands it seems.

Catholics generally believe that God gave us the ability to reason in accordance with how the spiritual world is, to an extent. We do not believe that what God reveals to us should interfere with our most basic assumptions, such as the law of non-contradiction. We cannot understand the Trinity, but it does not conflict with the most basic things we reason to be true.

 

[Tomdstone]

You have revelation beyond that of any mortal to know with such certainty that Causality works exactly the same way in the spiritual world as it does in this world.

This is an interesting point. Causality may work somewhat differently in the spiritual world. Some say that causality may not apply to the universe as a whole in the same way that it applies on earth.

 

[blase6]

This is an interesting point. Causality may work somewhat differently in the spiritual world. Some say that causality may not apply to the universe as a whole in the same way that it applies on earth.

You could also say that a contradiction does not work the same way in the spiritual world. Sorry, but this sounds more like a cop-out than a valid counter argument.

 

[ready]

Does God have free will?

Yes, of course, God has free will. We have an intellect and will like He does. God bless you.

 

[NeuralMonk]

You could also say that a contradiction does not work the same way in the spiritual world. Sorry, but this sounds more like a cop-out than a valid counter argument.

I would agree if God Himself didn’t tell us that His “ways” were not the same as ours. I don’t need an excuse to justify myself because the author Himself wrote this into the record. Or didn’t you read His letter to you?

The bigger “cop-out” would be someone who doesn’t understand, ignoring facts on the table because they don’t fit a false mold of who you want to define God to be.

If you are truly not “ducking out” on the argument, let’s chat about Jesus. You want to talk about God, but you ignore Jesus, who is God.

Jesus waited till Lazarus died. He chose to wait, but then, being God, He changed the rules about death. He exercised free will, and still fixed the outcome. Now being both God and man, He either had free will as a man, or did not as a God… oh, yeah, blase6 is stuck in the 17th century version of determinism. Nobody has a choice because… well, why do none of us have a choice again blase6? Is it because Stephan Hawking said so, and you take it on faith?

{for those who think I am being hard on blase6, just realize that I really had no choice. What you are reading is just the determined outcome of the universe. In fact, I really didn’t write it, it was just a cosmic certainty that the magnetic alignment on a metal disk happened to form allowing you to read this. Not chance, just the rules of the universe in motion for our entertainment, if such a thing as entertainment exists and is not just a chemical response leading you to the cosmic opinion that none of this really matters… but I still wonder did God have a choice to write those rules, or was there some sort of non-time loop thing going where God had no choice but write the rules; those rules being that God had no choice to write the rules; those rules being that God had… }

 

[blase6]

I would agree if God Himself didn’t tell us that His “ways” were not the same as ours. I don’t need an excuse to justify myself because the author Himself wrote this into the record. Or didn’t you read His letter to you?

The bigger “cop-out” would be someone who doesn’t understand, ignoring facts on the table because they don’t fit a false mold of who you want to define God to be.

If you are truly not “ducking out” on the argument, let’s chat about Jesus. You want to talk about God, but you ignore Jesus, who is God.

Jesus waited till Lazarus died. He chose to wait, but then, being God, He changed the rules about death. He exercised free will, and still fixed the outcome. Now being both God and man, He either had free will as a man, or did not as a God… oh, yeah, blase6 is stuck in the 17th century version of determinism. Nobody has a choice because… well, why do none of us have a choice again blase6? Is it because Stephan Hawking said so, and you take it on faith?

{for those who think I am being hard on blase6, just realize that I really had no choice. What you are reading is just the determined outcome of the universe. In fact, I really didn’t write it, it was just a cosmic certainty that the magnetic alignment on a metal disk happened to form allowing you to read this. Not chance, just the rules of the universe in motion for our entertainment, if such a thing as entertainment exists and is not just a chemical response leading you to the cosmic opinion that none of this really matters… but I still wonder did God have a choice to write those rules, or was there some sort of non-time loop thing going where God had no choice but write the rules; those rules being that God had no choice to write the rules; those rules being that God had… }

If you wish to be understood, don’t ramble on.

 

[NeuralMonk]

If you wish to be understood, don’t ramble on.

Sorry. I am truly dense when it comes to understanding other’s capacity for logic.

However, I have learned to stop asking you questions you don’t intend to answer.

Happy New Year

 

[blase6]

Sorry. I am truly dense when it comes to understanding other’s capacity for logic.

However, I have learned to stop asking you questions you don’t intend to answer.

Happy New Year

Ask them in a simple and straightforward way, and I am more inclined to answer them. But if you just jumble them together incoherently, then I get confused.