The Evangelical Universalist Forum

The Christian life is impossible

Revelation 14: 3 says, “And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.” I spent some time traveling in Adventist circles, where you’re very likely to hear that God doesn’t want robots, which at face value sounds very reasonable. But this statement assumes an either/or dichotomy, much like free will vs determinism. But likely that new song has little to say about our usual categories. Nietzsche thought of Christianity as a slave religion, and the modern mind hates that sort of thing. But to be an entirely obedient slave to the most beautiful, loving master imaginable, actually beyond imagining; what would a word like cooperation mean when you can’t imagine wanting to do anything else, when you can no more imagine doing else than you can stop breathing, when you can actually remember what it was like not only imagining it, but acting it out. I’ll bet that new song is really a very different sort of thing entirely. Since God will be all in all, why lay claim to our having even a will to cooperation? Why make such a thing doctrinal? Why stop just so short of giving all glory to Him?

Possessing a free will is simply having the ability to choose. Do you have the ability to choose? Or are all of your choices predetermined?
It IS an either/or proposition. If you possess the ability to choose, you can either choose to have porridge for breakfast tomorrow, or you can choose not to. There is no “in-between.” Or if you do not possess the ability to choose, whatever you do has been predetermined by prior causes.

Either you possess the ability to choose—or you don’t.

God has free will (the ability to choose) and He created man in his image. Thus, man also has the ability to choose. God never forces his will upon man.

Yet the vast majority of mankind do NOT come to repentance during their lifetime. If God forces His will on people, why have many centuries passed and most people have never repented and submitted to Him? Is it not because He is patient toward us (same verse) and is awaiting our decision to repent?

What do you think is meant by the passage I previously quoted?

How can we “work together with Him” unless we coöperate with Him in fulfilling His will? It is crystal clear that He doesn’t FORCE people to do His will, or Jesus wouldn’t have instructed His disciples to pray, “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven!” If that will were already being done on earth, that prayer would be unnecessary. God is not the cause of all the atrocities that continue, day after day, on earth. Yet He usually does nothing to prevent them. What possible answer is there to “the problem of evil” except to recognize that God respects man’s free will, id est, his ability to choose.

Well, I can see that you employ a certain kind of logic, but I don’t think it works. It’s written that we’re created in God’s image, but you are assuming that this entails our having free will. I’m not sure what we might do with the Biblical potter and clay analogies. I agree that we either possess free will or not, assuming this dichotomy is an accurate formulation, which I’m willing to do. And I know, from my own experience and likely very limited understanding of all things, that I usually seem to have a power of choice. I’m just very doubtful this is else but an illusion, or delusion based on not understanding enough, not seeing enough, not being quite omniscient enough. But I understand that the idea of not having free will is abhorrent to and rejected by many people. I actually hope I don’t have a free will, because if it were left to my resources and ability to cooperate, I think my salvation would be in very serious jeopardy.

Don - I have no quibble with the vast majority of what you are saying - you expressed it well. And as for the POE, yes I am with you on that too.

I do get a little antsy when folks move from - ‘we all have a will’ to ‘we all have Free will’ to 'we all have Libertarian Free Will". I get antsy because I feel like a point is being made, but not necessarily the point about free will; that is, the free-will argument is being made to perform as an underpinning for a doctrinal or moral issue. And I’m never really certain what that larger issue is, or what important ideas hang from that larger issue.

Except, of course, for the Problem of Evil. I do think the FWD is key to answering that problem; a necessary key but perhaps, for a lot of folks, not sufficient.

So you rather be a robot or a puppet?

Even animals have the ability to choose. Yet they don’t have libertarian free will. Everything they do is determined by their (A) environment (which includes demons & angels, etc) & (B) their heredity and © their nature, whether that of a cat, dog, or monkey, etc.

