Understanding free choice by God

[tonyrey]

The problem is his argument is written from the point of view that God is saying “do this or die”, when in fact God is saying “if you do this you will live.” It’s an offer of salvation, not a threat of death. The entire point of the law was to teach us that sin meant spiritual death.

As to the argument that a just God wouldn’t send anyone to hell, why would a merciful God force someone who wants nothing to do with Him to spend eternity in His presence? Isn’t an act of love to allow someone to choose that if they want to spend their entire eternity away from God that they can do so?

Precisely! The fatal flaw in their argument that it is entirely negative…

 

[ASimon]

The problem is his argument is written from the point of view that God is saying “do this or die”, when in fact God is saying “if you do this you will live.” It’s an offer of salvation, not a threat of death. The entire point of the law was to teach us that sin meant spiritual death.

This does nothing to change the calculus of what’s being offered. On one hand, we’re being offered the greatest thing that could ever happen to anyone. On the other hand, we’re being “offered” (if you like) the worst thing that could ever happen to anyone. This is not a free choice in any intelligent sense.

As to the argument that a just God wouldn’t send anyone to hell, why would a merciful God force someone who wants nothing to do with Him to spend eternity in His presence? Isn’t an act of love to allow someone to choose that if they want to spend their entire eternity away from God that they can do so?

If the choices were the Christian Heaven, the Christian Hell, or Oblivion, I’d likely take Oblivion without giving it a second thought. But despite this satisfying my desire to not spend an eternity worshiping my Creator for doing only what came naturally to him, the Lord does not see fit to offer me this choice.

 

[Blinky]

If the choices were the Christian Heaven, the Christian Hell, or Oblivion, I’d likely take Oblivion without giving it a second thought.

Let’s take Oblivion off the table since we can only choose between Heaven and Hell. So, which is your choice: Heaven or Hell?

 

[SteveGC]

This does nothing to change the calculus of what’s being offered. On one hand, we’re being offered the greatest thing that could ever happen to anyone. On the other hand, we’re being “offered” (if you like) the worst thing that could ever happen to anyone. This is not a free choice in any intelligent sense.

There’s not “one hand…and the other hand”. That’s a flawed understanding of the reality of our existence. We are born into exile. We did not personally choose this exile, it was inherited. We’re not “offered” the worst thing, we are born into it, by the actions of rejection of our first parents. We are offered one thing…salvation from this reality. To put it in terms of two choices, those choices would be 1) remain in the exile you innately possess, or 2) be redeemed from it and enter into the divine family for which you were eternally designed.

If the choices were the Christian Heaven, the Christian Hell, or Oblivion, I’d likely take Oblivion without giving it a second thought. But despite this satisfying my desire to not spend an eternity worshiping my Creator for doing only what came naturally to him, the Lord does not see fit to offer me this choice.

He cannot offer you an impossible option. By creating us in His image, it necessarily placed within us an eternal essence, one not capable of ceasing to exist. He could not create us in His image if He included an essence capable of ceasing to be, thus the very fact that we are designed to share in His essence makes oblivion a nonsensical option. Even God cannot do what is contrary to His very nature. This is not an admission of a non-omnipotent God, it is simply a recognition that all things must follow their natural essence.

You unfortunately also possess a severely under-developed sense of what eternal worship actually means. And creating is not really what “comes naturally” to our Lord. He did not have to create you. He did so out of infinite love. What comes naturally to our Lord is existence. It is His very essence. You cannot limit Him to “Creator”, for this misses the reality of Who He is. Your existence is a gift from Him, as is your opportunity for redemption from inherited exile.

 

[tonyrey]

If the choices were the Christian Heaven, the Christian Hell, or Oblivion, I’d likely take Oblivion without giving it a second thought.

Your notion of heaven is obviously distorted!

But despite this satisfying my desire to not spend an eternity worshiping my Creator for doing only what came naturally to him, the Lord does not see fit to offer me this choice.

Your notion of heaven is obviously distorted!

 

[ASimon]

Let’s take Oblivion off the table since we can only choose between Heaven and Hell. So, which is your choice: Heaven or Hell?

