The capability to sin

[Willum]

Are there any other applications of freewill other then to sin?
Without freewill, we would be living God’s will.

Making freewill a very dubious gift indeed.

So, in God granting freewill, was there any other opportunity or benefit to it, other then the capability and eventuality of sin?

If you could choose to live in God’s will, without freewill, would you?

[bjs1]

Are there any other applications of freewill other then to sin?

Doing good.

A person who has never had free will cannot sin, but that person also cannot do anything good. He is, morally speaking, a robot. His Creator can do good or evil, but he can do neither.

[William]

Are there any other applications of freewill other then to sin?

Yes. Not to sin.

Without freewill, we would be living God’s will.

Yes. Either way, all exist because of this.

Making freewill a very dubious gift indeed.

What free will accomplishes is not necessarily dubious.

So, in God granting freewill, was there any other opportunity or benefit to it, other then the capability and eventuality of sin?

Yes. Creativity.

If you could choose to live in God’s will, without freewill, would you?

Yes. Especially if coming from a place of having experienced free will.

[Replying to William in post #17]

I can’t answer these comments within scope of the site.
But that seems fair as your didn’t post comments that allowed discussion or debate.

If my answers to the OPQ's don't allow for discussion or debate - therein, the truth is revealed. My answers [re 'comments'] are non-debatable because no one is able to debate against them. Therefore, my answers must be true enough, for that to occur.

Or..?

[Goat]

[Replying to Goat in post #14]

I’m satisfied that it’s true. I can think of no contrary evidence, and I have no interest in making your objection for you.
You would need to come up with a reason there isn’t freewill.
I can’t think of any,

Now, unless you can contribute to the topic, use your freewill, to comment elsewhere.

I am sure you are confident there is free will. However, I can not see any means of showing that there is free will, or not free will. It all comes down to emotional response, and metaphysical arguments. Since there is no way to show that there is free will or no free will, I find the concept irrelevant, and any argument that depends on it to be based on claim that can not be proven. The various definitions of what is free will depends on axioms that can not be shown to be true, but based on pure emotion.

You might be satisfied, but what you CAN'T do is provide a way to show it's either true or false. I can not find a value to arguments are are dependent on axioms that are not testable, nor can the predicted results be confirmed.

[Willum]

[Replying to Goat in post #23]

That’s completely on you.
However, since there are conflicting viewpoints on minutia and irrelevant things, even on tangents to topics, I have four things demonstrating freewill, to your, “I don’t know,” and “what if.”
Your “ I don’t know,“ and “what if,” are meaningless conjecture.
Your opinion is dismissed for want of evidence, freewill holds true by inspection, and evidence.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #3]

Not even close.
There is a topic, perhaps you'd like to review it, then answer again?

I'm aware and no I see no need to review. The point was to clarify what freewill in practical/philosophical terms is before we even get onto the theology, which I get. The point is whether God is letting us operate our own plans freely or whether it's all part of God's plan and we really don't have free will. It is of course a pointless speculation because God's plan could incorporate genuine human free will in any case and on the other hand, free will, whether real or an illusion, would be whatever it was, even if there was no God and no Plan.

If there is something I am missing about the topic, feel free to explain it to me. I'm sure that others would appreciate your more subtle reading of the topic.

[Willum]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #21]

Brilliant.
Except even the purest will do evil. Therefore, no matter how much good you do, you still sin, making freewill a horror, not blessing.

So your reasoning is unsound.
Sorry.

[otseng]

Thank you for the useless reply.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid uncivil comments.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[TRANSPONDER]

Are there any other applications of freewill other then to sin?

Doing good.

A person who has never had free will cannot sin, but that person also cannot do anything good. He is, morally speaking, a robot. His Creator can do good or evil, but he can do neither.

Obviously we have a decision -making ability (or at least the appearance of one). The idea is, I suppose to offload the responsibility for Sin (wrongdoing) onto man, and it wasn't God's fault or responsibility for us having the capacity to sin, as he had to give us that or we would be 'Robots' and lacking the ability to really love God, which is why he made in the first place, yes?

Sounds like it's all His fault so far. But I can see a validation that it was all for our good in the end, (end justifies means apologetic) or there is some Good outcome that only God knows or sees (which raises the 'Which Morality'aspect of the problem of Evil - God must have a morality that makes sense to us, too otherwise his morality is Alien). And of course the great Dictator apologetic: we have to say it's all Good and we should Love him or he'll hit us with nukes. You can guess what I say to that one.:

In case there was some idea to say that giving us freewill with the inherent capacity to sin (whether by not doing Good or by not obeying God's wishes) also gives us the ability to do Good hardly redresses the balance. As in the 'Christian student demolishes Atheist Professor' apologetic, there is no Good. It is simply the absence of Evil, just as there is no Evil; it is just the absence of Good.

Which is where we came in, but leads onto the whole debate on what is moral and what is morality. Because one has to know what is good to know whether one has done it. I know we all think we know, but how do we know?

I know - written on our hearts. But what is that and how, just as much as what is freewill and how does it work?

[Goat]

[Replying to Goat in post #23]

That’s completely on you.
However, since there are conflicting viewpoints on minutia and irrelevant things, even on tangents to topics, I have four things demonstrating freewill, to your, “I don’t know,” and “what if.”
Your “ I don’t know,“ and “what if,” are meaningless conjecture.
Your opinion is dismissed for want of evidence, freewill holds true by inspection, and evidence.

IT's more than 'I don't know' and 'what if'. It is pointing out that the axioms that are being used to make a conclusion and argument can not be shown to be sound. It's more than 'I don't know' .. it is showing that the answer to the question is unknowable, because the axiom on which all the arguments flow is can not be tested and shown to be true.

[Willum]

Well, in that case your logic is absolutely and definitely incorrect.

You are choosing a mental construct that does not allow you to come to a conclusion.

In logic that is defined as the wrong one.

Logical reasoning means to use the logical tool that allows a conclusion, not one that arrives at an indefinite or unknowable conclusion.

So once again, evidence and observation on my side, admittedly erroneous logic on yours.
My logic comes to a logical answer, yours doesn’t.

Your thread is, as I mentioned before, irrelevant to the topic.

But, by all means continue to insist on your right to not know.

I’ll read all on them with appropriate interest in the future.