Prepared for Battle

[Aurrin]

Perhaps you should also distinguish between 'choice', 'action', and 'effect'.

A choice is a decision reached by your own independent mind. Factors may exist in your mind that would tend you toward one direction or another, but ultimately you and you alone are responsible for your choices.

An action is often the result of a choice. An action is closely linked with a choice, typically seperated only by the neurons that connect your brain to your body, but sometimes may be seperated either physically or in time. For instance, you may choose to go to see a movie, but the action wouldn't occur until it was actually time to go to the theatre. An action is the time-irrevokable result of a finalized choice.

An effect is just that, an effect. Effects can be created by actions, by pseudo-random phenomena, or by divine intervention.

Perhaps you can see where I'm going with this? Just because you choose something does not mean you control the effect. Maybe you do, and maybe you don't. Whether or not the effect actually happens the way you want it typically depends on how well you planned the action and/or whether God wishes for it to happen. Many times he intervenes in the space between action and effect. Sometimes he even intervenes in the space between choice and action, acting as the voice in your mind that gently asks you "Why are you doing this?". But the choice is the starting point, and you are the one responsible for it. This is the core, the essence of free will.

Furthermore, we are linearly-temporal beings. That is, our entire frame of reference, our being is dependant on the passage of time. God is above time, existing in a manner outside it. He doesn't tamper with your choice: that is yours. However, he knows the choice and the outcome. In this way, he will often intervene to the contrary of the desired effect in the space between choice and action or action and effect.

The nature of the intervention may vary, as well. God has shown through repeated example that he prefers to work through the butterfly effect, with subtle disturbances here and there that create His will in the world. Sometimes these chain reactions start years in advance of where they take effect. An example would be that God might cause a raindrop to fall a certain way. This raindrop seeps inside a bag of bread being carried into a car. The bread molds, and so the person who bought it has to go and buy more. Because of this, the person is not in the house when the burglar breaks in. While the burglar made the choice to break in and kill the person, God has prevented the effect from taking place. Yet no one could claim that the burglar did not chose to break in or the free will to kill. The choice was his and his alone. God will often sandbox those who try to work against Him.

Why? Because that is His right and priviledge. Don't lose sight of the fact that our continued existence rest solely upon the fact that He loves us too much to completely wipe us out right now, and not through any merit of our own. We exist only so that we may make the choice to love him, the sole redeeming quality for which he would overlook everything wrong we have done. We are neither guaranteed nor owed anything more than that.

[Narnian]

Without covering everything:

A plan is a set timeline of events from getting to point A to B. By saying there is a plan, there has to be predestined events.

At last we agree - I beleive there is predestination (I am a flaming Calvinist). But I suspect my understanding of predestination is different from yours in than due to man's fallen nature he is still responsible for his actions and is acting consistent with his own nature and will.

You're saying that these persons were imbued with the interest in sciences and thus took a liking to the sword, which means that their whole lives up to this point was solely for that purpose of taking away the sword from Quentyn.

Nope, didn't say that. This is one element is their whole life, not the sole purpose.

Whole life, isn't their sole purpose?

Sorry, typo - s/b This is one element IN their whole life

You're contradicting yourself. If there is a Plan in effect, then in order for Quentyn to be in his current situation, those people have to be there. Quentyn's sword is more or less a hunk of iron that seems to be blasting heavy amounts of lux whenever it's swung, which would mean it isn't locked down for precise motions, and its randomness is due to the over load of previous mages using it to focus their power. It's more or less a chunk of lux uranium casting off all the radiation it has gathered.

But the sword isn't as consistent as uranium. Heisenberg uncertainty principle at work here? Because we can't fully understand something doesn't mean there isn't a cause behind it.

But, that's besides the point, you're continuing to try to have your cake and eat it too.

Can't - low carb diet per doctors orders, high tryglycerides...

You're saying that it is God's Plan that event X happens, and if God's Plan, a Plan devised by something that knows the past, present, and future intimently, is to be followed through, then all of these pawns have to meet at that location.

See earlier argument about human nature and predestination.

I've seen the 'innocence' of youth, and I'm trying to avoid creating more spawnlings altogether. And no, I do not forget the exhile from Eden. If you say that God's Plan was to have the people remain in Eden, then Mankind had actually changed the course of history and thus God could not claim omnipotence. Or, prehaps it was in God's Plan to let Lucifer send his His spies upon the Garden.