If Heaven is the best thing that could ever happen to me, and Hell the worst thing that could ever happen to me, then I’d choose Heaven. But we needn’t pretend this is an actual choice we’re being offered.

 

[ASimon]

There’s not “one hand…and the other hand”. That’s a flawed understanding of the reality of our existence. We are born into exile. We did not personally choose this exile, it was inherited. We’re not “offered” the worst thing, we are born into it, by the actions of rejection of our first parents. We are offered one thing…salvation from this reality. To put it in terms of two choices, those choices would be 1) remain in the exile you innately possess, or 2) be redeemed from it and enter into the divine family for which you were eternally designed.

This just restates the problem. If we’re born sick and commanded to be well, we have to work for it. And if to remain in exile is the Worst Thing That Can Ever Happen, then it can’t really be called a choice.

You unfortunately also possess a severely under-developed sense of what eternal worship actually means. And creating is not really what “comes naturally” to our Lord. He did not have to create you. He did so out of infinite love. What comes naturally to our Lord is existence. It is His very essence. You cannot limit Him to “Creator”, for this misses the reality of Who He is. Your existence is a gift from Him, as is your opportunity for redemption from inherited exile.

No, what I possess is a very common-sense understanding of what “eternal worship” is. If it was meant to be something other than endless praise and thanks, they would’ve called it something else. As you say, I did not ask to be Created, to be born into this exile, yet I’m expected to be thankful for the opportunity to work my way out of it. Just so I can spend an eternity continuing to be ever thankful for it. Thanks, but no thanks.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

The problem is his argument is written from the point of view that God is saying “do this or die”, when in fact God is saying "if you do this you will live.

A relative earlier today told me that her mom was asking her if she believed in God and said something that reminded me of this message. It’s not so much that God was saying “do this or die.” But that Man was saying it. A very abbridged version of the conversation went something like this (at least according to what she told me).

The mom was telling daughter some new info she learned about the new testament.

Daughter: “I…but I don’t care about the new testament. The new testament isn’t going to do anything for me or pay my bills.”

Mom: “Are you telling me you don’t believe in God?”

Daughter: “I’m telling you I’m not going to live my life according to some book that was written hundreds of years ago.”

Mom: “Are you an atheist?”


Mom: “So you don’t believe in God?”

Daughter: “I don’t believe in the God of the bible. The only reason we were Christian is because some people came over with guns hundreds of years ago and gave our ancestors the choice to either convert or die.”

 

[karaleigh]

I was recently on a website called godandscience.com and I found this site very helpful in answering this particular question. Let me know what you think

The internet has put a switch your GodandScience link because it goes to a Facebook database site.

I have seen the channel you mentioned. It interesting, lots to do there.

 

[karaleigh]

This just restates the problem. If we’re born sick and commanded to be well, we have to work for it. And if to remain in exile is the Worst Thing That Can Ever Happen, then it can’t really be called a choice.

No, what I possess is a very common-sense understanding of what “eternal worship” is. If it was meant to be something other than endless praise and thanks, they would’ve called it something else. As you say, I did not ask to be Created, to be born into this exile, yet I’m expected to be thankful for the opportunity to work my way out of it. Just so I can spend an eternity continuing to be ever thankful for it. Thanks, but no thanks.

Salvation is free simply by believing in the All Mighty God. To go into heaven is the reason a person must do the Jesus work.

 

[SteveGC]

This just restates the problem. If we’re born sick and commanded to be well, we have to work for it. And if to remain in exile is the Worst Thing That Can Ever Happen, then it can’t really be called a choice.

Ah, but you see, “worst thing” is a subjective description. It is not objectively true. For some, hell is better than facing God, because self-reliance and pride are more appealing to them than submission to the Supreme Being - even if they come to an awareness of the objective truth that hell is eternal torment and heaven is eternal joy. So, it is indeed a choice.

No, what I possess is a very common-sense understanding of what “eternal worship” is. If it was meant to be something other than endless praise and thanks, they would’ve called it something else.

By “common sense”, perhaps you mean “common among atheists”. Because that is not a “common” view held by theists.

