What is TRUE "Free Will"?

[Jashwell]

All FREE means is uncoerced...

IF GOD set it up so HIS new creation had no coercion or constraints upon their choices, forcing them to choose anything, they had free will.

Then we don't have freedom in regards to love, belief, emotion, any more than we have choice in our tastes.

The Elements of a True Free Will Choice:

1. Free will can't be coerced:
Nothing in their created nature could FORCE them to choose love or hate, good or evil, including all genetics...(therefore it can't happen on earth).

Wouldn't the very existence of alternate consequences of choosing good/evil, e.g. heaven and hell, even if they weren't intended to do so, coerce believers?

Nothing in their understanding or knowledge of reality could FORCE them to choose good or evil, love or hate.

Can you choose an option without knowing it exists?
Isn't that being forced to make another choice?

In other words, they had to be completely and truly ingenuously innocent.
[Ref: definition of ingenuous: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ingenuousness as: 1. Lacking in cunning, guile, worldliness; artless. 2. Openly straightforward or frank; candid.

I don't think this entirely covers aforementioned features of 'free'.

2. Consequences must be known but not proved:
The person must understand the full consequences of their choice or it is a guess, not a true choice. What will happen if I choose left or right, the red pill or the blue pill? must be answered in full detail.

But "PROOF" of the nature of the consequence would compel or coerce the person to choose what was proven to be the best for them. If the answer death here, life there, was proven, which would you choose? The weight of knowledge would destroy the free of the "free" will choice.

If it were proven you would die if you went left, are you truly free to choose to go right? No, you are forced by your knowledge to go right. Therefore they must know, but without proof, the nature of the consequences of their choice.

Peace, Ted

So if there's any reason or thought put into a decision, it isn't free?


//

It's not all that nebulous...free will is the ability to choose between available options. It does not mean 'free to do anything one can imagine and a few things one cannot, without consequences."

Like a computer algorithm can?

As in...one is quite free to choose which side of the fence to walk on, when looking at a fenced off cliff. However, if one chooses to walk on the cliff side of the fence, then one is also choosing to do without the protection of that fence, and therefore choosing the possible consequence of falling off.

Scenario:
A person phones their parents.
The line is tapped and connected to a nuclear launch system, which launches and detonates a nuclear device a short distance above their house.
If they thought about it, they would know this was a possibility. Did they choose this outcome?

How can you choose mutually exclusive outcomes that you are aware are possible?

One may not be able to flap one's arms fast enough to fly...but one is certainly able to try.

Women who choose to have sex are also choosing the possible consequences of that action, positive or negative.

If one is tied to a post, blindfolded and awaiting the firing squad, one STILL has free will: eyes open or shut, what one says...what one thinks. There is always a choice between one action, or thought, and another. That is 'free will.'

Previous problem with this, other than that, this definition is so good it practically doesn't solve the problem of evil or prevent a deterministic universe from having it.

As to whether one must have 'all the information' before one can make a choice...bushwah. If the choices are available, and one can actually, physically make that choice, then it's free will. The consequences of that choice may be so horrendous that making it would be a psychological breaker, but...

For instance, if someone had your children at home strapped to a bomb, and you were told that if you didn't rob a bank, that the bomb would be set off, nobody would blame you for robbing the bank. You might be arrested, but never tried and certainly never convicted; however, you could still refuse to rob the bank. In that case most everybody would consider that choice to be the evil one...but it is one you could make.

In fact, I would say that having consequences attached to choices is proof that we have free will; if we didn't, would it matter what our choices would cause?

With regards to my ethical basis, I'm an ethical intentionalist. I don't think the consequences are what makes us responsible for the action in any regard, but the intent to choose to increase the chance of a greater overall positive outcome. (regards would have to be given for a subject's own personal evaluations, e.g. they may not consider it a choice if their family is held hostage or a gun is pointed at them)
Basically:
higher probability of better results = good
lower probability of worse results = good
lower probability of better results = bad
higher probability of worse results = bad

(The way I would arguably 'prove' an ethical basis is to find the thing that most matches scenario results for what we consider right/wrong, e.g. if you purely accidentally commit homicide, is that worse ethically than attempting and failing to murder?)

Does it matter what our choices cause?
Yes, but not because we chose them.

[ttruscott]

...

The Elements of a True Free Will Choice:

1. Free will can't be coerced:
Nothing in their created nature could FORCE them to choose love or hate, good or evil, including all genetics...(therefore it can't happen on earth).