Actually is was Gods plan to let Satan tempt Adam and Eve - when man truely had free will.

God can certainly exist with independant thought and reasoning. However I truely doubt that the being takes that much time to organize everything. God isn't dead or unexisting, but rather looking at the effects of what She's created. Like a child admiring a small obsticle course set up infront of a line of ants. The Clockmaker theory seems to be the best course. A little nudge here and there, but the overall events are purely that of the residents.

Read Dr. Leon Lederman's "The God Particle" or Dr. Michio Kaku's "Parallel Worlds" and you'll see that Clockmaker is far too crude of an analogy.

Like I said, you just aren't giving enough credit to the people on the Earth.

They get plenty of credit - great art, music, charity, etc. And great depravity - 100 million dead in the 20th century with WWI, WWII, gulags, concentration camps, communism, killing fields, etc.

Ahh, and you mention the great evils of Men without mentioning the ones God did, such as, The Spanish Flu that wiped out 70 million people during that time. Also AIDS, Ebola Zaire, and shark attacks. You're quick to mention "All things Bright and Beautiful" but not "All Things Dull and Ugly"

Didn't I also mention that man has had great acievements? I would say that the natural evils you mentioned are results of the Fall. However God does permit them to happen, the freedom of nature akin to the freedom of man. Nature itself is corrupted due to man's sin.

Read C.S. Lewis's "The Problem of Pain" for a good summary of how God can allow pain and suffering.

I think our differing worldviews will make it difficult to come to any meeting of the minds. I believe that God man man to have fellowship with - someone to share the universe with and that apart from God that man has no purpose (e.g. Nihilism). To quote the Shorter Catechism: What is the chief end of man? Man's chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy him forever.

[Madmoonie]

I agree with Aurrin and I would like to add something. GOD does not force a person to do something. He asks and you can choose to obey or not. This is your choose. Now what HE asks will the right choice but you are not forced down this path. (The road to destruction is wide and easy, the road to salvation is narrow and steep and so on.) GOD knows what your choice will be, but HE wants you to choose the right choice. Man was not born (in my opinion) sinful. He was born with free will. GOD did not slaves or machines to worship HIM. GOD wanted to man to choose HIM. Unfortunately, given the nature of man, man will ALWAYS BE SINFUL. Jesus was not just a break in the clouds, HE was rather the biggest "interferance" by GOD in man's life. Because man will always sinful, Jesus took man's sinful burdern and died for us. In that way he gave man freedom. Man is no longer ruled by dead law but by a living testiment. Jesus lives within us (if we let him) and HE lets us know what if the right choice. It is never forced upon us though. There is always a choice. GOD through the HOLY SPIRIT gives the guidance and strengh to make the right choice.

(By the way, in casse you haven't noticed...I like writing in caps when refering to GOD or the HOLY SPIRIT.)

[Narnian]

Man was not born (in my opinion) sinful. He was born with free will. GOD did not slaves or machines to worship HIM. GOD wanted to man to choose HIM. Unfortunately, given the nature of man, man will ALWAYS BE SINFUL.

Hello! Welcome! <waves>. Would disagree with you on one statement here - I believe that man is born sinful, hence the doctrine of original sin stating that man cannot choose God - he is born without free will (a slave to his sinful nature) and that is why he is always sinful, even from birth. Man cannot truely be free until God changes his nature back to the way it should be, which then he can naturally choose God.

Most people say when they get to heaven that want to talk to Jesus - I confess I want to go up to Adam first, grab him by the lapels (if he has any) and ask, why? And give him a dope slap.

As for the rest I would say, Amen!

[Narnian]

Perhaps you should also distinguish between 'choice', 'action', and 'effect'.

A very interesting explanation of the warp and woof of reality. Thanks!

