T
thelovelyone
Guest
Like people doing immoral things, etc.
Be thankful you are without sin.Like people doing immoral things, etc.
No, I would rather take away the freedom of psychopaths and sociopaths to commit their acts.Would you rather not be free? You and I are both sinners.
Incorrect dichotomy. Would you rather have somebody who is able to choose between several good options, rather than the one who can inflict mayhem and suffering in the name of “freedom”.Think of it this way: Would you want somebody loving you because they want to and choose to or because they’re an automaton?
Then I can only say that I am glad it is not your decision. If we are not free to choose evil, then we are also not free to choose good.No, I would rather take away the freedom of psychopaths and sociopaths to commit their acts.
“Doing” good is much more important than “choosing” good. A toddler is not free to “choose” good, it is her nature to be love.Then I can only say that I am glad it is not your decision. If we are not free to choose evil, then we are also not free to choose good.
How do you “do” good unless you “choose” to do so? Just as sin requires consent, so does good.“Doing” good is much more important than “choosing” good
How many toddlers do you know? They are among the most savage of creatures unless and until they are civilized by their parents (or others if necessary).A toddler is not free to “choose” good, it is her nature to be love.
I don’t remember hearing about this - got a reference? Without Original Sin, yes, but still quite capable of choosing to sin, even though she never did.the Virgin Mary was supposed to be without inclination to do evil
Because it is your nature. “Sin” does not even cross your mind.How do you “do” good unless you “choose” to do so? Just as sin requires consent, so does good.
Then you are denying free will. But God gave us free will.Because it is your nature . “Sin” does not even cross your mind.
Because of the necessity of free will such that charity can be expressed and one can therefore become a partaker of the divine nature.Like people doing immoral things, etc.
No. Not denying, limiting the actions, maybe. Free will is not contingent upon being able to rape, kill and do other kinds of mayhem. It is sufficient to be able to choose from all kinds of good actions.Then you are denying free will. But God gave us free will.
Actually, it is. If we are not free to choose evil, we are not free to choose.Free will is not contingent upon being able to rape, kill and do other kinds of mayhem.
No, I wouldn’t. It is sufficient to show that God included the ability to choose to sin when He gave us free will. If He hadn’t, then it wouldn’t be free. I am in no way saying that doing evil is anything but, well, evil. But the discussion is about free will and the ability to choose sin over good.If you would like to argue for the ability to rape or murder, you would need to show that these activities are preferable on their own . That it is better to rape than not to rape.
If you are able to choose chocolate ice-cream over vanilla, then you have free will. But I already explained this to you.Actually, it is. If we are not free to choose evil, we are not free to choose.
Really? When? And what does selecting an ice cream flavor have to do with good and evil?But I already explained this to you.