Wouldn't the very existence of alternate consequences of choosing good/evil, e.g. heaven and hell, even if they weren't intended to do so, coerce believers?

No sir, not if it was presented correctly as without any immediate danger. I contend that knowing about a possible danger is an influence to be considered in our deliberations of what to choose but that GOD in all fairness ensured that such things would have no coercive effect upon us.

I will agree that the warnings about the natural consequences of rejecting HIM did weight the considerations strongly in HIS favour and set that bar very high for those inclined to rebel...in other words, they must have really hated the idea of a GOD above them or HIS version of a heaven by holiness by choice or something extreme to be willing to go against such warnings.

In other words, HE did all HE could to encourage people to decide for HIM without crossing the line and forcing belief.

Nothing in their understanding or knowledge of reality could FORCE them to choose good or evil, love or hate.

Can you choose an option without knowing it exists?
Isn't that being forced to make another choice?

Any option of importance to the question of our eternal relationship with YHWH as becoming members of HIS church or as HIS eternal enemy was known and considered by every person created in HIS image at length. GOD made no decision about anybody until their heart was settled and firm on their chosen position...no mistakes of ignorance were made.

And yes, more than one choice was made in our self creation of our eternal relationship with HIM.

In other words, they had to be completely and truly ingenuously innocent.
[Ref: definition of ingenuous: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ingenuousness as: 1. Lacking in cunning, guile, worldliness; artless. 2. Openly straightforward or frank; candid.

I don't think this entirely covers aforementioned features of 'free'.

All ways open for suggestions about a stronger definition but this bit does not define free so much as it defines the person who is free as not influenced by any previous or created moral decision or character trait.

2. Consequences must be known but not proved:
The person must understand the full consequences of their choice or it is a guess, not a true choice. What will happen if I choose left or right, the red pill or the blue pill? must be answered in full detail.

But "PROOF" of the nature of the consequence would compel or coerce the person to choose what was proven to be the best for them. If the answer death here, life there, was proven, which would you choose? The weight of knowledge would destroy the free of the "free" will choice.

If it were proven you would die if you went left, are you truly free to choose to go right? No, you are forced by your knowledge to go right. Therefore they must know, but without proof, the nature of the consequences of their choice.

Peace, Ted

So if there's any reason or thought put into a decision, it isn't free?

You interpret no proof as we were without thought, without reason? I'm rendered speechless.

Since I obviously disagree with dianaiad, I'll leave the rest to her.

Peace, Ted

[Jashwell]

No sir, not if it was presented correctly as without any immediate danger. I contend that knowing about a possible danger is an influence to be considered in our deliberations of what to choose but that GOD in all fairness ensured that such things would have no coercive effect upon us.

I will agree that the warnings about the natural consequences of rejecting HIM did weight the considerations strongly in HIS favour and set that bar very high for those inclined to rebel...in other words, they must have really hated the idea of a GOD above them or HIS version of a heaven by holiness by choice or something extreme to be willing to go against such warnings.

In other words, HE did all HE could to encourage people to decide for HIM without crossing the line and forcing belief.

No, he's not forcing belief, not that belief is a demonstration of free will. After all, I don't believe in the consequences.

But if you think A or B is a choice where A leads to heaven and B leads to hell, I think you're hard pressed to demonstrate there's no coercion there.

Any option of importance to the question of our eternal relationship with YHWH as becoming members of HIS church or as HIS eternal enemy was known and considered by every person created in HIS image at length. GOD made no decision about anybody until their heart was settled and firm on their chosen position...no mistakes of ignorance were made.

And yes, more than one choice was made in our self creation of our eternal relationship with HIM.

But being certain isn't knowing.

You interpret no proof as we were without thought, without reason? I'm rendered speechless.

I accept logical proof, necessary premises and likely some other things as reason.
Logical proof requires premises.
Logical conclusions about reality require premises about reality.
Which require REAL proof.

[ttruscott]

[Replying to post 4 by ttruscott]

Agreed. True free will must be informed or it is not a true choice but a guess. All info must be shared, especially regarding the natural consequences of making the choice, unless the choice has no consequences.

First, thank you for your response to the Question. Nice to debate these topics and at least TRY to see things from another perspective.

Now, nice to see you agree that True Free Will MUST be Informed, otherwise it is just a guess.

What is your proof it did not happen? Earthly life?

