Free will? I dont think so

[Latin]

Augustine​

“We are commanded to live righteously, and the reward is set before us of our meriting to live happily in eternity. But who is able to live righteously and do good works unless he has been justified by faith?” ( Various Questions to Simplician 1:2:21 [A.D. 396]).

“He bestowed forgiveness; the crown he will pay out. Of forgiveness he is the donor; of the crown, he is the debtor. Why debtor? Did he receive something? . . . The Lord made himself a debtor not by receiving something but by promising something. One does not say to him, ‘Pay for what you received,’ but ‘Pay what you promised’” ( Explanations of the Psalms 83:16 [A.D. 405]).

“What merits of his own has the saved to boast of when, if he were dealt with according to his merits, he would be nothing if not damned? Have the just then no merits at all? Of course they do, for they are the just. But they had no merits by which they were made just” ( Letters 194:3:6 [A.D. 412]).
.
COUNCIL OF TRENT Session 6 Chapter 8
. . . None of those things which precede justification - whether faith or works - merit the grace itself of justification.
.
“What merit, then, does a man have before grace, by which he might receive grace, when our every good merit is produced in us only by grace and when God, crowning our merits, crowns nothing else but his own gifts to us ?” (ibid., 194:5:19).
.
We have merits, not because we deserve it but because God promised it, all our merits are His undeserved Gifts, freely given to us.

.
Instead of coercion better used the word, God’s aide.

Aquinas said, “ God changes the will without forcing it. But he can change the will from the fact that he himself operates in the will as he does in nature,” De Veritatis 22:9. 31. ST I-II:112:3. 32. Gaudium et Spes 22; "being …
.
CCC 308 The truth that God is at work in all the actions of his creatures is inseparable from faith in God the Creator.
God is the first cause who operates in and through secondary causes:
For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
Far from diminishing the creature’s dignity, this truth enhances it.

CCC 2022; The divine initiative (supernatural intervention of God in the faculties of the soul) in the work of grace precedes, prepares, and elicits the FREE RESPONSE of man.
.
Theologically speaking, God aides us, never coerces us and we always freely and positively respond, because He himself operates in our wills.
.
God bless

 

[Lunam_Meam]

@aitapyh

Lunam_Meam:

God is eternal and omniscient. He has foreknowledge, but as He incessantly sees what was, is, and will be, everything is known in the eternal present. To say His eternal being is contingent upon man’s inability to freely choose is to not take into account the passive nature of His foreknowledge, and the understanding that the “eternal present” means everything that has, does, and will exist, exists simultaneously from His vantage point.

…continued.

What I mean by “everything is known in the eternal present” is as God is eternally omniscient He always has, is, and will incessantly see what was, is, and will be simultaneously. This is not to say creation existed eternally.

What I mean by “passive nature of His foreknowledge” is it is not an active measure in place by God to control man, or force us into a “template” in which He has forced our thoughts and actions. It is passive in that He “sees” all that was, is, and will be.

…continued.

To help you better understand "everything is known in the eternal present”, imagine it this way:

Before creation was realized God still knew all that would be. When God began creation time also came into existence. God is outside of time and creation in a way that allows Him to see everything from the beginning to the end of creation simultaneously. Again, this is not to say creation existed eternally.

To help you better understand "passive nature of His foreknowledge”, imagine it this way:

God’s foreknowledge of creation existed in Thought before He began creation. So, it is passive in that it does not actively create.

(1 of 2)

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

The Supreme Mind, that knows everything, before man existed, knew that man would be a thief and self-murderer. And, as the Eternal Goodness has no limits in being good, before Guilt existed, He thought of the means to obliterate Guilt. The means: Jesus, the Word. The instrument to render the means an efficient instrument: Mary. And, the Virgin was created in the sublime mind of God.

This indicates man possesses a free will, otherwise God could have forced His will on the soul of the first man, and thereon to only know and only be good, thus no need for Mary and Jesus, etc.

…continued.

I have gathered we agree God is capable of, but chose not to force His will on souls, in the manners in which I described above [see bolded], but you do believe God chose to force souls to know and be good and/or evil. However, there would be no merit if there were coercion, and scripture consists of teaching on, and examples of merit. Consider Mary and Jesus, for example:

“And Mary said to the angel: How shall this be done, because I know not man?” (Lk. 1:34)
“…be it done to me according to thy word.” (Lk. 1:38)

“My Father, if it be possible, let this chalice pass from Me. Nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.” (Matt. 26:39)

Despite their initial reactions in response to God’s will for them, in the end they submitted out of obedience of their own [free] will, and through this cooperation, merit was attained for mankind.

