The Absence of Free Will

What does a world look like in the absence of free will. I understand this will knock on the Calvinist door but it also knocks on the atheists door also. And the atheist is who I usually spend time debating as to why I am challenging that worldview and that view has unknowingly persuaded other Christians. The world of a true materialist is a world absent of free will.

Before I explain the a world absent of free will, I will define my key words.

Libertarianism Free will: I hold the Libertarianism view which is the concept of free will that requires the agent to be able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances. ( Not related to politics)

Interactionism or interactionist dualism: is the theory in the philosophy of the mind which holds that matter and mind are two distinct and independent substances that exert causal effects on one another.

Metaphysics: is a branch of philosophy that explores the nature of being, existence, and reality. It does not explore religious beliefs and laws created by man, but rather, it explores the immutable laws of nature, set by The Creator, God/Universal Presence, in the creation of the Universe. The observed affects of a unseen cause.

Materialism: a theory that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality and that all being and processes and phenomena can be explained as manifestations or results of matter.

Matter: In the classical physics observed in everyday life, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume. All everyday objects that we can touch are ultimately composed of atoms.

Primordial soup: is a term introduced by the Soviet biologist Alexander Oparin. In 1924, he proposed the theory of the origin of life on Earth through the transformation, during the gradual chemical evolution of molecules that contain carbon in the primordial soup.

Evolution: the scientific theory explaining the appearance of new species and varieties through the action of various biological mechanisms (such as natural selection, genetic mutation or drift, and hybridization.

Animal instincts: Instinct is an inherent behavior; a fixed action pattern that is unlearned. Animals are born with certain instincts which are common to all those in their breed. Some instinctual behaviors require a certain amount of maturation before they begin. The most obvious one is the instinct to mate and propagate.

Herd: is a social group of certain animals of the same species. Bonded together to better their chances of survival.

Sociobiology is a field of biology that aims to examine and explain social behavior in terms of evolution.

As described above in materialism the only thing that exists is the physical realm, the natural realm or made of matter. All of life on Earth came from a natural cause. The most held theory is called the primordial soup. We first began through a random event by a systematic game of chance in a billions of years timeframe.

Many theories suggest how the primordial soup came to be but one day all the elements for life came together and began a gradual chemical evolution of molecules. This gradual change is usually what the secular scientific world calls evolution.

Speed up time from soup, to fish, to vertebrate mammal, to ape, to caveman, and finally to modern human.

Where did free will enter the biological mix?

Well it couldn't of under a only natural cause. Everything is a chemical reaction. The brain is all material and thus only reacts to its surroundings. We are in many ways just more Intelligent animals that are predetermined by natural selection, instincts inherited by past species like the ape, environmental factors like survival of the fittest, and robots reacting to chemical reactions.

This is how a true materialist must deny the idea of a objective morality. They must deny sin, evil and good. Everything is subjective and truth is only true to the individual as they are only responding to the environment from internal evolutionary programming.

Under this explanation. What kind of world would this be if truly followed?

1. Obviously morality couldn't exist
2. Just laws wouldn't exist
3. Justice wouldn't exist
4. Life isn't sacred
5. Sin doesn't exist
6. In the Animal kingdom whoever is the strongest controls the environment. Everyone else responds to the strongests actions in order to survive.

Examples: Someone like Hitler couldn't be judged by others because good and evil doesn't exist. His actions was only him responding to his brain. In reaction he was only surviving in a herd type of complex. The sociobiological response led to his choices of enacting genocide, eugenics and environmental control of surrounding countries. All in order to survive and protect his herd.

Laws are just subjective and change with environmental factors, human needs, and the top dogs actions.

Justice is a illusion because technically no right and wrong exists. Just survival.

-------------------------------------------------------------

So what happens if from a theological perspective if we use the absence of free will concept? Well we must first examine what free will looks like before comparing the absence of free will.

In more detail free will is
1.The Man is the origin and cause of his own actions.

2: The Man, in most cases, will have the ability to choose between 2 or more options. And whichever option he chooses, he did not have to make that choice. He could have chosen one of the alternatives.

3: The Man’s choice was undetermined. Nothing internal or external to the man causally determined the man to make the choice he did. His choice was uncaused or undetermined.

