Does God Have Free Will?

[Primemuscle]

I think if you guys really want to understand the Bible, it would help to frsti understand that we are truly depraved creatures, victims of our own rebellion,  separated from a holy God who will not force the disobedient to behave. 

Not all of us have the history you do. 

[tbombz]

Yeah.. if your not a Christian and according to human standards you have lived a morally upright life.. then it could be difficult for you to understand how your depraved and deserving of hell.

But God's moral standard is quite different. If we have ever hated someone in our heart, then we are guilty of committing murder. If we have lusted, then we have committed adultery. Etc.

So, even though you may have lived a very upstanding life... your  still guilty of some extremely heinous crimes. The worst of all not loving God.

[The Ugly]

Yeah.. if your not a Christian and according to human standards you have lived a morally upright life.. then it could be difficult for you to understand how your depraved and deserving of hell.

But God's moral standard is quite different. If we have ever hated someone in our heart, then we are guilty of committing murder. If we have lusted, then we have committed adultery. Etc.

So, even though you may have lived a very upstanding life... your  still guilty of some extremely heinous crimes. The worst of all not loving God.

This is so bothersome.

No one ASKED to be born - that's on Him. WE didn't eat that fucking fruit - on them/Him. He invented a faulty product - again, Him.

Think about it, T. You're born into this place without consenting. You do your best to behave, and you pull it off better than most. But maybe you're just not so convinced about the story they tell.

How, in good conscience, can you honestly say this is "deserving of hell"? Separated from God (for rejecting), fine, but ETERNAL TORTURE? Come on, fella. Nothing evil about nonbelief, and eternal punishment for a finite crime is totally unjust.

[avxo]

Yeah.. if your not a Christian and according to human standards you have lived a morally upright life.. then it could be difficult for you to understand how your depraved and deserving of hell.

You're right. It's difficult to be convinced that every human being is inherently evil and worthy of eternal punishment and that the divine being that deems as unworthy, somehow also manages to love us enough to offer us salvation if we just choose to believe. Do you have any proof to offer that doesn't require me to believe first?

But God's moral standard is quite different.

That's his problem, not mine. I can't live by someone else's moral standards. I can - and only wish to live - by mine.

If we have ever hated someone in our heart, then we are guilty of committing murder.

And this passes for justices in the eyes of your God? That one, single statement makes a mockery of justice.

If we have lusted, then we have committed adultery. Etc.

Well, if nothing else, instilling that mentality into people does make them easy for the men of God - who conveniently also sell salvation - to control and profit from the masses.



"Step right up folks... step right up and get Jesus's Elixir of Eternal Life"

So, even though you may have lived a very upstanding life... your  still guilty of some extremely heinous crimes.

If a supernatural being demands my belief, worship and obedience but refuses to give me clear and convincing proof and then chooses to punish me when I don't believe, worship and obey it, then the fault isn't with me - it's with the supernatural being. Your God, if your description is accurate, is nothing short of a bully - on a cosmic scale, no doubt, but a bully nonetheless.
 

The worst of all not loving God.

I find it hard to love someone that is, in essence, threatening me. Or are you so twisted you think that "believe or else..." is an expression of love?

[tbombz]

Guys, at this point I don't have any reason to continue replying.


Send MOS or I a private message if you have any sincere questions about our faith and/or our God.


Regards,

-Taylor

[Agnostic007]

If this were a boxing match it would have been  Tyson Vs Spinks

[avxo]

Guys, at this point I don't have any reason to continue replying.

And yet, you invite those with sincere questions to PM you, suggesting that our questions are, somehow, less than sincere.

Send MOS or I a private message if you have any sincere questions about our faith and/or our God.

I have sincere questions. The problem is you aren't answering them. You can't even define what it is you believe in in a way that allows me to distinguish it from the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[Primemuscle]

Yeah.. if your not a Christian and according to human standards you have lived a morally upright life.. then it could be difficult for you to understand how your depraved and deserving of hell.

But God's moral standard is quite different. If we have ever hated someone in our heart, then we are guilty of committing murder. If we have lusted, then we have committed adultery. Etc.

So, even though you may have lived a very upstanding life... your  still guilty of some extremely heinous crimes. The worst of all not loving God.

Have you no lust for your wife? If you do, that's not generally considered adultery.

You are making some assumptions here. You could be right or you could be wrong. You really do not know.

[Man of Steel]

Have you no lust for your wife? If you do, that's not generally considered adultery.