When you say “they would’ve called it something else”, who’s they? “eternal worship” is not a phrase I’ve ever heard used as any official title for heaven. Regardless, if you’d like to limit yourself to a distorted understanding of heaven as nothing else but eternally bowing before God, or sitting in a pew singing, or endlessly pronouncing praises aloud to Him, then you go right ahead and do that, and convince yourself that it’s “common sense”. I can’t argue with someone who thinks he can possess an authentic understanding of God using nothing but an isolated, atheistic common sense, or someone who doesn’t worship God who nevertheless thinks they know what it means to worship God.

As you say, I did not ask to be Created, to be born into this exile, yet I’m expected to be thankful for the opportunity to work my way out of it. Just so I can spend an eternity continuing to be ever thankful for it. Thanks, but no thanks.

You’re not “expected” to do anything, no more than a prisoner is expected to want to be rescued. Look, I didn’t ask to be created either. None of us did. And we certainly wouldn’t choose to be condemned from the start. But you seem to think that since you didn’t “ask” for it, then it must not be true. Well, that logic doesn’t even follow a humanistic system of reasoning or common sense. You don’t base your understanding or belief of earthly things on only those aspects that you personally would want, or ask for. So why force that erroneous logic on the supernatural? We can certainly achieve a degree of authentic understanding of God, but reason must not be divorced from faith.

Most atheists base their disbelief on their insistence that God must provide “clear evidence” (a very vague and undefined demand) of Himself and must also fit nicely and simply into a humanistic concept of rationality, must follow the laws of science and “common sense”. God must fit into the world, in other words. When they realize He doesn’t do that, when they can’t capture Him in a box and study Him, it furthers their disbelief. As they live their lives in disbelief, something compels them to justify their unbelief, to discredit belief and believers. One of the justifications tends to be the invention of a sort of self-refuting false dichotomy. They claim God who Christians claim is all loving cannot exist, because this God’s intent is to create you, give you no evidence of His existence, force you to believe in Him and follow His commands, or else will send you to Hell for eternity. And since this is not “loving”, He cannot therefore exist.

So, they say, there really is NO choice because one of the choices is eternal torment, and who would choose that? And since there is no choice, God is a tyrannical dictator, not a lover, and hence the Christian God is a phantom of the imagination.

You have to realize that pride is what makes choosing against God a valid and even reasonable choice. Self-reliance and disdain for the demands of righteousness make choosing against God an authentic free-will and even appealing choice. The fact that God and His followers reveal to the world the reality of the after-death consequences of this particular choice (eternal torment and despair) is simply meant to reveal TRUTH. Atheists seize it as “proof” that the Christian God cannot exist, but they miss the point. The point is that it is reality. The saints have written that most people in Hell are the ones who DID NOT believe Hell existed. This is why it is important for God to reveal to his creation what it means for someone to separate themselves eternally from Him. He does not want that for anyone, yet He cannot make that reality cease to be. His eternal existence and our creation by Him in His image DEMANDS that we are either eternally among His family, or eternally separated from it.

The revelation of Hell is not a threat, it is a plea and beckoning to loved ones to choose eternal happiness.

 

[ASimon]

Ah, but you see, “worst thing” is a subjective description. It is not objectively true. For some, hell is better than facing God, because self-reliance and pride are more appealing to them than submission to the Supreme Being - even if they come to an awareness of the objective truth that hell is eternal torment and heaven is eternal joy. So, it is indeed a choice.

Anyone who claims they would actually choose the objective truth of eternal torment over the objective truth of eternal joy simply doesn’t know what they’re talking about, or is pretending to not know what they’re talking about. We may safely dismiss such an opinion out of hand.

What I’m doing is using the theistic characterization of Heaven and Hell to show how there’s no free choice that can be meaningfully applied here. And in a separate and independent argument, I’m pointing out that going to Christian Heaven, as it’s described, is nothing like the best thing that could ever happen to you.

By “common sense”, perhaps you mean “common among atheists”. Because that is not a “common” view held by theists.

No doubt. Neither are terms like “Mercy” and “Love” - words I often hear thrown around by the Faithful in the face of tragedy. When a little girl dies of leukemia, this is supposedly evidence of God’s “Love.” When it’s a tsunami wiping out a Japanese village, this is God’s “Mercy.” Every now and then, a Christian will have sufficient shame to step back and say that God’s will is “Mysterious,” which at least shows the bare minimum of humility. But I can’t help but notice that it’s a strange time for Believers to stop pretending they know what God wants. I’d like to see this attitude more often put into practice.