I look at the need for true free will and recognize it is not available on earth but rather than claim either or both GOD or free will must therefore be a fantasy, I looked for a time where we might of had our true free will and found it quite easily in a pre-earth existence in the spirit world (sheol) before the creation of the physical universe.

In a telepathic society of pure spirits, all ingenuously innocent, it would be easy, as you say, for GOD to provide us all with all of the necessary info to make a true choice (not a guess) about whether HE was GOD or not. OF course, you missed the fact that if HE gave proof of HIS divinity, our choice would be coerced by that proof and no one would ever choose against HIM...who would try to elevate themselves above or against the proven GOD?

So above you agree that we NEED All the Information to have True Free Will. But here you say that if we had all the Information, it somehow would not be True Free Will anymore, because it would now be "Coerced"!?? Which is it then?

Information does not coerce, proof coerces:
IF you are in a room with two doors out and I claim one door leads to a tiger and the other door is the path out, do You have a choice? No I call this a pure guess as the info is to meagre to make a true choice, though technically it is a choice of sorts. IF I tell you the left door has the tiger and the right door the path out, do you have a choice? Yes, you have all the info you need to be safe except you must trust me. To be safe you must put your faith in my instructions and with no proof, exit by the right door. [One could call this being saved by faith...]

Oh, and what if I let you peek through each door and show you the tiger on the left and the path out on the right...do you have a choice? I claim you do not since you are coerced by your new knowledge, the proof of the tiger, to go to the right.

If heaven is only available to those who choose it by a true free will decision then to be coerced into choosing heaven by proof of hell cannot be made available.

This is how I see proof as outside of necessary knowledge and detrimental to a true free will choice.

You also say "recognize it is not available on earth". With that statement, the rest of your post is irrelevant, as you agree that if there is some "god", he does NOT give us True Free Will.

I'll recap in short because the post after my post 4 is about these things in detail...about post 6 I think.

I reject the coercion of our genetics, our family and cultural mores and our human based instincts as destructive to our true free will decision AND I accept the doctrine that all are sinners every one and sin has an enslaving addictive quality that none can choose true 'good' which also denies our free will being available on earth.

Here you have put forth the confusion between evidence and proof. GOD gives us evidence but withholds the proof of HIS divinity. Why? Because GOD wanted us to choose without proof because we hoped all HE said was true.

This is where religious people seem to think that if he showed up, that would somehow make it impossible to have True Free Will and would eliminate Faith. I say that is False.

BUT there is an obvious difference between having the choices for your faith (ie, choose YHWH as your GOD or reject HIM as your GOD) proven before the choice and being coerced by that proof to choose a particular way AND having your faith CONFIRMED BY PROOF after the choice!

Proof of HIS divinity was withheld before we chose because it would impinge upon our choice because who would actually ever choose to reject the Living GOD, EL SHADDAI as their GOD!!???

But after our choice, when our faith is set, then proof solidifies it, so to speak. We chose to accept HIM as our Lord and Saviour by faith and then He proves this truth, can we ever change our mind? Of course not, we are locked in our faith by the truth with much gladness because our faith that HE existed unproven and was a rewarder of us who sought HIM was vindicated.

And those who put their faith in that which was not YHWH, themselves or some false god...when they experience the proof of HIS divinity and believe, their new knowledge damns them as it destroys their ability to enter heaven by their true free will choice of faith. Proof of HIS divinity is to them proof of their damnation.

I go so far as to say that Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: means that every created person whether elect or reprobate saw the proof of their choice to put their faith in YHWH or elsewhere BY HIS creating the physical universe before our very eyes and every knee did bow and every voice did sing HIS praise, elect and damned together, Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy!

The rest of Romans 1 tells about how this proof / knowledge twisted them psychologically. The reason the judgment did not happen before the creation of the earth or with the proof of HIS divinity offered by the creation of the earth, is another long story.

But we did have all knowledge, we just don't remember. We did have all knowledge at the time of our choice but do not remember.

Come on now. I mean, really?
But, I'll go along. Even IF we had all this information, what good does ANYTHING do if we don't remember it!?? It is Useless! What you seem to be saying with this is, everything is already pre-destined.....so why blame us!??

Having or not having a memory of all this does nothing at all. What matters is that the lives of the sinful elect are predestined to end with their being brought to holy righteousness, able to enter fully into the heavenly experience. It is all by grace and not by memory induced good works.