[Madmoonie]

Thanks for the welcome. I appreciate it. Perhaps this will clarify how I feel. When I said I do no believe that man is not born sinful, I do not BY ALL MEANS mean that man could live outside of sin. (Caps, again) MAN WILL SIN. This is not a "if", this is a will statement. Sin cannot enter into GOD's presence, therefore HE created a way for mankind to enter Heaven, Jesus's perfect life and death on the cross, which paid our debt. I will diffenately (sp?) agree that man is a slave to sin. We cannot escape it. The reason, I feel, is that sin is the easy way out, the self-gratification (RH deals with this in GH/UTLT). Jesus's sacrifice freed us from the bondage of, well....., ourselves. Give GOD control of our lives, and HE will save us. It must be freely given, not forecably taken.

[Madmoonie]

Oh yeah, about Adam? If he hadn't "taken the bite", so to speak, someone would have. Mankind always wants more, but this is obviously not a good thing.

[Aurrin]

Man was not born (in my opinion) sinful. He was born with free will. GOD did not slaves or machines to worship HIM. GOD wanted to man to choose HIM. Unfortunately, given the nature of man, man will ALWAYS BE SINFUL.

Hello! Welcome! <waves>. Would disagree with you on one statement here - I believe that man is born sinful, hence the doctrine of original sin stating that man cannot choose God - he is born without free will (a slave to his sinful nature) and that is why he is always sinful, even from birth. Man cannot truely be free until God changes his nature back to the way it should be, which then he can naturally choose God.

There I would have to disagree. While man is born sinful, the Bible is clear on that much, I do believe he has free will. What the sinful nature means is that, given free will, he will naturally tend toward sinful choices. Were man an actual slave to sin, he would have an excuse for his actions: "I couldn't help it, I had to do it because I had no choice". While weak, there would be some small amount of truth to it. One thing I've noticed is that God abhors letting there ever be any doubt that he gave people every opportunity.

And you can see the non-exclusivity in action, too. People who hate religion and God altogether still sometimes do good deeds. I believe that that is God's mark on our race as the master designer, a buried instinct to do good that wars with the sinful nature. Most of the time the sinful nature would win out in the natural state, but sometimes that instinct wins out. Either way, it is a choice the person makes, which impulse to obey, and therefore his own responsibility. That goes back to the ultimate responsibility of man for his own actions.

[Madmoonie]

What he said.[/quote]

[SolidusRaccoon]

We are all born into Sin, It's the blood of Jesus that erases that sin.

[Aurrin]

Oh indeed. I don't think that's in debate at all. I think we've simply got a disagreement over what exactly being 'born into sin' means, and where free will plays into it.

[Narnian]

There I would have to disagree. While man is born sinful, the Bible is clear on that much, I do believe he has free will. What the sinful nature means is that, given free will, he will naturally tend toward sinful choices. Were man an actual slave to sin, he would have an excuse for his actions: "I couldn't help it, I had to do it because I had no choice". While weak, there would be some small amount of truth to it. One thing I've noticed is that God abhors letting there ever be any doubt that he gave people every opportunity.

If you have time read Charles Spurgeon's sermon on the falicy of free will called "Free Will, a Slave" - http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0052.htm - one of the greatest preachers of all time.

To quote that great theologin, Bob Dylan:

You may be an ambassador to England or France,
You may like to gamble, you might like to dance,
You may be the heavyweight champion of the world,
You may be a socialite with a long string of pearls

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

Man is dead in his sins - and the dead don't respond. God has to revive us first so we can respond. Regeneration comes before faith.

If it helps this is the Reformed (Calvinist) view. (e.g. Francis Schaeffer, R.C. Sproul, to name a few).

And you can see the non-exclusivity in action, too. People who hate religion and God altogether still sometimes do good deeds. I believe that that is God's mark on our race as the master designer, a buried instinct to do good that wars with the sinful nature. Most of the time the sinful nature would win out in the natural state, but sometimes that instinct wins out. Either way, it is a choice the person makes, which impulse to obey, and therefore his own responsibility. That goes back to the ultimate responsibility of man for his own actions.

I would agree here, that man's nature is not so corrupt as he is inable to do good deeds, but it is so corrupt he cannot turn toward God without God first changing his nature.

Remember you are:

1. Saved by faith
2. Faith is a gift from God
3. Therefore if our decision is part of it then it is not Gods gift

[Aurrin]

I would agree here, that man's nature is not so corrupt as he is inable to do good deeds, but it is so corrupt he cannot turn toward God without God first changing his nature.