You are making some assumptions here. You could be right or you could be wrong. You really do not know.

Let me understand, are you suggesting that lusting after one's spouse is committing adultery?  Or am I not understanding?

[avxo]

Man of Steel, if looking at a cake is not the same thing as eating a cake, why should having sexual thoughts about the sexy barista be the same as having sex with the sexy barista?

Let me guess... God's morality, which we cannot comprehend but must follow, that's why.

[Primemuscle]

Let me understand, are you suggesting that lusting after one's spouse is committing adultery?  Or am I not understanding?

You're understood just fine. Tbombz posted that lust is adultery without qualifying whether or not having lust for one's spouse was okay. That is what begged my questioning him about this.

[The Ugly]

Have you no lust for your wife? If you do, that's not generally considered adultery.

You are making some assumptions here. You could be right or you could be wrong. You really do not know.

What assumptions, he's just repeating exactly what the bible says? In which case, right/wrong about what? He didn't write the thing, he just believes it.

[The Ugly]

Let me understand, are you suggesting that lusting after one's spouse is committing adultery?  Or am I not understanding?

No, he's saying it ISN'T, but don't read his reply because it'll just confuse you further.

If you two are are bailing on the thread, can you at least address the OP's OQ before you split? How is it possible, logically, that the two aren't in direct conflict?

[Man of Steel]

You're understood just fine. Tbombz posted that lust is adultery without qualifying whether or not having lust for one's spouse was okay. That is what begged my questioning him about this.

I do understand thanks for the clarification.

To answer briefly, lusting after your spouse (or having a strong desire for sex with your spouse) is not adultery.

To be direct, I have a strong desire for sex with my wife right now    and though I'm think about it from time to time I'm not committing adultery in doing so.....she's my wife.
 

[Man of Steel]

Man of Steel, if looking at a cake is not the same thing as eating a cake, why should having sexual thoughts about the sexy barista be the same as having sex with the sexy barista?

Let me guess... God's morality, which we cannot comprehend but must follow, that's why.

Well, looking at a cake and eating a cake are not the same thing in God's eyes, but looking at a cake and desiring to eat that cake that isn't your cake he does consider the same as actually eating the cake.....sticking with the cake example.  

It's the same with anger towards someone in that God considers that murder committed in our hearts.

The underlying idea for believers is that we're supposed to take every thought captive and be lead through the Holy Spirit making every effort to become more Christ-like in action and thought.

[Man of Steel]

No, he's saying it ISN'T, but don't read his reply because it'll just confuse you further.

If you two are are bailing on the thread, can you at least address the OP's OQ before you split? How is it possible, logically, that the two aren't in direct conflict?

Well, I never really engaged in the thread.  Just haven't had the opportunity to recently.  There's been a few topics on board in recent weeks and I simply haven't had time to get involved.

What I'm not going to do is the same back and forth dialogue I've done on the same topics with the same folks repeatedly for years.

If those same folks truly want to discuss further they can PM me about it, but the reality is that the core of my answers probably won't be changing. 

[Agnostic007]

Well, I never really engaged in the thread.  Just haven't had the opportunity to recently.  There's been a few topics on board in recent weeks and I simply haven't had time to get involved.

What I'm not going to do is the same back and forth dialogue I've done on the same topics with the same folks repeatedly for years.

If those same folks truly want to discuss further they can PM me about it, but the reality is that the core of my answers probably won't be changing.  

Which is very common among religious people in general. Even when their answers clearly contradict themselves and are problematic, they will stick with their belief regardless. Not pointing the finger at you specifically but in general. You could literally stack up books around a Christian with information and evidence that would show the miracle claims in the bible were fiction, completely wall them in with the stacks of scientific, historical and archeological evidence, and they would say "What evidence?"  While Christians laugh at the Mormons and the Scientologist for their silly belief system, the Christians are just as silly in theirs, yet of course, it all makes sense to them, in my opinion      

[Man of Steel]

Which is very common among religious people in general. Even when their answers clearly contradict themselves and are problematic, they will stick with their belief regardless. Not pointing the finger at you specifically but in general. You could literally stack up books around a Christian with information and evidence that would show the miracle claims in the bible were fiction, completely wall them in with the stacks of scientific, historical and archeological evidence, and they would say "What evidence?"  While Christians laugh at the Mormons and the Scientologist for their silly belief system, the Christians are just as silly in theirs, yet of course, it all makes sense to them, in my opinion      

Yeah, for almost every biblical view I hold to I most likely own a book (or two or three) that affirm it.   I can also find (and own) a book (or two or three) that call the claim bogus.  If you've ever worked with sales folks they're a prime example of this.  Hold up two commission reports for their work for a given month.....whichever one has the higher commission amount is the correct report and they'll only seek out sources of information that will confirm that.

