Evidence for God from Science

August wrote:Once again, you give no alternative for either a standard or mechanism by which people should be saved or not. What is your solution? If you are considering worshiping a God, what do want that God to be like? I am genuinely curious as to what you think about this.

I have no issue with the Standard being sin specifically, I have an issue with the standard, whatever it is being unattainable through any means. Don't you think scripture like John 3:16 loses much of it's value when "whoever believes in him" becomes "whoever is destined" to believe in him? If the entire world wanted to be good through God, yet some of them were not picked for reasons outside their control, and spend an eternity condemned, where is the love and righteousness?

August wrote:We obviously have very different views of what humans are, as can be expected from your belief system. God did not generate the world to have sin, but once it happened He had to deal with it. The standard can not be anything, that is the reason that God revealed His standard for us. That we fall short of the standard and is corrupted is not His fault, but that of humanity itself. We have to deal with the facts...there is sin, people are lost, some are saved, others are not. Why do you think it is like that?

If not the fault of God for sin who else could take the blame? If I create 10 cars and sell them, and they do not start, is it the car's fault or my own? I am using things like paintings, cars, etc. for a reason, they have no free will, they have no real decision making and they have no choice. Unless you want to say we do have choice? If not then I do not see where the problem with any of my analogies comes in.

As to my view on free will, what Jlay said seems to fit with what I am talking about. My choices are what have been set before me. I can choose to reject or accept God. I was under the impression Jesus died for all of mankind, so that anyone could be forgiven, of their own volition. The gift of salvation seems meaningless to me without free will. I take Jeremiah 29:13 very seriously in my search, yet you are telling me God might not even let me seek him, I simply might not be "destined" through no fault of my own.

August wrote:I know what WLC says about knowledge in his Molinist approach, if that is what the video is about. I respectfully disagree with him.

Can i just ask if you have watched the small video, August?

Aside from simply how free will fits in with God's sovereignty (though thats a good debate to continue), how would one retailiate against the notion that free will is an illusion? How do people have free will if Determinism is true (that is, if you believe in free will at all)? Perhaps because Mind-Body Dualism is true and we have a non-physical soul that is not subject to cause-and-effect like everything else? If so, why do so many brain functions seem to have a physical cause that can be altered by medications?

Also, how would you combat the idea that free will just plain doesn't make sense (another arguement I've heard many times)? Many philosophers argue that the concept of free will doesn't make sense because if you stop and analyze a time when you make a descion, there really is no point where you actually decide anything, you're just reacting to the situation and/or your own motivations and act as anyone would if they had your same mindset and personality.

For me, the best evidence in favor of free will is creativity. The creation of something completely new is either the result of an previously unspecified set of circumstances, in which case there needs to be an infinite number of possible circumstances, or it is simply something that is willed into existence. Both of those are incompatible with hard determinism. The determinist may argue that creativity is an illusion too, as it is a mere reflection and interpretation of what we observe. That is a narrow view, in my opinion, as we would not see fiction or fantasy or abstract art if that was true.

The third option is that we tap into the infinite wisdom of God, and reflect His thoughts when we are being creative.

I never thought of that. I like that answer a lot!

CeT-To wrote:

August wrote:I know what WLC says about knowledge in his Molinist approach, if that is what the video is about. I respectfully disagree with him.

Can i just ask if you have watched the small video, August?

Yes, I did. And I disagree.

August wrote:

CeT-To wrote:

August wrote:I know what WLC says about knowledge in his Molinist approach, if that is what the video is about. I respectfully disagree with him.

Can i just ask if you have watched the small video, August?

Yes, I did. And I disagree.

Oh okay lol just checking because the comment you gave it looked like you just shrugged it off but i was wrong.

CeT-To wrote:

August wrote:

CeT-To wrote:

August wrote:I know what WLC says about knowledge in his Molinist approach, if that is what the video is about. I respectfully disagree with him.

Can i just ask if you have watched the small video, August?

Yes, I did. And I disagree.

Oh okay lol just checking because the comment you gave it looked like you just shrugged it off but i was wrong.