Why blame us? All our suffering is for OUR chosen sin (not GOD's creating us as sinners)...all our sins were self chosen by true free will before we became enslaved by sin and by our humanness by being born on earth. The predestination of our lives does NOT refer to our becoming sinners liable to damnation or not, but only to the fulfillment of HIS promise to HIS elect to save them from all their sins and to make them holy, fit for heaven.

Peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

...

In other words, HE did all HE could to encourage people to decide for HIM without crossing the line and forcing belief.

No, he's not forcing belief, not that belief is a demonstration of free will. After all, I don't believe in the consequences.

But if you think A or B is a choice where A leads to heaven and B leads to hell, I think you're hard pressed to demonstrate there's no coercion there.

Perhaps you might look at post 15 for my tiger analogy...

Any option of importance to the question of our eternal relationship with YHWH as becoming members of HIS church or as HIS eternal enemy was known and considered by every person created in HIS image at length. GOD made no decision about anybody until their heart was settled and firm on their chosen position...no mistakes of ignorance were made.

And yes, more than one choice was made in our self creation of our eternal relationship with HIM.

But being certain isn't knowing.

No, but being certain is an aspect of faith which GOD wants from us.

You interpret no proof as we were without thought, without reason? I'm rendered speechless.

I accept logical proof, necessary premises and likely some other things as reason.
Logical proof requires premises.
Logical conclusions about reality require premises about reality.
Which require REAL proof.

So if I think a thought that is logically meaningless or wrong, I'm not thinking? Riight. Good luck with that,

Peace, Ted

[The Me's]

[Replying to post 1 by Master Spade]

Free will includes every action and inaction that you take.

You have the mental capacity to will yourself into lethargy or goad yourself into action even in the worst of circumstances.

[Jashwell]

Any option of importance to the question of our eternal relationship with YHWH as becoming members of HIS church or as HIS eternal enemy was known and considered by every person created in HIS image at length. GOD made no decision about anybody until their heart was settled and firm on their chosen position...no mistakes of ignorance were made.

And yes, more than one choice was made in our self creation of our eternal relationship with HIM.

But being certain isn't knowing.

No, but being certain is an aspect of faith which GOD wants from us.

Isn't it unethical to damn someone eternally for not worshipping that which they do not believe exists?
Isn't it unreasonable to be certain on poor evidence?

You interpret no proof as we were without thought, without reason? I'm rendered speechless.

I accept logical proof, necessary premises and likely some other things as reason.
Logical proof requires premises.
Logical conclusions about reality require premises about reality.
Which require REAL proof.

So if I think a thought that is logically meaningless or wrong, I'm not thinking? Riight. Good luck with that,

Peace, Ted

No.
Just that thought isn't proof.

[agnosticatheist]

[Replying to post 15 by ttruscott]

Ted,

I have few questions and comments.

1. During our PCE, when we made our free will decision, were we given proof of God's existence?

2. During our PCE, when we made our free will decision, why did each soul make the decision they did? Was it because of the nature of their soul? Was it just chance?

If we replayed the scenario of their decision over many times, would every soul choose the same choice every time, or would there be at least one soul who would choose a different choice at least one time out of those many times?

If it's the former, then our decision making is ultimately determined by the circumstances that led up to that decision being made, and we no have true free will. In this case, God is basically a monster because he created the circumstances which led up to each soul's decision being made, and thus determined their eternal fate.

If it's the latter, then the mechanism by which we make decisions is subject to chance. In this case, perhaps God isn't as big of a monster, but then I would question the moral character of a God who leaves the eternal fate of people's souls up to chance.

3. "who would actually ever choose to reject the Living GOD, EL SHADDAI as their GOD!!??? " Apparently, Satan and one third of the angels in Heaven chose to do just that.

[acehighinfinity]

[Replying to post 18 by Jashwell]

Isn't it unethical to damn someone eternally for not worshipping that which they do not believe exists?
Isn't it unreasonable to be certain on poor evidence?

No it wouldn't be! Is it unethical to break the laws of the land and considerate FREE WILL or an act of CHOICE? Is there a reason why some who break the laws e.g. murder/kill someone are then punished for it? Or do you think rationally and say we have NO FREE WILL? Like monkey see monkey do! The LAWS are there for a reason and the same as written in GOD's word.

I like what TTRUSCOTT have covered about FAITH and "FREE means without coercion". One has to understand GOD is a gentlemen and does not force himself to everyone(sorry to say).

Romans 9:19-21 "One of you will say to me: Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will? 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, Why did you make me like this?[h] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?"