That is true. But in the legalistic sense there is a third option. That would be one of living a perfect life without going to God. In the strictest, most hypothetical sense, it is technically possible. So is an isentropic process. Neither happen in practice. However, man does then technically have a choice.

Remember you are:

1. Saved by faith
2. Faith is a gift from God
3. Therefore if our decision is part of it then it is not Gods gift

I'm afraid that's a non-sequiter. You are saved by Faith, yes. Faith is a gift from God, yes. But whether or not you accept a gift is entirely up to you. You can refuse God's gift. That is your choice, your free will. People do that all the time. God offers salvation to them, but they refuse it. You might not choose to go to God, but God doesn't force you in either. Once you've been directed to the doorstep, whether you open the door is up to you.

Once again, if it were not up to you, then people could truthfully claim that God had sentenced them to death without a chance to love Him, and He will never allow that to happen. God will give everyone a chance.

[Gildedtongue]

I'm beginning to notice a pattern in the responces from the Fatalists. Sure, you have free will, but it's meaningless. Either you honestly do not have a choice as the choice is already known in the future, or the effects of your choice have no bearing in life.

Narnian, you mention parenthood earlier on. I wonder if you could look your son or daughter and tell them that the reason they were raped by that man or woman (yes, women can rape men, it's rarely talked about by the victim as they feel usually worse than the reverse pairing, with the social expectaions. and of course men can rape men and women on woman.) But the reason they were violated was because it was God's Plan for them to be so, God wanted it. And that she should now pray to God and give thanks for the experiance.

[Aurrin]

Well, it's important to note that just because someone else knows what happens in the future, that doesn't negate the choice that got it there. It was still a choice. Just because someone else knows the outcome doesn't mean that it couldn't have turned out any other way. The knowledge itself comes from after the fact. Time is funny like that.

If it helps you to visualize what I'm saying, think of it this way: Suppose someone flips a coin. And before it lands, a time traveller comes back from thirty seconds in the future, having seen how the coin lands. His knowledge of what will happen, in and of itself, does not in any way alter the probabilities that the coin will land heads or tails. What he might do is bet on the coin, and he would win. Yet, that would not change the probability of the coin to land either side. (To say that it did would be to say that merely the presence of an observer can change physical law, which is preposterous and extremely egocentric.) Similarly, someone knowing what you eventually decide doesn't negate that it is still for you to decide. That's still at the 'choice' stage.

What it WILL change (potentially) is the EFFECT. Recall from what I defined earlier that the effect is NOT part of free will. You don't always get things to turn out the way you wanted. That doesn't mean you're not responsible for what you do, it simply means that God is already taking action to alter the outcome to His Will. In reality, how is that any different than if he acted after you made the decision? Since we do not know the mind of God, and do not share the priviledged information of the future, there essentially is no difference at all.

Oy. Temporal mechanics can give you such a headache...

[Capnregex]

Greetings,

This whole agency vs predestination discussions is interesting.

These arguments are old, and have been going on for a long time. I find it interesting that very rarely is asking God about it mentioned.

Each of us are capible of making our own decisions. This should be self evident. We can choose to be good, or evil. To become better than we are, or pander to our basest desires. This is our greatest inheretance from God.

Regardless of the overall outcome in the world, our own individual choices effect our own growth as a person. God set up the playingfield, so we could choose, and in so doing, learn, and choose again.

He understood that in such an environment, we would all make mistakes, and would need to get up, be dusted off, bandaged up, and sent on our way again. This is why Christ has such a significant role, since it was his sacrifice that permitted our progresion to continue after we learn to not make the same mistakes, forsake, and repent of our sins.

Even Christ had his free will, "If it be possible, let this cup pass from me".. but God knew Christ well enough that he could trust him to do the job.

If most of us were to play chess against a chess master, we would likely loose. this does not mean that we did not have the ability to choose, but simply that we were out played. If we were to continue to play, we might loose every game, but we would also be learning, and after enough learning, and enough experiance, we may be able to cause a stalemate, or even win the occasional game. At which point we would be ourselves, chess masters.

God's purpose in creating this world, and everything that goes with it, is to help us to become like he is.

Some of us will do things that will effect the entire world, others might only effect themselves, and those close to them.. The choices in our lives are still ours. The learning, or lack thereof is ours. Our choices do matter. The game is ulimately his.