Interactionist dualism is simply the mind and brain are separate but work together. The mind is metaphysical while the brain is physically material.

Interactionism was propounded by the French rationalist philosopher Rene Descartes (1596–1650), and continues to be associated with him. Descartes posited that the body, being physical matter, was characterized by spatial extension but not by thought and feeling, while the mind, being a separate substance, had no spatial extension but could think and feel.

So Mind= thinking and feeling
Brain= physical response to the mind.
-Rene Descartes

This simple sentence is a mental exercise that shows we are free thinkers. I doubt and think shows a boundary beyond just instincts or chemical responses.

The evidence of morality is evidence for God. The moral law is evidence of a metaphysical right and wrong universal standard that we all knowingly or unknowingly react to. Also proving immaterial things exist.

A world without free will but belief in God means everything is predetermined. God is the author of sin and evil. If free will doesn't exist neither was the actions of Satan. Everything was predetermined by God.

Now obviously in light of the evidence for free will, morality, and the characteristics of God being all just, all good, and Holy. A God who is the author of sin and evil isnt the God of the Bible.

A world with God and absence of free will is also a world absence of morality, absence of just laws, absence of true justice, and life predetermined is every action also is within God's will including Hitlers.

Conclusion:

A Atheistic worldview just doesn't follow reality or any belief without free will. Free will is a tricky thing to pretend it doesn't exist.

If libertarian free will does not exist, rationality and knowledge do not exist. If all things are causally determined, then that includes all thoughts and beliefs.’ If our thoughts and beliefs are forced upon us, and we could not have chosen better beliefs, then we are simply left assuming that our determined beliefs are good (let alone true).

Except we also use the laws of logic to reason and come to a rational explanation for the reality we live in. Therefore for anyone to debate against free will they must use reason and logic and proving free will at the same time. Otherwise you must admit your not really thinking but only reacting.

If this sounds confusing. It can be when you start trying to deny reality.

View attachment 204151

Also examine the law on noncontradiction. I dont think I explained that above but the law states that a contradictory statement cannot both be true at the same time.

If God is the source of truth. And absent free will agents both speak contradictory statements as we see in this thread then God is the source of each statement making both true but in reality they are contradicting therefore free will to think is obviously more logical.

Nope its reality. If God had control over all of creation then the existence of evil would be impossible.

We either have free will or we dont. Our only choice is to respond in faith or rebel in pride. Man's role in salvation is so far limited that God only asks us to first believe, repent, and accept God into our heart. Faith cannot be forced or it couldn't be genuine. Love couldn't be forced or it wouldn't be genuine.

Free will agents is the best answer for evil. Otherwise God is the determined author of evil.

Cool testimony! My testimony was God giving me a choice. I kept playing the lukewarm Christian for years not really knowing it until one night while trying to repent of the same failures of not following God.

God spoke to me in my mind with a all body feeling experience that I cannot really describe. But I heard the scripture about a lukewarm Christian and the the words Son are you going to follow me or are you not?

With a feeling of a Father lovingly but sternly warning me that a lukewarm Christian isnt a true disciple but only a hypocrite.

I finally grasped I couldn't keep trying for perfection as if I was trying to fix my life without letting God have the reigns. I wanted to love Jesus but didn't yet want to give up control. Unfortunately I still struggle with control and obedience. My only options was either continue the energy draining lifestyle of a hypocrite, or to completely walk away, or to fully surrender my will to His.

I didn't feel forced as my only will was the choice to surrender in faith.

Praise our King!! Man He is just so great! Makes such perfect sense in every way. That is truly awesome brother, thanks for sharing too.

I think a large part of this problem is a lack of defining what words mean.

Jesus says "Let the DEAD bury their DEAD"

In Ephesians and elsewhere we are told we WERE DEAD.