…continued

The angel, Gabriel, basically stated to Mary “You have been chosen for x, and y is what will result,” and of her own [free] will She gave Her consent.

Jesus was the Son of God and a son of man. In Gethsemane He combated Satan alone, without the Father’s help, and He tasted despair, which is why in regards to His mission He said “if it be possible let this chalice pass from Me.” However, using all the strength of man, He overcame and defeated it and Satan by obeying the will of God, of His own [free] will.

Lunam_Meam:

…you do believe God chose to force souls to know and be good and/or evil. However, there would be no merit if there were coercion,…

God does not coerce…

In the same post you also said:

…God does interfere in the affairs of mankind through coercion.

Your statements contradict.

(2 of 2)

 

[Lunam_Meam]

catholicray:

If you understand how the Church teaches it has yet to make an error in teaching

I suppose you understand how the Church teaches? Do you not understand the difference between a sin that’s been institutionalized into the Church and one that has been committed by a member of that Church which is a failure to adhere to its teachings? I know this is a sensitive subject and an attack on your cherished beliefs but I’m only speaking the truth here.

The Roman Catholic Church and its magisterium when it instituted and oversaw inquisitions which included torture or the threat of torture in order to elicit repentance failed, as an instituted Church not as individuals, to be the Church instituted by Christ. When the Pope apologized, he apologized for the failures of the Church, not its individual members. How could he apologize for a failure of particular members when they were only following the precepts of the Church?? Perhaps when you see Jesus again you can explain to him why you didn’t care that the leadership of your Church, following the precepts of that Church, used to torture people, psychologically if not physically. Perhaps a good explanation would be that although you follow the precepts of the Church now you wouldn’t have then?

I don’t think any of this will change your mind one iota. People generally run from the truth that is painful to their psyche and even if it did, then what? What should you do? I don’t know and that is my dilemma. So I will drop it here and apologize for speaking bluntly about how I feel.

Gods blessings be with you and yours.

First, why gripe about the Catholic Church, or @catholicray not changing his mind, or anything when man is just “following the template of Gods foreknowledge”, as you say, @aitapyh? Ah, yes, because you are following the template too…all for His “glory and pleasure”…somehow.

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

aitapyh:

Lunam_Meam:

aitapyh:

Lunam_Meam:

…as I and others have shown, you keep trying to fit a set of puzzle pieces into a framework where they do not belong, because you think they must…somehow. Perhaps it is because you experienced a traumatic, unfathomable life-changing event, and in an attempt to find understanding and justification in it, you have driven yourself into believing this concept of a controlled existence?

I agree…this world is traumatic overall. Who hasn’t experienced trauma?

How can you agree to what I did not say? And, I, for one, have not experienced trauma, but again, have you?

What possible fruit do you wish to gain from making this statement a battle? We really must pick the battles that deliver to us the best fruits for our labors. If this, out of everything else that was said in that post, is what you felt the need to lead with then I don’t know that we can ever have a productive conversation. I’m still willing to try but… I agreed for gosh sake that I have had traumatic events in my life.

You would either have to be an unemotional psychopath or completely ignorant of and insulated from the true state of the world, your friends, your family and your religion to not have ever felt traumatized by something. I would go further and say, if you think you are a Christian and not traumatized by this world then you are no Christian.

I asked if you had experienced trauma, and initially you could have answered: “Yes, I have had trauma…" Instead, you said you agreed the world is traumatic overall — even though I was not speaking generally — which is a statement that is not clear in whether or not that includes you. So, that is why I asked the questions I did, and thank you for finally answering clearly.

Now, if you are not comfortable discussing personal traumas, please say so. Otherwise, is there one traumatic event that stands out as having been the most difficult to cope with?

Of course I’m not comfortable discussing personal traumas. Anyone who is wasn’t much traumatized to begin with. I will not talk with you about specific traumas in my life. I do not know you well enough to predict your intentions and opening one’s self up to this kind of attempted psychoanalysis can cause more harm than good.