No worries, it has been a long-standing disagreement anyway, and the video was more of what he had said in the past. It's a pity, because he has done some very good work in other areas.

We are actually beginning a Sunday School series on the very subject. We need to establish some sort of definition for "free will", because not everyone agrees on just what free will is free from. The will of man is free in the sense that it is not controlled by external coercion. I freely chose what to eat for breakfast, what to wear today, etc. No one put a gun to my head and told me what to eat and wear (and even if they did, I still have the free choice to obey, or to take a bullet.)

But when many talk of free will, they go a step further and dream of a will that is free, not only from external coercion, but also our internal natures. In that sense, our will is not free. In fact, human nature is in bondage (Paul says that we are "slaves to sin".) I would go as far to say that, while all men are "free to choose" Christ, they do not have the ability to do so because it is against their natures (being at emnity with God). As such, Christ must set us free, and then we are free indeed.

Can't one make the arguement that people are highly influenced by their internal natures, but not necessarily a slave to them? When people resist temptation, they are fighting against their internal nature's influence to sin. Sometimes people succeed and overcome it, including atheists who shouldn't have the influence of the Holy Spirit in their lives. Couldn't that be evidence for total free will, where people may have the ability to choose against their internal impulses?

If we follow that line of thinking to it's logical conclusion, then we would not need Christ, nor need to be born again. We could just use our free will to fight against temptation, live a perfect life, and go to heaven. No matter how you slice it, if our natures merely influence us, then this would be possible, however difficult. Once we acknowledge that this is impossible, then we refute any type of libertarian free will.

But then how do non-Christians overcome addictions and temptations?

Even if people have complete free will over their internal natures, I strongly doubt it is possible to live a perfect life. I believe Jesus and transformation by the Holy Spirit are required for salvation, but I don't really think that people are absolutely powerless in all instances without them, just imperfect.

They overcome addictions and temptations because they have free will. But they cannot overcome the sinful nature, not can they choose Christ without being born of the Spirit.

They aren't powerless in dealing with individual sins (which is why they are responsible for them), But they are powerless to obtain salvation without the new birth. Free will is no remedy for the sinful nature. It is the cause.

I know that what I am about to type is going to sound blasphemous.... But this is just my view on this subject... I Love Jesus Christ and the Godhead as much as I can try..

Ok, how does a God of PERFECT LOVE (This is a powerful Love, it is an all-knowing Love, it is even a Love that spans throughout the cosmos of all that is seen and being seen....) This is the God that we worship, the God of the Bible, and in our Bible, there comes along 2 passages that throw a wrench into the workings of this All Powerful Love... The Predestination Passages.....

Now reason out, how A God that Loves his creation, that are made in his Likeness and Image, get NO CHANCE in THEIR SALVATION......... God LOVES ALL OF US EQUALLY, Yet somehow, this Love decides that some (I would say most) of his created never even got a freaking chance, and that they went to Hell (thrown there personally by God Himself) When he willed it before all things were even made, he knew who died in their sin, he knew that they would spit in his sons face, that they would Blaspheme the Spirit, yet so did the saints, when they sinned, the ones who found Christ.. ALL OF IT WAS PLANNED AHEAD OF TIME..

That's the stupidest crap I have ever heard, The same God of Love, "LOVING" his creation enough to die for them, I would think, wouldn't turn around and say "you just didn't make the cut, I knew you were gonna turn your back on me there, I gave you 6,700 different options to choose me, but I made sure you didn't, now you get to burn... FOREVER, P.S. I LOVE YOU" Does that make ANY SENSE?

That's the stupidest crap I have ever heard, The same God of Love, "LOVING" his creation enough to die for them, I would think, wouldn't turn around and say "you just didn't make the cut, I knew you were gonna turn your back on me there, I gave you 6,700 different options to choose me, but I made sure you didn't, now you get to burn... FOREVER, P.S. I LOVE YOU" Does that make ANY SENSE?

. It makes sense if one believes in the unbiblical predestination claims that some calvinists make.