Here is the definition of DEAD:

Strong's Concordance
nekros: dead
Original Word: νεκρός, ά, όν
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: nekros
Phonetic Spelling: (nek-ros')
Definition: dead
Usage: (a) adj: dead, lifeless, subject to death, mortal, (b) noun: a dead body, a corpse.
HELPS Word-studies
3498 nekrós (an adjective, derived from nekys, "a corpse, a dead body") – dead; literally, "what lacks life"; dead; (figuratively) not able to respond to impulses, or perform functions ("unable, ineffective, dead, powerless," L & N, 1, 74.28); unresponsive to life-giving influences (opportunities); inoperative to the things of God.
3498 /nekrós ("corpse-like") is used as a noun in certain contexts ("the dead"), especially when accompanied by the Greek definite article. The phrase, ek nekron ("from the dead"), lacks the Greek article to give the sense "from what is of death."



I ask you, what can a DEAD person do? Answer? NOTHING!!! We were completely and utterly POWERLESS.

God had to make us alive, or quicken us. HE gets ALL the credit. NOT us for "choosing" Him.

I reiterate. We were NOT just mostly dead.

Dead in sin. Sin leads to death. Surrendering to Jesus chooses life. Can you justify my 6 point conclusion or not? Otherwise in your view we both are being God driven to debate this issue and if both are God driven we both are right as God is the source of truth.

Too important a point to concede. We WERE spiritually dead. We needed to be born again. We do NOT decide to birth ourselves and Scripture SPECIFICALLY says we can't. Those who are not born again are right now are spiritually DEAD and condemned. That does NOT mean that they won't be quickened upon hearing the Gospel and THEN become born again through the faith that was activated upon their hearing.

John 1:12-13 New King James Version (NKJV)
12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the [a]right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, NOR OF THE WILL of the flesh, NOR OF THE WILL of man, but of God.

1 Corinthians 2:14 New King James Version (NKJV)
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

So in our DEAD Spiritual state we are incapable of choosing Christ or choosing in essence to save ourself by our decisions.

You had ZERO say in your physical conception and birth. Why on earth would you think you can decide to conceive and birth yourself Spiritually?

So I can't move beyond this point. GOD CONCEIVES US, GOD BIRTHS US, GOD ALONE SAVES US.

Romans 1:18 New International Version (NIV)
God’s Wrath Against Sinful Humanity
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

(Sorry I may not of included enough context. One verse above says wrath of God is against all people who suppress the truth. )


Romans 1:19-20 New International Version (NIV)
19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

(The scriptures above is truth in nature)

Romans 2:14-15 New International Version (NIV)
14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)

(The scriptures above is truth in moral law)

John 16:7-9 But in fact, it is best for you that I go away, because if I don’t, the Advocate won’t come. If I do go away, then I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convict the world of its sin, and of God’s righteousness, and of the coming judgment. The world’s sin is that it refuses to believe in me.

(The scriptures above is truth by the Spirit)

There is not a better evangelist in the world than the Holy Spirit.” Dwight L. Moody

We are having a slight difference in the way we see the meaning of Romans 1:19. God's wrath is against "ALL MEN" I do not believe that he is talking about all mankind, because the unregenerate do not posses spiritual truth and therefore can not suppress something that they do not have. That is why I believe God is directing his wrath toward his regenerate children who do have the basic things of the truth but have a lack of knowledge of the meat of the gospel and are still babes in Christ. I hope that
I have stated this in a way that you can understand what I am talking about.

I think a large part of this problem is a lack of defining what words mean.

Jesus says "Let the DEAD bury their DEAD"

In Ephesians and elsewhere we are told we WERE DEAD.

Here is the definition of DEAD:

Strong's Concordance
nekros: dead
Original Word: νεκρός, ά, όν
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: nekros
Phonetic Spelling: (nek-ros')
Definition: dead
Usage: (a) adj: dead, lifeless, subject to death, mortal, (b) noun: a dead body, a corpse.
HELPS Word-studies
3498 nekrós (an adjective, derived from nekys, "a corpse, a dead body") – dead; literally, "what lacks life"; dead; (figuratively) not able to respond to impulses, or perform functions ("unable, ineffective, dead, powerless," L & N, 1, 74.28); unresponsive to life-giving influences (opportunities); inoperative to the things of God.
3498 /nekrós ("corpse-like") is used as a noun in certain contexts ("the dead"), especially when accompanied by the Greek definite article. The phrase, ek nekron ("from the dead"), lacks the Greek article to give the sense "from what is of death."



I ask you, what can a DEAD person do? Answer? NOTHING!!! We were completely and utterly POWERLESS.