Yet, you know me well enough to have diagnosed me as either an “emotional psychopath”, or one “completely ignorant and insulated from the true state of the world”…

Now, as I recall, you were comfortable enough to mention one traumatic event in your life: the death of your child, earlier in our discussion, but I can understand why you are opposed to discussing further. However, I do not have to know you well enough to know a trauma like the one you have mentioned could easily drive one to belief that God is controlling everything.

(1 of 3)

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

aitapyh:

Lunam_Meam:

…you do believe God chose to force souls to know and be good and/or evil. However, there would be no merit if there were coercion, …

God does not coerce…

In the same post you also said:

…God does interfere in the affairs of mankind through coercion.

Your statements contradict.

…I should have clarified this, Gods interference in the affairs of mankind as shown in the bible is only apparent coercion from our perspective. It is presented as coercion in sacred scripture for the purposes of the literary narrative taking place. Necessary for us to make the narrative meaningful but not applicable to Gods reality. Scripture does show God clearly interfering in people’s ability to freely choose.

In the beginning of our discussion you referenced the Pharaoh Ramessess, and asserted God forced him to let the Israelites leave Egypt, an act which he “otherwise would not have not done”, i.e., coercion. There was no indication even then of an “apparent coercion”. So, you are not “clarifying” now, rather backpedaling.

I have been doing my best to keep up to speed on your evolving and devolving beliefs, and what I have gathered your current position to be is God’s foreknowledge are “templates for mankind to follow”, but not out of our own free will, nor even coercion, though some of these templates contain the false perception of free will, and others the false perception of coercion, all to “fulfill all righteousness” for “His glory and pleasure”… And, you likened your concept of our existence to that of a remote control toy and robot.

(i) What is your support for God’s foreknowledge being templates?

(ii) What is your support for some humans possessing a false perception of free will, and others a false perception of coercion?

(iii) Why is it necessary for robotic beings to possess false perceptions?
Note: what is false but perceived to be truth is a false perception

(iv) How is a robotic existence not coercion?

(v) If we are controlled like robots, are we also controlled like a remote control toy, as you have also stated?

(2 of 3)

 

[Lunam_Meam]

…the context of the verse being delivered by the angel as well as a comparison to the angels message to Zachariah makes it pretty clear that the message to Mary was prophetic not contingent. It’s also quite clear that Mary questioned the message because she wasn’t sure it WAS from God.

Do you really think Jesus was completely alone? …how could Jesus possibly be alone if he IS eternally part of the trinity? God tells us, call upon me and I will not forsake you and Satan tells Jesus that he could call upon thousands of Angels to help him at any time and that was true, he could have. Does that sound like he was alone?

Zachariah prayed for a child of his own [free] will, and the angel, Gabriel, was sent by the Father to inform him his prayer was heard, that they would conceive a son, and what would happen as a result.

Mary did not pray to be mother of the Son of the Father, rather was chosen, and informed what would happen as a result. Gabriel departed after She gave Her consent of Her own [free] will: “…be it done to me according to thy word.” (Lk. 1:38). Furthermore:

When God asked her to take on a role in his plan of salvation, she said yes: “I am the handmaid of the Lord, let what you have said be done to me.” Her question to the archangel, “But how can this come about, since I am a virgin?” was different than the similar sounding question Zechariah had posed: “How can I be sure of this? I am an old man and my wife is getting on in years.” Zechariah was asking for proof that God could do what he promised; Mary was merely asking what God wanted her to do – she had promised her virginity to God, and she wanted to know if God was asking her something else. She didn’t doubt God’s wisdom or power; she just wanted more instructions. This is why the angel’s response to her was generous, while his response to Zechariah was harsh. Zechariah answered God’s call by saying, “Prove it to me”; Mary answered saying, “Show me the way to go.”

Source: 151. The Greatest Yes (Luke 1:26-38)

In regards to Jesus, it was Him, not Satan, who said "Thinkest thou that I cannot ask my Father, and he will give me presently more than twelve legions of angels?, but He continued: “How then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that so it must be done?” (Matt. 26:53)

And, I did not say Jesus was “completely alone” in the way you defined that to mean, rather as in without help from the Father in relation to His mission, as was necessary, but the why is not pertinent to the point. And, the point is there is an apparent two wills: that of Jesus and God the Father, which you acknowledge as well:

Yet according to the verse Jesus’s will was not the Fathers…

As for Jesus’s will not being the Father’s, while He said “…if it be possible let this chalice pass from Me” out of His humanness, He continued: “Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt” (Matt. 26:39). He wanted to be faithful to God’s will, and using all the strength of a man, He fulfilled His mission through His death
of His own [free] will.