So to answer your questions:

  1. Yes

  2. Probably yes.

We certainly have a will–it is not free in any meaningful sense though, until Christ makes us free. Yes, we make choices (the pie or the cake–the treadmill or the television, etc.), but we have neither the strength nor the understanding to consistently make optimal choices. If we know, we do not always (or sometimes even ever) choose what is best. If we do not know the sweet from the bitter (as is often the case), we may choose something we think is good only to find it is really evil. Until Christ makes us free, we are subject to the dictates of the flesh (our natural human nature). Paul says this better than me of course–in Romans 6.

Re Q1 & Q2. It is probably because He didn’t choose them - yet - for salvation.

John 15:16a You did not choose me, but I chose you…

John 6:29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”

Re Q3. It probably is talking about the elect. Just as this article states:

reformationtheology.com/2005 … _by_pa.php

Perhaps those verses would be classified by Martin Zender as relative & absolute viewpoints, as per the following article:

pilkingtonandsons.com/art_ze … solute.pdf

We work with Him because He works in us to will and to do of His good pleasure (cf Phil.2:13).

Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (Jn.1:13)

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: (Eph.2:8)

To quote a commentary re 2 Cor.6:1:

“We then, as workers together with him: ministers of the gospel are fellow workers together with Christ; though but as instruments, serving him as the principal Agent, and efficient Cause: he trod the wine press of his Father’s wrath alone, and had no partner in the purchase of man’s salvation; but in the application of the purchased salvation, he admits of fellow workers. Though the internal work be his alone, and the effects of his Spirit upon the souls of those whose hearts are changed” biblehub.com/commentaries/2_corinthians/6-1.htm

As for the atrocities on earth, that are like a single drop of water in a universe full of oceans relative to endless heaven, there is no difference between the One Who causes them (directly or indirectly) & the One Who allows them. For a man’s sins of commission are equally evil with sins of omission. Although, of course, God never sins.

If LFW were true, then could beings suffer many ages in hell before finally choosing via LFW to be saved, as Origen believed? If determinism is true, OTOH, God can spare them billions of years of sufferings. If you were God, which would you choose?

If LFW were so important, then will God allow those in heaven to rebel as the angels who followed Lucifer in heaven did?

BTW, I’d recommend the series of 8 audio tapes (#'s 240-247) on “Human Choice & the Deity of God” by UR Determinist James Coram:

concordant.org/free-media-library/audio/

Ultimately, if grace is forced upon us…or choices are forced upon us (by our environment and/or heredity)…then we can take no responsibility, for what we are. I watched the TV show Animal Kingdom. Where a ruthless, criminal mother - raises sons to be criminals. Perhaps the boys had little choice, in growing to up lie, steal, kill, etc. And in the end, all are redeemed. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Kingdom_(TV_series)

Do we say the 17 year old is NOT responsible - for adopting the criminal behavioral elements, of his adopted family and new criminal head gangster mother? Well, do we?

A universal determinism wants us to “look at the big picture”. Eventually, justice will be served - in the world to come. Well, all Christian theological traditions (i.e. ETC, universalism, annihilation, etc.), would agree with that: Eventually, justice will be served - in the world to come. They just have different ways, of addressing it. Although we could argue differently, in the case of “ultra-universalism”.

And in all my views of Quantum mechanics discussions on Quota…Nobody seems to think, that determinism rules - in the world of Quantum mechanics. And if that world, makes up the building blocks of our world. Then how can our world be deterministic…but the world of quantum mechanics is NOT? See, for example:

physics.stackexchange.com/questions/110983/why-was-quantum-mechanics-regarded-as-a-non-deterministic-theory
philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/1210/in-which-way-does-quantum-mechanics-disprove-determinism
quora.com/Is-Quantum-theory-deterministic-or-non-deterministic

And can a hard core, theological determinism…argue successfully, against a materialistic scientist, who also believes free will is an illusion. But it’s an illusion, produced by brain chemistry? See these Scientific American articles:

scientificamerican.com/article/is-free-will-an-illusion/
blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/what-neuroscience-says-about-free-will/

But if hard core determinism is the case, then why shouldn’t I use my Nerd talents…to make a lot of money, on the Dark Web? Therefore, I can have my cake and eat it too…both in the here and now, and the world to come. And if you ask me if I have even visited the dark web - here’s my standard CIA answer:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m00wo0UFpS1qi6jbho1_r2_250.gif

But if the health and prosperity gospel, has ANY element of truth to it (regardless, of how the POPULAR evangelists spin it)… I can have my cake and eat it too…both in the here and now, and the world to come…And still have freedom of choice thrown in.