God had to make us alive, or quicken us. HE gets ALL the credit. NOT us for "choosing" Him.

I reiterate. We were NOT just mostly dead.

Too important a point to concede. We WERE spiritually dead. We needed to be born again. We do NOT decide to birth ourselves and Scripture SPECIFICALLY says we can't. Those who are not born again are right now are spiritually DEAD and condemned. That does NOT mean that they won't be quickened upon hearing the Gospel and THEN become born again through the faith that was activated upon their hearing.

John 1:12-13 New King James Version (NKJV)
12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the [a]right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, NOR OF THE WILL of the flesh, NOR OF THE WILL of man, but of God.

1 Corinthians 2:14 New King James Version (NKJV)
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

So in our DEAD Spiritual state we are incapable of choosing Christ or choosing in essence to save ourself by our decisions.

You had ZERO say in your physical conception and birth. Why on earth would you think you can decide to conceive and birth yourself Spiritually?

So I can't move beyond this point. GOD CONCEIVES US, GOD BIRTHS US, GOD ALONE SAVES US.

What does a world look like in the absence of free will. I understand this will knock on the Calvinist door but it also knocks on the atheists door also. And the atheist is who I usually spend time debating as to why I am challenging that worldview and that view has unknowingly persuaded other Christians. The world of a true materialist is a world absent of free will.

The interpretation you hold is being interpreted through pre held assumptions.

In the context of no free will, every scripture must be seen through that lens. Everyone does this with personal held doctrines. If not carefully investigated 1 scripture may sound like no free will but when added 50 others, the picture looks different with open eyes.

Our disagreement on this scripture isn't a common disagreement. Your the first to interpret this that way. I have not had anyone ever to interpret that way or heard any of the articles, commentaries, or podcasts hold that view of 1st and 2nd Romans.

I am in agreement that all scriptures must harmonize if we are to understand the doctrine that Jesus taught, I also believe that scripture proves scripture, therefore, I do not refer to commentaries, or any man's private interpretation of the scriptures, unless all of the scriptures harmonize.

I am in agreement that all scriptures must harmonize if we are to understand the doctrine that Jesus taught, I also believe that scripture proves scripture, therefore, I do not refer to commentaries, or any man's private interpretation of the scriptures, unless all of the scriptures harmonize.

1.

God calls things that have not happened yet as though they already happened, for if it is a plan of God to happen in the future it is the same as if it happened in the beginning, for it will surely come to pass with no hindrance.

Which the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world, and the prophets blood shed from the foundation of the world, and all the works were finished from the foundation of the world, although they were future events.

Which Jesus is the beginning of creation, and the firstborn among the creatures, although He was not born until 4000 years later, the man Christ Jesus whose deity is God.

Which the Word of God which was in the beginning, and was God, is the plan of God to come in the future in flesh before He started creation, and without that plan God would of not created anything that He created, for Jesus is the reason creation is successful, eternal life, and to judge the angels and people.

The Lord is not willing that any should perish but that all come to the truth and be saved.

And God will have all people to be saved, and commands all people to repent, and to come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved.

And Jesus lights every person born into this world which means all people have the chance to see the light of Jesus and be saved.

And the Spirit and the bride say Come, and anybody can have that salvation.

So the saints being predestined to salvation does not mean God chooses who will be saved, and not saved without their choice, but that God already had the plan to give mankind salvation before He started creation, so it is the same as if the saints have salvation in the beginning, but this salvation is to whoever wants this salvation.

For all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

2.

God's kingdom is love, and He is not evil to condemn people that have no choice but to reject the truth seeing no other alternative.

If you program your computer to say I love you when you start it up does your computer really love you, and if you program it to say I hate you will you break your computer out of anger.

We have a choice because God's kingdom is love, and He is not evil to condemn people that have no choice but to reject truth.

If we do not have a choice then God's kingdom is not true love, but they are robots that have no choice but to say I love you, and would the greatest love of all want that kind of love.

And if they have no choice then their faith is not real, their confessing Christ is not real, their hope is not real, their repenting of their sins is not real, because it did not come from them but from God.

3.

If OSAS is true then God would only work in the lives of those He chose for it would not make any sense to work in the lives of those He did not choose.

