P
PJM
Guest
Dear friend,
Is it possible that gifting humanity with a “freewill” was an error?
Is it possible that gifting humanity with a “freewill” was an error?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
W
w_stewart
Guest
Did you mean God was possibly in error when he gave humanity freewill?Dear friend,
Is it possible that gifting humanity with a “freewill” was an error?
If he was in error, then he had his own limitations and he was not omniscient at all. In that case, he could not be god.
W
Watchman
Guest
Love is possible only via free will. Without the ability to freely turn away from God and all he offers us, our acceptance, devotion, and obedience are meaningless.Dear friend,
Is it possible that gifting humanity with a “freewill” was an error?
W
wolfgang
Guest
God did not err in giving humanity freewill. I believe that God cannot err.Dear friend,
Is it possible that gifting humanity with a “freewill” was an error?
C
ckempston
Guest
Although it can seem like a mistake with all the evil in the world and man’s seeming inability to live up to God’s standards, God planned for man to fall from the beginning so that He could redeem us. Remember, the Lamb was “slain from the foundation of the world.” God has the situation well in hand.Dear friend,
Is it possible that gifting humanity with a “freewill” was an error?
C
cerad
Guest
Given that there can be no free will in heaven; it’s pretty obvious that free will in this life was totally unnecessary and a big oops.
D
davidv
Guest
A: God is perfect
B: Free will is a gift from God
Therefore: The gift of free-will is not an error.
B: Free will is a gift from God
Therefore: The gift of free-will is not an error.
C
ckempston
Guest
Wow, two fallacies in a single sentence from an atheist: question begging and non sequitur.Given that there can be no free will in heaven; it’s pretty obvious that free will in this life was totally unnecessary and a big oops.
P
PJM
Guest
**Originally Posted by cerad **
Given that there can be no free will in heaven; it’s pretty obvious that free will in this life was totally unnecessary and a big oops.
REPLY
Dear cerad,Wow, two fallacies in a single sentence from an atheist: question begging and non sequitur.
So friend how… and why… did you make this statement?
T
tmellin
Guest
PJM,
Since you describe yourself as an informed, practicing Catholic, I will assume that you believe that He who “gifted” humans with free will is God, who created humans in his own image (standard Catholic belief).
From this starting point, your question itself can be seen as an error because it can have no answer. Just as the robot cannot evaluate its designing engineer, so too are we incapable of evaluating our designer, the Father Almighty, Creator of the universe.
Another way to show the “dead-endedness” of your question is to see that it invites the reader to use free will and the intellect to consider whether free will and the intellect should be as they are. Only an intellect that transcends the human intellect can begin to have the epistemic perspective (roughly: “the ability to know”) to even consider a question such as this.
Two other examples that may help reveal the implicit limitation here are:
Since you describe yourself as an informed, practicing Catholic, I will assume that you believe that He who “gifted” humans with free will is God, who created humans in his own image (standard Catholic belief).
From this starting point, your question itself can be seen as an error because it can have no answer. Just as the robot cannot evaluate its designing engineer, so too are we incapable of evaluating our designer, the Father Almighty, Creator of the universe.
Another way to show the “dead-endedness” of your question is to see that it invites the reader to use free will and the intellect to consider whether free will and the intellect should be as they are. Only an intellect that transcends the human intellect can begin to have the epistemic perspective (roughly: “the ability to know”) to even consider a question such as this.
Two other examples that may help reveal the implicit limitation here are:
- Matter and energy alone cannot be used as tools to completely understand what matter and energy are.
- A complete understanding of the human brain cannot be achieved by a human brain.
T
tmellin
Guest
PJM,Dear friend,
Is it possible that gifting humanity with a “freewill” was an error?
Unless you are using this question as an academic exercise of some kind–perhaps as the starting point for a chain of reasoning that moves toward Catholic principles–then I would question your self description (appearing in the header of your posts) as an informed, practicing Roman Catholic. Perhaps you will now develop your point?
Tom
C
ckempston
Guest
I guess he doesn’t want to defend that comment. It would put a dent in the illusion of the “superior reasoning abilities” of atheists.Dear cerad,
So friend how… and why… did you make this statement?
S
Squishy
Guest
Perhaps its just a misenterpretation of scripture. You have theists struggeling with those everyday. But that does not dent the “superior reasoning abilities” of theists. Their is not always a line drawn in the sad which Theists and Atheists have to do battle over, and reducing the arguments to tit for tat is a good way to get exactly nowhere.I guess he doesn’t want to defend that comment. It would put a dent in the illusion of the “superior reasoning abilities” of atheists.