And even if freedom of choice is an “illusion”, people like to live - by that illusion.

And in the end, the Christian life is impossible without grace. But we need to cooperate with that grace - throughout our lives. And this is reflected in the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic theologians. And if I understand Paidion here correctly - it’s found in his theology.

The LFW position does seem to conflict with the theological position that God knows the future.
The problem is put nicely by an article at the Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy:
quote
Fatalism is the thesis that human acts occur by necessity and hence are unfree. Theological fatalism is the thesis that infallible foreknowledge of a human act makes the act necessary and hence unfree. If there is a being who knows the entire future infallibly, then no human act is free.

Fatalism seems to be entailed by infallible foreknowledge…

For any future act you will perform, if some being infallibly believed in the past that the act would occur, there is nothing you can do now about the fact that he believed what he believed since nobody has any control over past events; nor can you make him mistaken in his belief, given that he is infallible. Therefore, there is nothing you can do now about the fact that he believed in a way that cannot be mistaken that you would do what you will do. But if so, you cannot do otherwise than what he believed you would do. And if you cannot do otherwise, you will not perform the act freely.

The same argument can be applied to any infallibly foreknown act of any human being. If there is a being who infallibly knows everything that will happen in the future, no human being has any control over the future.

This theological fatalist argument creates a dilemma because many people have thought it important to maintain both (1) there is a deity who infallibly knows the entire future, and (2) human beings have free will in the strong sense usually called libertarian. But the theological fatalist argument seems to show that (1) and (2) are incompatible; the only way consistently to accept (2) is to deny (1). Those philosophers who think there is a way to consistently maintain both (1) and (2) are called compatibilists about infallible foreknowledge and human free will. Compatibilists must either identify a false premise in the argument for theological fatalism or show that the conclusion does not follow from the premises. Incompatibilists accept the incompatibility of infallible foreknowledge and human free will and deny either infallible foreknowledge or free will in the sense targeted by the argument.
-end of quote-

One “potential” solution is to introduce open theism. :smiley: See:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_theism
iep.utm.edu/o-theism/
gotquestions.org/open-theism.html

It should be noted that Calvinist site Got Questions, will have problems with it - as their “commentary” reflects there-in. And a Calvinist like Matt Slick, with have a different answer - to your stated problem:

carm.org/if-god-all-knowing-and-he-knows-our-future-then-how-free-will

And suppose all the future is fixed. And I went to the Theosofest (held in September, at the Theosophical Society). And I paid some big sum of money - to 10 readers - to read my future. Well, suppose that all these readers - have some reading ability. Then all ten should see, the same big event coming (I win the big lottery, I die in a plane crash, etc.). My Protestant mom - now deceased at 92.5 years - had the gift of prophesy. But I believe she is seeing “the most likely possibility”. Like what you see in Quantum mechanics. And NOT fixed events. And open theism brings up possibilities - NOT certainties.

Let me see if I can paraphrase Paidion’s viewpoint. He believes in open theism and universalism. But a person will be given - an infinite amount of purification time - to make the right choice (being with God).

And you can even bridge open theism and the prosperity gospel, as this author has done:

nolongerbechildren.com/2011/05/30/the-link-between-open-theism-and-the-prosperity-gospel/

Perhaps we need to seek out - some “academic experts” :question:

When you place a slice of bread and a piece of meat in front of a dog, he eats the meat first. Did he “choose” to eat the meat? Or did he eat it because of his nature as a carnivore? I am not convinced that mammals in general make choices, although I am undecided about some types of apes, but am decided about homo sapiens.