 

[Poelice]

In essence his line of thinking is that one really has no real choice about believing in God. If one doesn’t believe then they are essentially choosing eternal death which really is no choice. Hoping someone here can help me with some thoughts/words as to how to counter this line of thinking?

Thanks

Everyone believes in God. The evidence is overwhelming. Someone people say they don’t believe in God, but deep down they know there is a God, but don’t want to admit it because they want to sin.

 

[chazcheh]

So sorry it is godandscience.org QUOTE=karaleigh;8724850]The internet has put a switch your GodandScience link because it goes to a Facebook database site.

I have seen the channel you mentioned. It interesting, lots to do there.

 

[neophyte]

I know what I want to say but I often find myself at loss for words when debating an atheist acquaintance of mine. Here is essentially his argument;

What choice? Believe without evidence or go to hell for eternity?..

His objection is based entirely on distortions of Catholic theology.

There’s plenty of evidence. That argument is based in the absurd notion that faith is “believing in something when there’s no evidence”, which is a distortion that arose during the so-called Enlightenment from atheists who wanted to discredit Christianity. What that describes is actually called “credulity”
Faith is “an act of the will by which one adheres to another who is known”. That’s what the word meant (and still means) in Hebrew, and it’s what it’s meant in English since the beginning. That’s why we say things like “being faithful to your spouse”… what, you have no evidence that your spouse exists?
It’s a silly argument, based on an ignorance of the English language.

As for the rest, I suspect you’ve already gotten plenty of (name removed by moderator)ut. The Church doesn’t teach as the Calvinists do, that one must absolutely and in all cases have heard of Jesus and become a Christian in order to be saved.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Faith is “an act of the will by which one adheres to another who is known”.

That’s what the word meant (and still means) in Hebrew, and it’s what it’s meant in English since the beginning.

Here it sounds like “loyalty” could be used interchangeably with the definition you are providing for “faith.” If it is, then when speaking to a non-catholic wouldn’t the chance for distortion or misunderstandings here be reduced by using the word “loyalty?” Some Christians do state that by “faith” they mean belief in something for which there is no evidence. When used without further definition I can see how some one will interpret the word in a manner that is consistent with how they may have heard other Christians define it.

 

[fhansen]

I know what I want to say but I often find myself at loss for words when debating an atheist acquaintance of mine. Here is essentially his argument;

*What choice? Believe without evidence or go to hell for eternity? Obey your parents or be stoned to death? Look straight ahead or be turned to a pillar of salt? Worship only me or endure my plagues and pestilences? Pray the gay away or die, pervert? These are not choices that anyone would consider benevolent.

If I offered my kids choices like this, would you consider me a moral person? “Do what I said because I said so or die”, “respect me or I will cause you physical harm”. *

In essence his line of thinking is that one really has no real choice about believing in God. If one doesn’t believe then they are essentially choosing eternal death which really is no choice. Hoping someone here can help me with some thoughts/words as to how to counter this line of thinking?

Thanks

Lack of faith in God is eternal death. God told Adam & Eve they’d die when they ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil-and they did-they lost faith in God then. And their progeny are all born dead-separated from God And that’s why we must be born again. Our choice is simply to choose life, which for us means to choose God, the source of life. The first step in this is renewed faith.

 

[JDaniel]

This does nothing to change the calculus of what’s being offered. On one hand, we’re being offered the greatest thing that could ever happen to anyone. On the other hand, we’re being “offered” (if you like) the worst thing that could ever happen to anyone. This is not a free choice in any intelligent sense.

ASimon:

This seems to be a complete contradiction, in at least your case. You have made your decision and you are sticking with it. So much for coercion!

If the choices were the Christian Heaven, the Christian Hell, or Oblivion, I’d likely take Oblivion without giving it a second thought. But despite this satisfying my desire to not spend an eternity worshiping my Creator for doing only what came naturally to him, the Lord does not see fit to offer me this choice.