[Narnian]

I'm beginning to notice a pattern in the responces from the Fatalists. Sure, you have free will, but it's meaningless. Either you honestly do not have a choice as the choice is already known in the future, or the effects of your choice have no bearing in life.

I agree with you about fatalism , but the doctrine of predestination is not fatalism. To quote Loraine Boettner:

"According to the doctrine of Predestination the freedom and responsibility of man are fully preserved. In the midst of certainty God has ordained human liberty. But Fatalism allows no power of choice, no self-determination. It makes the acts of man to be as utterly beyond his control as are the laws of nature. Fatalism, with its idea of irresistible, impersonal, abstract power, has no room for moral ideas, while Predestination makes these the rule of action for God and man. Fatalism has no place for and offers no incentives to religion, love, mercy, holiness, justice, or wisdom, while Predestination gives these the strongest conceivable basis. And lastly, Fatalism leads to skepticism and despair, while Predestination sets forth the glories of God and of His kingdom in all their splendor and gives an assurance which nothing can shake."

Narnian, you mention parenthood earlier on. I wonder if you could look your son or daughter and tell them that the reason they were raped by that man or woman (yes, women can rape men, it's rarely talked about by the victim as they feel usually worse than the reverse pairing, with the social expectaions. and of course men can rape men and women on woman.) But the reason they were violated was because it was God's Plan for them to be so, God wanted it. And that she should now pray to God and give thanks for the experiance.

I can say that God's plan permitted it and God did not want it at the same time. The rapist would be wholy responsible for their actions. And I would be more than willing to throttle them. If God stopped every bad thing then it would be a form of fatalism since we could no longer act according to our natures.

[Aurrin]

[quote]According to the doctrine of Predestination the freedom and responsibility of man are fully preserved.[/qoute]

Would you mind explaining how God can simply consign you to hell before you've done anything and still have that be freedom?

[StrangeWulf13]

I did not mean to try and downplay Christ's influence on the world. It was more meant as an analogy as to how God has pretty much gone silent in the last couple millenia. You can pray all you want, but He doesn't really talk back nowadays. Closest you can get is reading the Bible, which kinda implies He believes He's said all that needs to be said. =P And He said quite a lot.

As to this whole "predestination" thing... bull$#!7 in my opinion.

To eliminate free will is to make life meaningless. If I cannot freely choose my path in life, if it's instead directed by another, what point is there? This is why communism is so degrading and demoralizing; you have no purpose or goals save what you're given. And heaven help you if you get "selfish" in a communist society. People like that end up meeting their maker a bit early.

This, of course, seems to conflict with prophecy. If God has already laid out how things are going to happen, how can we possibly have free will?

I submit that although the history of the world and its major events, as they relate to God's will and His priorities, are already set in stone before Adam drew first breath, our own individual futures are not. You may live to see the end times. You may not. That is up to your choices. But make no mistake, the end times will come, and in such a manner that the only disbelievers will be those who side with Satan or delude themselves into insanity.

Most of history is like that oobleck stuff we made as kids at my house. Add starch to water and you get this funny stuff that runs when you hold it in your hand... but squeeze it hard enough and it becomes quite solid.

History is like this in that most parts of it are fluid and always changing. They are not set, and can be altered. But, history can only be altered so much, and there will come a time when pushing it this way or that only results in delaying the event, or causing a similar one to take place. You can change how your life turns out, but you cannot keep God from suddenly snatching people off the earth at His whim.

Am I right? Perhaps not. But as far as I can tell, from my own observations and reasoning, this is how it is. You can take it however you like.

Now pardon me while I go find a less serious thread. =P

[Narnian]

That is true. But in the legalistic sense there is a third option. That would be one of living a perfect life without going to God. In the strictest, most hypothetical sense, it is technically possible. So is an isentropic process. Neither happen in practice. However, man does then technically have a choice.

I believe that a perfect life isn't good enough - that is the falacy of looking at the law as a possible salvation mechanism. The Bible doesn't offer that option - it says Jesus is the only way. The reason for the law was to reflect God's character and show us our sinfulness so we turn to Him, not try to do better. Doing better (sanctification) will follow if we go to God (and keep going to him.)

As for the rest we should probably take it offline to keep everyone else from having their eyes glazing over. And my break is over ...