It's the ole "my scholar can beat up your scholar" stuff.   People love to study the scholarly material they already know aligns with their opinions, but very rarely do they study the material that contradicts their beliefs.....that's often of no interest.  That's why the unbelieving public flocks to Dr. Bart Ehrman's books, but ignore Dr. Dan Wallace's or Dr. James White's books that contradict Ehrman.

They leave the understanding of the contradictory material to brief google searches of websites ("Ralph's Atheism Website") that have lists of summarized contradictions and brief responses that are copied and pasted all over....I call these "surface objections" because the understanding by the nonbeliever is typically surface only.   Yet the same folks deep dive head first into the material that they love and that aligns with their presuppositions and worldviews.

But of course, almost everyone that stands opposed to the bible has read it "cover to cover multiple times".      

[Man of Steel]

Or is He omniscient?

Can't be both, as they're mutually exclusive.

I wouldn’t say God has “free will” per se.  That would imply a forced categorization that aligns with lesser beings or that his will has been granted to him or could be extracted from him.   God is uncategorized and simply has will…it’s is unique, non-contingent and of itself.   It’s his divine nature (of God or being God) that contains his quality of righteousness.  He self-restricts engaging in certain activities that violate aspects of his divine nature (ex: engaging in evil). 

Now, God does have some limitations based upon his divine nature?  Sure. God can’t be anything other than himself….he can’t not be divine in nature.   God can’t not exist.  God can’t create another being that is equal to or greater than himself.   God is incapable of not knowing all things past, present and future.  God also can’t create beings who are given free will and that will only choose him.  

God’s omniscience is total and complete knowledge subset by foreknowledge which is knowledge of all things to come.

[Agnostic007]

I wouldn’t say God has “free will” per se.  That would imply a forced categorization that aligns with lesser beings or that his will has been granted to him or could be extracted from him.   God is uncategorized and simply has will…it’s is unique, non-contingent and of itself.   It’s his divine nature (of God or being God) that contains his quality of righteousness.  He self-restricts engaging in certain activities that violate aspects of his divine nature (ex: engaging in evil). 

Now, God does have some limitations based upon his divine nature?  Sure. God can’t be anything other than himself….he can’t not be divine in nature.   God can’t not exist.  God can’t create another being that is equal to or greater than himself.   God is incapable of not knowing all things past, present and future.  God also can’t create beings who are given free will and that will only choose him.  

God’s omniscience is total and complete knowledge subset by foreknowledge which is knowledge of all things to come.

define "divine in nature" for me

Your laundry list of things god can and cant do is entertaining to say the least

[Man of Steel]

define "divine in nature" for me

Your laundry list of things god can and cant do is entertaining to say the least

As is stated above "of God or being God".

Glad you are entertained.

[Primemuscle]

I do understand thanks for the clarification.

To answer briefly, lusting after your spouse (or having a strong desire for sex with your spouse) is not adultery.

To be direct, I have a strong desire for sex with my wife right now    and though I'm think about it from time to time I'm not committing adultery in doing so.....she's my wife.
 

Perhaps Tbombz has read the bible so many times now that he's speaking in riddles much in the way the bible is written. I wish him the best, but I also wish he'd give up preaching to us folks. It is often laughable and annoying at the same time.

[Man of Steel]

Perhaps Tbombz has read the bible so many times now that he's speaking in riddles much in the way the bible is written. I wish him the best, but I also wish he'd give up preaching to us folks. It is often laughable and annoying at the same time.

I would guess he just neglected to qualify that piece because he assumed it was a given.....to be honest I wouldn't have qualified it either.   

[Agnostic007]

As is stated above "of God or being God".

Glad you are entertained.

"It’s his divine nature (of God or being God) that contains his quality of righteousness."

Can you explain this sentence to me? What do you mean?

[Agnostic007]

I would guess he just neglected to qualify that piece because he assumed it was a given.....to be honest I wouldn't have qualified it either.   

Nor would I as it is impossible to commit adultery with your own wife... so lusting after her would not be adultery as well. However, Jesus set the bar so high in his rant that he assures humans will perish in hell ...unless........ they believe in him and give their life to the god that created them. Pretty swell set up