Logicaly, with the idea of the Christian God. Error is not possible. This does leave some questions though, with the fall of man just being the beggining. In order for god to feel love from his creation he had to allow evil into the world. Knowing the outcome of all that he did, he would have had to knowingly allow the deaths of countless peoples to horrific and terrible things. In order to allow his creation to feel ‘true’ love for him. I certainly view this as an extremly selfish act on gods behalf.
The idea of Omniscience and Free-will are two of the things i just cannot get my head around. In order for both to be true, god has to be flawed which contradicts the very idea of a perfect being.
W
w_stewart
Guest
How could omniscience and freewill be contradictory?Perhaps its just a misenterpretation of scripture. You have theists struggeling with those everyday. But that does not dent the “superior reasoning abilities” of theists. Their is not always a line drawn in the sad which Theists and Atheists have to do battle over, and reducing the arguments to tit for tat is a good way to get exactly nowhere.
Logicaly, with the idea of the Christian God. Error is not possible. This does leave some questions though, with the fall of man just being the beggining. In order for god to feel love from his creation he had to allow evil into the world. Knowing the outcome of all that he did, he would have had to knowingly allow the deaths of countless peoples to horrific and terrible things. In order to allow his creation to feel ‘true’ love for him. I certainly view this as an extremly selfish act on gods behalf.
The idea of Omniscience and Free-will are two of the things i just cannot get my head around. In order for both to be true, god has to be flawed which contradicts the very idea of a perfect being.
C
ckempston
Guest
That was obviously a tongue in cheek comment. Atheists do indeed project this image that they are somehow superhuman when it comes to logic.Perhaps its just a misenterpretation of scripture. You have theists struggeling with those everyday. But that does not dent the “superior reasoning abilities” of theists. Their is not always a line drawn in the sad which Theists and Atheists have to do battle over, and reducing the arguments to tit for tat is a good way to get exactly nowhere.
I think the Bible, in some ways, supports your contention that God is selfish. He is also jealous. The difference between God’s selfishness/jealousy and man’s is that God’s is justified by his very nature. It’s the same reason a husband is justifiably jealous if his wife cheats on him or vice versa.Logicaly, with the idea of the Christian God. Error is not possible. This does leave some questions though, with the fall of man just being the beggining. In order for god to feel love from his creation he had to allow evil into the world. Knowing the outcome of all that he did, he would have had to knowingly allow the deaths of countless peoples to horrific and terrible things. In order to allow his creation to feel ‘true’ love for him. I certainly view this as an extremly selfish act on gods behalf.
Well, as you probably know, our ability or inability to understand a thing does not determine its truth. Again, I think you’re question-begging here. Does God have to be flawed in order to maintain omniscience and free-will? How do you define “free will?”The idea of Omniscience and Free-will are two of the things i just cannot get my head around. In order for both to be true, god has to be flawed which contradicts the very idea of a perfect being.
For one, the “omni” qualities are human constructs and are not found in the Bible. We say that God is omnipotent, but that is only true to the extent that it means there is no one more powerful or greater. God cannot do anything outside of his own nature (e.g. he cannot lie), nor can he do nonsensical things like make a squared circle or a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it.
Man only has “free will” in the sense that he is presented with a very limited number of options in any given scenario. Given the choice of coffee or tea, if coke is not available, man cannot choose coke. Does this negate free will? Even in my limited nature, I know what my children will do every day. They will wake up. They will be hungry. They will eat. They will either choose Cheerios or Life cereal. I could go on and on throughout their day. In a fairly limited sense, because of the nature of my home and my family, I have some foreknowledge of what will go on in my house. If there is some all-powerful being, is it unreasonable to think he could have knowledge of every choice we make before we make it while not directly interfering in those choices?
Given the fact that God is supposedly above or outside of time, that raises another point. We can’t really apply limits common to our reality to God, if indeed such a being exists. We can assign characteristics and qualities to describe his interactions with us, but even those would fall short, and would only be useful to humans and not necessarily reflect the “reality.”
P
PJM
Guest
=tmellin;5045158]PJM,
Unless you are using this question as an academic exercise of some kind–perhaps as the starting point for a chain of reasoning that moves toward Catholic principles–then I would question your self description (appearing in the header of your posts) as an informed, practicing Roman Catholic. Perhaps you will now develop your point?
Hi Tom,
This one hits very close “to home.”:tiphat:
If God did not error because God cannot error, then is one to conclude that God has a purpose for the Gifts that He grants us?
Love and prayers,
D
davidv
Guest
Yes.Hi Tom,
This one hits very close “to home.”:tiphat:
If God did not error because God cannot error, then is one to conclude that God has a purpose for the Gifts that He grants us?
Love and prayers,
How does one discover this purpose?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.