And still no coercion. On the one hand you argue that there is no choice and people will only take the perceived good. On the other hand, you have no problem with rejecting the perceived “good.” So, in what way is it coercive?

The fact of the matter is that there is no choice. In fact, there is nothing you can do to merit Heaven. Some will be in Heaven with God, some won’t. Even the “good faith” Christian is constantly praying to God not to ignore him when the time comes. The “good faith” Christian is constantly beseeching the Holy Spirit for more grace. There are a series of things that must be done in order to find oneself among the elect, it would appear. I plan to try to stay on the good side of He who hands out the invitations! Of course, that presumes a Belief and a Faith in God.

So, don’t worry about Heaven or Hell. But, please try to be open to grace if and when it is offered. Remember, it is offered to all and refused by some. So, really, where’s the coercion?

God bless,
jd

 

[ASimon]

ASimon:

This seems to be a complete contradiction, in at least your case. You have made your decision and you are sticking with it. So much for coercion!

And still no coercion. On the one hand you argue that there is no choice and people will only take the perceived good. On the other hand, you have no problem with rejecting the perceived “good.” So, in what way is it coercive?

The fact of the matter is that there is no choice. In fact, there is nothing you can do to merit Heaven. Some will be in Heaven with God, some won’t. Even the “good faith” Christian is constantly praying to God not to ignore him when the time comes. The “good faith” Christian is constantly beseeching the Holy Spirit for more grace. There are a series of things that must be done in order to find oneself among the elect, it would appear. I plan to try to stay on the good side of He who hands out the invitations! Of course, that presumes a Belief and a Faith in God.

So, don’t worry about Heaven or Hell. But, please try to be open to grace if and when it is offered. Remember, it is offered to all and refused by some. So, really, where’s the coercion?

God bless,
jd

The reason I’m not coerced is because I reject the parameters of the choice out of hand. I’m working under the assumption that it’s not true. The only question that remains for me is whether I’m right or wrong in that assumption. And I’m very probably right.

If you’re working under the assumption that it IS true, then you must, by definition, confront two possible destinies - either the Greatest Thing Ever, or the Worst Thing Ever. This can be no more considered a “free choice” than it would be to not hand over your wallet to a mugger at gunpoint - with the certain knowledge that you’ll be shot if you didn’t. Even if you wanted to call THAT a free choice, would that ever work as a defense of the mugger (“I didn’t rob him, your honor! I just pointed a loaded gun at him, asked for his wallet, and he gave it to me of his own free will!”)?

 

[danserr]

The reason I’m not coerced is because I reject the parameters of the choice out of hand. I’m working under the assumption that it’s not true. The only question that remains for me is whether I’m right or wrong in that assumption. And I’m very probably right.

If you’re working under the assumption that it IS true, then you must, by definition, confront two possible destinies - either the Greatest Thing Ever, or the Worst Thing Ever. This can be no more considered a “free choice” than it would be to not hand over your wallet to a mugger at gunpoint - with the certain knowledge that you’ll be shot if you didn’t. Even if you wanted to call THAT a free choice, would that ever work as a defense of the mugger (“I didn’t rob him, your honor! I just pointed a loaded gun at him, asked for his wallet, and he gave it to me of his own free will!”)?

We’ve discussed this before and you simply refuse to understand that few Christians feel compelled to worship God by the threat of hell. I do not, and I suspect most here would agree that their worship of God is not motivated by fear of hell. Belief in God is not a form of fire insurance! Christians worship God because he is the proper object of love and worship. He created the universe out of his love and made us to enjoy eternal happiness with himself. Put that with the crucifixion and frankly, how could we not love him? Fear of hell has nothing to do with it.

And God can’t not make hell. He is the source of all goodness, happiness, and joy. If a person wants these things, he must go to God. Just as a person is free to accept God, a person is also free to reject him. In doing so, one cuts himself off from all the source of all goodness, happiness, and holiness and the result is hell. How could it not be?

If the choices were the Christian Heaven, the Christian Hell, or Oblivion, I’d likely take Oblivion without giving it a second thought

How could you possibly find oblivion preferable to heaven? I suppose because you have some crude caricature of heaven in mind, but I still wonder what makes a person claim that they would rather not exist than enjoy eternal happiness.