(3 of 3)

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

aitapyh:

…I should have clarified this, Gods interference in the affairs of mankind as shown in the bible is only apparent coercion from our perspective. It is presented as coercion in sacred scripture for the purposes of the literary narrative taking place.

In the beginning of our discussion you referenced the Pharaoh Ramessess, and asserted God forced him to let the Israelites leave Egypt, an act which Pharoah “otherwise would not have not done”, i.e., coercion. There was no indication even then of an “apparent coercion from our perspective." So, you are not “clarifying” now, rather backpedaling.

From what am I “backpedaling”?

In short, you initually asserted God coerces man, and now you are saying He doesn’t, but to some it appears He does. This would mean you now believe mankind has a free will, but some have the false perception they are being coerced. Note: what is false, but perceived to be truth, is a false perception.

Lunam_Meam:

…what I have gathered your current position to be is God’s foreknowledge are “templates for mankind to follow”, but not out of our own free will, nor even coercion…

Mankind doesn’t “follow” a template like a map through a wilderness.

You are the one who used “follow” to mean “to be or act in accordance with.”

Lunam_Meam:

…, though some of these templates contain the false perception of free will, and others the false perception of coercion,…

It is not a false perception from our perspective.

What is false, but perceived to be truth, is a false perception.

Lunam_Meam:

…all to “fulfill all righteousness” for “His glory and pleasure."

Do you disagree that scripture does indicate this?

If you are referring to Matt. 3:15 & Rev. 4:11 when you say God created us thus “to “fulfill all righteousness” for “His glory and pleasure”, in Matt. it actually says “For so it becometh us to fulfill all justice” in relation to Jesus and John the Baptist and their mission. And, in Rev. it actually says God is worthy of glory, honor, and power because He has created all things, and they were created because He willed it so. Note: “all things” refers to all He created, not everything in existence, because, for example, God did not create evil, or immorality in other words.

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

(i) What is your support for God’s foreknowledge being templates?

You’re making a fundamental semantic mistake here. God’s foreknowledge is NOT a template for creation.

I am not as you said:

…man follows the template of Gods foreknowledge for man.

Lunam_Meam:

(ii) What is your support for some humans possessing a false perception of free will?

Humans possess (from our perspective) a real perception of free will.

What’s false, but perceived to be true, is a false perception. Now, for example, you believe mankind doesn’t possess a free will, therefore what is false is man possessing a free will. So, if one perceives they do have a free will, then it’s a false perception, as in untrue because they do not possess a free will, despite perceiving it to be true they do. In conclusion, why are false perceptions necessary if we’re coerced?

 

[Lunam_Meam]

…the context of the verse being delivered by the angel as well as a comparison to the angels message to Zachariah makes it pretty clear that the message to Mary was prophetic not contingent. It’s also quite clear that Mary questioned the message because she wasn’t sure it WAS from God.

Do you really think Jesus was completely alone? …how could Jesus possibly be alone if he IS eternally part of the trinity? God tells us, call upon me and I will not forsake you and Satan tells Jesus that he could call upon thousands of Angels to help him at any time and that was true, he could have. Does that sound like he was alone?

Zachariah prayed for a child of his own [free] will, and the angel, Gabriel, inform him his prayer was heard, that Elizabeth would conceive a son, and what would happen as a result.

Mary did not pray to be a mother, but was chosen to be mother of Jesus, and informed what would happen as a result. Gabriel departed after She gave Her consent of Her own [free] will: “…be it done to me according to thy word.” (Lk. 1:38). Furthermore:

Her question to the archangel, “But how can this come about, since I am a virgin?” was different than the similar sounding question Zechariah had posed: “How can I be sure of this? I am an old man and my wife is getting on in years.” Zechariah was asking for proof that God could do what he promised; Mary was merely asking what God wanted her to do – she had promised her virginity to God, and she wanted to know if God was asking her something else. She didn’t doubt God’s wisdom or power; she just wanted more instructions. This is why the angel’s response to her was generous, while his response to Zechariah was harsh. Zechariah answered God’s call by saying, “Prove it to me”; Mary answered saying, “Show me the way to go.”