Unless I misunderstand you, your concept of “libertarian free will” is that if anyone has it, he can actually accomplish anything he chooses to do. If that is your understanding then I reject the concept also. It is clearly false. You may choose to beat up a man who has insulted you, and yet not be able to do it. No matter how much a little boy chooses to flap his arms in order to fly, he cannot fly by that means.

However my understanding of “libertarian free will” is as follows:

The determinist and the compatibilist don’t agree. They believe that if X has has performed action A at time T, he couldn’t have done otherwise due to prior causes.

Robot and puppet are very loaded terms. I don’t want to be anybody’s puppet, unless that somebody is God, in which case I don’t think the word “puppet” applies, though you might think differently. Why should I have qualms about being conformed by Him to the image of Christ, with or without my having a choice in the matter? In fact, if I had the choice, I would much rather choose not having one. How is having a choice in this of any benefit? I suspect that when God’s work of redemption is entirely finished, and I am completely conformed to the image of His Son, I’ll nonetheless remember what it was like to believe that I had a will of my own, the terrible burden of it, the terrible disaster of it, and be overwhelmingly grateful for having been cured of that delusion.

No, i see the idea of Libertarian Free Will (LFW) as an inner decision that is independent from a person’s actions. A completely physically paralyzed person would be an example of that.

Horan, I believe as is said, “Where there is a will, there is a way.” The benefit is, we are not stuck in the circumstances that life doles out to us. I have seen many people who have lost their will, and to me, it is a sad thing.

No responsibility for our failures. No credit for our successes or salvation, which rules out boasting, judging others or “brother of the prodigal son syndrome”, which is much like “I have an issue with Hitler being saved” syndrome.

Men would not be responsible, but accountable for themselves at the judgement which is for the purpose of correction.

Supposedly for the same reasons a LFW advocate wouldn’t, e.g. the law, the wrath of God, “hell”, lake of fire, torment into the ages of the ages.

In the OP Benny Hinn speaks of two things: [1] the Christian life demands you taking up the cross & follow Christ. He quotes the OT Scripture “all that i have and all that i am is yours” & applies that as the prayer of the whole heart to Christ. [2] the 2nd half of the sermon regards how impossible it is, in the flesh (in & of ourselves) to please God.

I’ve listened to hundreds of hours of “prosperity gospel” teachers. They very seldom mentioned afterlife hell & when they did it was 2 minutes or less. Over ninety-nine percent of the time the good news they proclaim is salvation from hell in this life. Salvation from darkness, demons, destruction & destitution. Deliverance from sin, sickness & sorrow. In some ways they are very much like universalists who think the only hell is in this lifetime. Such universalists might feel quite comfortable following such teachers.

Some do, some don’t.

Due to no credit of my own, which is no wise a false humility, I’ve been blessed to have perceived that the promise of Jesus Christ is very real, that I can take it to the bank, set my watch by it, though we know neither the day nor the hour. While I live in a world that’s vastly filled with deception, His word is better than gold. So I’m not going to argue against the power of positive thinking with regard to improving the circumstances of life, when the Lord has made it abundantly clear that all I need do is bear this life, such as it is, with loving patience, waiting on the fulfillment of His promise. It hardly matters, except to my comfort perhaps, whether I’m stuck in a circumstance or not. The Lord has said that I can reasonably expect to be persecuted, and that this is actually an enviable circumstance to be in. I know there are those who have lost their will to live. Such is our manner of speaking about it. I would put it that these have invested all their hope in their life in this world, and been bitterly disappointed. They have been deceived. We are cautioned not to do this, to not layup our treasure, our life, our hope where it can be so easily corrupted, but who listens to this? Who is worse off, or better off, one who has lost all hope in this life, or one who experiences little else but plenty and success and believes in it wholeheartedly? This latter has also been deceived. I would say it’s the one who has the promise of Jesus Christ, regardless of their circumstance, because the life of this world is short. Perhaps he who is hopeless is walking closer to the hope that’s genuine.