God Has No Free Will?

Sleeppy · May 25, 2018

blü 2 said:
That's more theological retrofit. None of that is in the text ─ no surprise, since it uses ideas that didn't exist when the Garden story was written down, around 1000 BCE.

That was for the other readers here. You're not willing to admit wrong.

The text makes the implication, and fairly certain, in the surrounding context. No other interpretation satisfies the text.

Before their eating:

1) They were not dying. Genesis 2:17

If they were dying beforehand, the warning is of no effect. Dying is specifically given as a consequence of their specified eating, in the text.

2) They were not decaying, i.e. returning to the dust. Genesis 3:19

Again, if they were dying, or decaying beforehand, returning to the dust is not a consequence, as is given in the text.

3) They are removed from the tree of life, so as not to reverse the intended consequence, according to the text.

You yourself are injecting an incompatible supposition: they would completely die that day, but did not, according to the text. So, you have to make another supposition as well: the author is not only short-sighted, but incapable of correcting his prior writings.

If they were going to die at some point that day, removing them from the tree of life beforehand, should have guaranteed the author's intent.

There's literally nothing in the text substantiating your idea- which is actually thousands of years removed, from the text. No supporting context; nothing.

Continue on your way.

blü 2 · May 25, 2018

stvdv said:
I'm of the "Reality" !

Then you'll know what I mean about Bronze Age ethics.

blü 2 · May 25, 2018

Sleeppy said:
No other interpretation satisfies the text.

You keep ignoring the plain words of Genesis 3:27.

Sleeppy said:
3) They are removed from the tree of life, so as not to reverse the intended consequence, according to the text.

Really? The 'intended consequence' is clearly stated: in the day that you eat of it you will die. And that didn't happen, just as the snake said, or in your terms 'was reversed'. Now quote me the text that says 'so as not to reverse the intended consequence'.

Sleeppy said:
You yourself are injecting an incompatible supposition: they would completely die that day, but did not, according to the text.

Nothing incompatible about that. God said, 'You will die the same day' and the snake said, correctly, 'You will not die the same day'. One of them had to be wrong, and it was God. The story is perfectly clear.

Sleeppy said:
If they were going to die at some point that day, removing them from the tree of life beforehand, should have guaranteed the author's intent.

That might be a neat ploy, but they didn't get to the tree, AND they didn't die. Nor is that the reason God gave. God said, 'lest he put forth his hand, and eat, and live forever'.

Sleeppy said:
There's literally nothing in the text substantiating your idea.

So refer me to the verses in Genesis containing the words:
"sin"
"original sin"
"Fall of man"
"disobedience"
"Adam is immortal"
"death will enter (or, now enters) the world"
"spiritual death"

And tell me why Ezekiel is wrong in emphasizing that sin can't be inherited.

Sleeppy · May 25, 2018

blü 2 said:
You keep ignoring the plain words of Genesis 3:27.
Really? The 'intended consequence' is clearly stated: in the day that you eat of it you will die. And that didn't happen, just as the snake said, or in your terms 'was reversed'. Now quote me the text that says 'so as not to reverse the intended consequence'.
Nothing incompatible about that. God said, 'You will die the same day' and the snake said, correctly, 'You will not die the same day'. One of them had to be wrong, and it was God. The story is perfectly clear.
That might be a neat ploy, but they didn't get to the tree, AND they didn't die. Nor is that the reason God gave. God said, 'lest he put forth his hand, and eat, and live forever'.
So refer me to the verses in Genesis containing the words:
"sin"
"original sin"
"Fall of man"
"disobedience"
"Adam is immortal"
"death will enter (or, now enters) the world"
"spiritual death"

And tell me why Ezekiel is wrong in emphasizing that sin can't be inherited.

1) There is no Genesis 3:27.

2) It specifically says, "dying, you do die." You conveniently keep omitting that qualifier.

3) Genesis 3:22
And now, lest he send forth his hand, and have taken also of the tree of life, and eaten, and lived to the age.

Living would be a reversal of the intended consequence, i.e. dying.

4) Never used any of those words or phrases. Ezekiel would be theological retrofit, according to you. But, if you actually read Ezekiel 18 it says there in verses 2-3, that the idea was prevalent before him. Ezekiel is attempting to discredit it.

paarsurrey · May 25, 2018

Nakosis said:
Can Allah choose what pleases him?

If Allah chooses according to what he finds pleasing, that really not that much different from how man goes about choosing. The difference being unlimited power.

We'd all like to go about making choices for our pleasure, except we don't always have the power to make it happen.

Yes, G-d could do anything good and positive that pleases Him:
Quran 6:18
"And if Allah touches thee with affliction, there is none that can remove it but He; and if He touches thee with happiness, then He has power to do all that He wills."
https://www.alislam.org/quran/6:18

Regards

Nakosis · May 25, 2018

paarsurrey said:
Yes, G-d could do anything good and positive that pleases Him:
Quran 6:18
"And if Allah touches thee with affliction, there is none that can remove it but He; and if He touches thee with happiness, then He has power to do all that He wills."
https://www.alislam.org/quran/6:18

Regards

So, can you choose to be happy. Can you decide for yourself to be happy? Or do you believe it is only Allah who can make you happy?