The Bible says no person says Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

No person comes to the Son unless the Father draws them.

Peter said Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, which Jesus said flesh and blood did not reveal that to him but the Father.

Concerning the end time none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand.

Many people confess these things, and understand the end time, that does not believe OSAS, and God chooses in the beginning, but they have a choice.

So why is God working in their life if they are against OSAS and they have a choice.

And if the OSAS people want to argue about these facts it means they have an arrogant attitude to say we have the truth and you do not for this cannot be denied that God is working in the lives of people that are against OSAS and they have a choice for they confess these things, and understand the end time.

4.

We did not choose God but He chose us.

Nobody comes to the Son unless the Father draws them.

Some have a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof, from such turn away, and they are ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Many are called but few are chosen, which God does the calling and choosing on earth, and if God chooses in the beginning why is God calling people that cannot be chosen.

Not many mighty, not many wise after the flesh, not many noble are called, for their heart condition is too self exalting, and they do not love people like they should, but they love power and control.

If the heart condition is right God will call us and work with us to get us to the truth, but when we get to the door of truth we have to decide to go through it for God's kingdom is love, but nobody would of gotten to the door of truth unless God called them and intervened in their life to get them to the truth.

But once God calls us He will keep working with us to get us to the truth, but many do not go through the door of truth.

For many are called but few are chosen.

We do have a choice in our salvation for that is what the Bible states, and God said He wants all people to be saved.

Your also viewing your scripture through pre assumed beliefs that you believe to be true and must filter all scripture through it.

We all do this but if not in context of the whole Bible we twist and shape meanings to fit our pre held belief.

None of your verses take away free will. Of course to be in sin is death. A spiritual death as in if we remain in sin with no atonement then the only course of events is soul death in judgment.

A living human is not physically dead, therefore neither is the mind being not of brain which is where choice comes from. And finally neither is your soul dead. God hasn't destroyed it yet. But if you remain in sin then yes you are dead in sin.

John 3:3 I believe is appropriate in context of your usage.

John 3:3 New International Version (NIV)
3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.

gennaó
Phonetic Spelling: (ghen-nah'-o)
Definition: to beget, to bring forth
Usage: I beget (of the male), (of the female) I bring forth, give birth to.

Peculiarly, in the Gospel and First Epistle of John, of God conferring upon men the nature and disposition of his sons, imparting to them spiritual life, i. e. by his own holy power prompting and persuading souls to put faith in Christ and live a new life consecrated to himself; absolutely 1 John 5:1; mostly in passive, ἐκ Θεοῦ or ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐγεννήθησαν, γεγέννηται, γεγεννημένος, etc.: John 1:13; 1 John 2:29 (Rec.st γεγένηται); ; also ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος γέννασθαι, John 3:6 (Rec.elz γεγενημένον), ; ἐξ ὕδατος καί πνεύματος (because that moral generation is effected in receiving baptism ((?) cf. Schaff's Lange, Godet, Westcott, on the words, and references under the word βάπτισμα, 3)), John 3:5; ἄνωθεν γέννασθαι, John 3:3, 7 (see ἄνωθεν, c.) equivalent to τέκνον Θεοῦ γίνεσθαι, . (Compare: ἀναγεννάω.)

But of course this is with any kind of translation. The translators add their own commentary. If you look up born again by a different translator you may get a definition that best fits your beliefs.

Unfortunately this is the delimma being 2000 and more years from the Apostles and early church fathers.

Still I think we have enough evidence for free will for example the early church father once said

Tertullian (Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus) 160-225 AD
Debating theology is fun but I was hoping to pick your brain on answering my 6 conclusions.

That is quite a discourse. God did choose a people out of all mankind to be called his people, reference Eph 1. God, by his foreknowledge, saw that no one would seek him, reference Psalms 53:2, which made it necessary to choose a people to be adopted by his Son. Those that he choose, he called, predestined, justified and glorified, reference Romans 8:28-30. Many are called, but few are chosen, God has written the scriptures to be a mystery to the wise and prudent and revealed them unto babes, Matt 11:25. Only a few of God's children have been chosen to be revealed the truth of the scriptures and many of God's children have been called that are going about trying to establish their own righteousness by their works, reference Matt 7:13-14 and Romans 10:1-2-3.