Source: https://catholicexchange.com/151-greatest-yes-luke-126-38

In regards to Jesus, it was Him, not Satan who said "Thinkest thou that I cannot ask my Father, and he will give me presently more than twelve legions of angels?, but He continued: “How then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that so it must be done?” (Matt. 26:53)

And, I did not say Jesus was “completely alone” in the way you defined that to mean, rather as in without help from the Father in relation to His mission, as was necessary, but the why is not pertinent to the point. And, the point is there is an apparent two wills: that of Jesus and God the Father, which you acknowledged:

Yet according to the verse Jesus’s will was not the Fathers…

While He said “…if it be possible let this chalice pass from Me” out of His humanness, He continued: “Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt” (Matt. 26:39). He wanted to be faithful to God’s will, and using all the strength of a man, He fulfilled His mission through His death of His own [free] will.

 

[AlNg]

Simply because God not only knows what you will do but also what you will do is originated from Gods knowing.

Does the future exist? It looks to me like it is only the present which exists. If the future does not exist, then would it be some sort of a contradiction to say that Mr. G. knows all about something which is nonexistent? How can Mr. G know about something which does not exist?

 

[AlNg]

“Nevertheless, not as I will , but as thou wilt ”

Does that mean that Jesus did not will his crucifixion, but that God the Father did will His Crucifixion?

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

“Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt ”

Does that mean that Jesus did not will his crucifixion, but that God the Father did will His Crucifixion?

It was God the Father’s will that Jesus die for mankind, and it was Jesus’s will to obey Him, but at one point out of His humanness said “…if it be possible let this chalice pass from Me”, then continued saying “Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.”

I know I, and I’m sure many others can relate to Jesus here where one is faced with a difficult situation, and out of our humanness felt fear, or despair, etc, said to God " “…if it be possible let this chalice pass from Me", or something to that effect, but in the end overcame such feelings.

 

[AlNg]

It was God the Father’s will that Jesus die for mankind, and of His own free will Jesus chose to obey Him, but at one point out of His humanness He said “…if it be possible let this chalice pass from Me”, but then continued saying “Nevertheless, not as I will , but as thou wilt .”

So Jesus did not will the same thing as the Father? Was the will of Jesus different from the will of the Father? Did Jesus have two wills with one willing one thing and the second will willing something else, or did Jesus have only one will?
Does God have three wills?
The will of the Father
The will of the Son
The will of the Holy Spirit.
Are they one and the same will, or are they three different wills with their own separate existence?
Does the Son have two separate wills which are different or is the human will the same as the divine will.

 

[Lunam_Meam]

So Jesus did not will the same thing as the Father?

Again, in short, if Jesus didn’t want to obey the will of God then He wouldn’t have obeyed Him.

 

[AlNg]

Again, in short,

Does Jesus have a different will which is separate from the will of the Father?

 

[Lunam_Meam]

Lunam_Meam:

AlNg:

So Jesus did not will the same thing as the Father?

Again, in short, if Jesus didn’t want to obey the will of God then He wouldn’t have obeyed Him.

Does Jesus have a different will which is separate from the will of the Father?

Again, His will is to do the will of the Father, and He does, of His own free will.

 

[AlNg]

Again, His will is to do the will of the Father, and He does, of His own free will.

So there are three separate free wills in God. Each one distinct from the other. And each person of the Trinity has His own free will? What is meant by saying that the Son has free will if He can only do the will of the Father?

 

[Lunam_Meam]

So there are three separate free wills in God. Each one distinct from the other. And each person of the Trinity has His own free will? What is meant by saying that the Son has free will if He can only do the will of the Father?

…

God the Father and the Holy Spirit are free spirits. Humans were given a soul, which is a spirit, and it is how we are in God’s likeness, and therefore our soul is free like the One who created it, thus we have a free will. A free will, or desire, means you’re not coerced to act any way. Jesus too had a free will, and He chose to obey the will of God the Father.

 

[AlNg]

Jesus too had a free will, and He chose to obey the will of God the Father.

Would it have been possible for Jesus to disobey the will of God the Father? Or was it that the only possibility for Jesus was for Him to do only what God the Father had willed Him to do and nothing else?