Does Allah ever leave folks to their own machinations, or is he always in complete control of your life?

paarsurrey · May 25, 2018

Nakosis said:
So, can you choose to be happy. Can you decide for yourself to be happy? Or do you believe it is only Allah who can make you happy?

Does Allah ever leave folks to their own machinations, or is he always in complete control of your life?

G-d has set natural and spiritual rules and system for the humans, if I don't follow them and some harm comes to me, I am responsible for that harm not my G-d.
Does it help, please?
Regards

blü 2 · May 25, 2018

Sleeppy said:
1) There is no Genesis 3:27.

My error for 3:22. Apologies.

Sleeppy said:
2) It specifically says, "dying, you do die." You conveniently keep omitting that qualifier.

Young: 'dying, thou dost die'.

As to what Young means there, try these other translations of the same passage (from 2:17):

American Standard Version: thou shalt surely die.
Christian Standard Bible: you will certainly die.
Contemporary English Version: you will die
Darby Trans: thou shalt certainly die.
Doluay-Rheims Bible: thou shalt die the death.
English Revised Version: thou shalt surely die.
English Standard Version: you shall surely die.
God's Word Translation: you will certainly die.
Good News Translation: you will die
Hebrew Names Version: you will surely die.
Holman Christian Standard Bible: you will certainly die.
International Standard Version: you will certainly die
JPS Tanakh 1917: thou shalt surely die.
Jubilee 2000 Bible: you shall surely die.
KJV: thou shalt surely die.
NET Bible: you will surely die.
New American Standard Bible: you will surely die.
New English Trans: you will surely die.
New Heart English Bible: you will surely die.
New International Version: you will certainly die.
New KJV: you shall surely die.
New Living Trans: you are sure to die.
Revised Standard Version: you shall die.
Vulgate: morte morieris [by death you will die]
Webster's Bible: thou shalt surely die.
World English Bible: you will surely die.

Not one of them supports you. But they do make clear what Young meant, so Young doesn't mean what you want him to mean either.

Sleeppy said:
Never used any of those words or phrases.

Good when we can agree.

Sleeppy said:
Ezekiel would be theological retrofit, according to you.

Nothing to retrofit. Ezekiel is simply clarifying the obvious, stating what simple justice requires. Or is it your view that if someone is convicted of murder, their family should, by that fact alone, also be jailed or executed?

Sleeppy said:
But, if you actually read Ezekiel 18 it says there in verses 2-3, that the idea was prevalent before him. Ezekiel is attempting to discredit it.

He doesn't say such ideas were present in the Tanakh. Nor were they.

stvdv · May 25, 2018

blü 2 said:
Then you'll know what I mean about Bronze Age ethics.

Advaita Reality

blü 2 · May 25, 2018

stvdv said:
Advaita Reality

You seriously think Hindu philosophy was studied in the Egypt - Canaan zone in the second millennium BCE? Evidence, please.

stvdv · May 25, 2018

blü 2 said:
You seriously think Hindu philosophy was studied in the Egypt - Canaan zone in the second millennium BCE? Evidence, please.

God Realization is not location bound. Some call it Advaita. But in the Bible is clearly stated something like "I Am Who I Am" somewhere in exodus I think. And that is Advaita teaching also. This goes far beyond mind and intellect. Others give Koans to reach this state. Because it's beyond mind it will be found anywhere where people serious search for God or Truth.

Sleeppy · May 25, 2018

blü 2 said:
My error for 3:22. Apologies.
Young: 'dying, thou dost die'.

As to what Young means there, try these other translations of the same passage (from 2:17):

American Standard Version: thou shalt surely die.
Christian Standard Bible: you will certainly die.
Contemporary English Version: you will die
Darby Trans: thou shalt certainly die.
Doluay-Rheims Bible: thou shalt die the death.
English Revised Version: thou shalt surely die.
English Standard Version: you shall surely die.
God's Word Translation: you will certainly die.
Good News Translation: you will die
Hebrew Names Version: you will surely die.
Holman Christian Standard Bible: you will certainly die.
International Standard Version: you will certainly die
JPS Tanakh 1917: thou shalt surely die.
Jubilee 2000 Bible: you shall surely die.
KJV: thou shalt surely die.
NET Bible: you will surely die.
New American Standard Bible: you will surely die.
New English Trans: you will surely die.
New Heart English Bible: you will surely die.
New International Version: you will certainly die.
New KJV: you shall surely die.
New Living Trans: you are sure to die.
Revised Standard Version: you shall die.
Vulgate: morte morieris [by death you will die]
Webster's Bible: thou shalt surely die.
World English Bible: you will surely die.

Not one of them supports you. But they do make clear what Young meant, so Young doesn't mean what you want him to mean either.
Good when we can agree.
Nothing to retrofit. Ezekiel is simply clarifying the obvious, stating what simple justice requires. Or is it your view that if someone is convicted of murder, their family should, by that fact alone, also be jailed or executed?
He doesn't say such ideas were present in the Tanakh. Nor were they.

1) The other translations are not accurate word for word, which is why the Literal Translation is used. The link I provided to you, gives a list of several authoritative Torah scholars who interpreted similarly.

2) Exodus 20:5, Exodus 34:7, Deuteronomy 5:9, Numbers 14:18.

Setting aside your elementary understanding of it- it is a fact of life. Alcoholism for example is genetic. Another example is what happens in war; Israel kills a lot of civilians, many of them women and children. Another example is education; if you teach your children the wrong thing, it is no fault of their own, but they will repeat your mistakes and inherit similar consequence. If you are poor, your children most likely will inherit the effects of that. You need to open your eyes to reality.

paarsurrey · May 25, 2018

blü 2 said:
You seriously think Hindu philosophy was studied in the Egypt - Canaan zone in the second millennium BCE? Evidence, please.

A relevant question.
Regards

Truthseeker · May 25, 2018

God has the free will to choose between justice and mercy.

Thief · May 25, 2018

blü 2 said:
when you prays to this God, [he] has no more idea than you do how it's going to end?

I suspect we humans are very predictable
our future as a species is likely to be sure...maybe in some sharp details

but knowing in advance the outcome of your life
and what will stand from the dust
is like reading the last chapter of a biography
before the baby is born

spoils the whole event

paarsurrey · May 25, 2018

Truthseeker9 said:
God has the free will to choose between justice and mercy.

Justice and mercy could exist together, there is no contradiction in them.
Regards

blü 2 · May 25, 2018

stvdv said:
God Realization is not location bound. Some call it Advaita. But in the Bible is clearly stated something like "I Am Who I Am" somewhere in exodus I think. And that is Advaita teaching also. This goes far beyond mind and intellect. Others give Koans to reach this state. Because it's beyond mind it will be found anywhere where people serious search for God or Truth.

I have no argument with people seriously in search of truth.

But the truth is that the Bronze Age was primitive, barbaric and violent in many if not most aspects of its outlook. If you've considered Joshua, and Troy, and read the morality and the theologies of the Torah and the Iliad, you'll have a fair idea where I'm coming from.

dfnj · May 25, 2018

Nakosis said:
It's generally assumed that a God would have free will, but is it actually necessary?

I suppose it goes along with the assumption of God being omnipotent. However these are assumptions by various religious ideologies. Are the assumptions necessary?

It is known by four strong arguments that God cannot have free will, as other features and properties of God contradict the possibly of god being able to make choices.

An Omniscient (all-knowing) Being Does Not Have Free Will

A Perfect God Has No Free Will

A Moral God Has No Free Will

God Exists Outside of Time: Where There is No Free Will

How Can the Creator of Free Will Have Free Will?

Conclusion: God is Amoral, and, God is Impossible

http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/god_has_no_free_will.html

The idea of free-will only makes sense in the context of choice. God does not make choices. If you accept the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Then God's purpose is the realization of every possible quantum state as expressed in each Universe in the multi-verse. God does not make choices. God is the realization of every possible choice.

stvdv · May 25, 2018

blü 2 said:
I have no argument with people seriously in search of truth.

But the truth is that the Bronze Age was primitive, barbaric and violent in many if not most aspects of its outlook. If you've considered Joshua, and Troy, and read the morality and the theologies of the Torah and the Iliad, you'll have a fair idea where I'm coming from.

I agree that this age was primitive, barbaric and violent. 3300-1200 BCE. Even in 2018 I see humans who still seem mentally to be in this age. Not as many of course. In the same way I don't think it is impossible there were a few in the Bronze Age that were mentally in a Gold Age. Or do you say that Buddha [500 BCE] never existed and never became enlightened?

Even the Middle Ages were barbaric in Europe. But there were in India quite a few Saints. I believe these Saints have been always around. Or do you dismiss all these stories as fables. But even then how do these fables come into existence if never there were such a Saint. In the mind of a sick person who is barbaric it's very unlikely that such high teachings arise. They must come from somewhere and someone with a pure mind.

The time of Jesus was also quite barbaric. The fishermen were not the Saints. But being around a Saint can make you a Saint. Takes a while that's why the scriptures advice to stay with Saints. That's a major key for transformation. Some can do it on their own, but as you mention "Bronze Age being violent" that is very unlikely to happen. Don't go to a inn to expect spiritual teachings.

So I believe that Saints have been there always. So Advaita has been there always. Now with Google definitely more people have access. And still how many people decide to stay in Bronze Age primitive lifestyle? So I agree there are few. Like said in the Bible "the way is very narrow, very few will reach". This I am sure is even today.

D.Trump with IQ 159 or something chooses even not to go there. So you don't need IQ to become enlightened

blü 2 · May 25, 2018

Sleeppy said:
You need to open your eyes to reality.

Thanks for the tip (as Arnie said).

It's such good advice that I freely give it to you in return.

God Has No Free Will?

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.

Veteran Member

Non-Binary Physicalist

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV

Veteran Member

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.

Veteran Member

Non-debating member when I can help myself

Rogue Theologian

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV

Veteran Member