Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Volition and Free Will Are Not The Same Thing

sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 5:46:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.
-

To have a will, is to have "volitional capabilities."
Or in other words, the ability to make decisions and choices.
-

"Volition" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. an act of making a choice or decision; also : a choice or decision made

2. the power of choosing or determining : will


-

Now, volition is certainly related to "Free Will", but Free Will is a little more specific.

"Free Will" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. the ability to choose how to act

2. the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God


Full Definition of FREE WILL

1. voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>

2. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention


-
Now,
Generally, when "Free Will" is discussed in relation to God and religion, Free Will is defined as the following:

"the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God"
OR:
"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention"

-

And the general argument put forth by those who deny "Free Will", usually goes something like this:

Human beings have volitional capablilities, and thus are morally responsible, but they are limited by mainly two factors:

Their choices are determined by their nature (i.e. natural abilities and natural predisposition toward sin).
And:
Their choices are limited by divine intervention and God's sovereign predestination.


This argument does not deny that human beings have volition,
it denies that their choices are unconstrained by other factors.

And so, it is important to understand the terms, as they are being used, when discussing matters of religion.

Conclusion:

"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.

And the terms should not be conflated when discussing religion.
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 7:59:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 5:46:35 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.
-

To have a will, is to have "volitional capabilities."
Or in other words, the ability to make decisions and choices.
-

"Volition" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. an act of making a choice or decision; also : a choice or decision made

2. the power of choosing or determining : will


-

Now, volition is certainly related to "Free Will", but Free Will is a little more specific.

"Free Will" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. the ability to choose how to act

2. the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God


Full Definition of FREE WILL

1. voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>

2. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention


-
Now,
Generally, when "Free Will" is discussed in relation to God and religion, Free Will is defined as the following:

"the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God"
OR:
"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention"

-

And the general argument put forth by those who deny "Free Will", usually goes something like this:

Human beings have volitional capablilities, and thus are morally responsible, but they are limited by mainly two factors:

Their choices are determined by their nature (i.e. natural abilities and natural predisposition toward sin).

Who is responsible for this nature?

And:
Their choices are limited by divine intervention and God's sovereign predestination.


This argument does not deny that human beings have volition,
it denies that their choices are unconstrained by other factors.

And so, it is important to understand the terms, as they are being used, when discussing matters of religion.

Conclusion:

"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.

And the terms should not be conflated when discussing religion.
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 8:48:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 7:59:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 5:46:35 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.
-

To have a will, is to have "volitional capabilities."
Or in other words, the ability to make decisions and choices.
-

"Volition" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. an act of making a choice or decision; also : a choice or decision made

2. the power of choosing or determining : will


-

Now, volition is certainly related to "Free Will", but Free Will is a little more specific.

"Free Will" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. the ability to choose how to act

2. the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God


Full Definition of FREE WILL

1. voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>

2. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention


-
Now,
Generally, when "Free Will" is discussed in relation to God and religion, Free Will is defined as the following:

"the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God"
OR:
"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention"

-

And the general argument put forth by those who deny "Free Will", usually goes something like this:

Human beings have volitional capablilities, and thus are morally responsible, but they are limited by mainly two factors:

Their choices are determined by their nature (i.e. natural abilities and natural predisposition toward sin).

Who is responsible for this nature?

Man is.

Not God.

God created the first man, Adam, without sin and without flaws.
He was in perfect health--mentally, physically, and spiritually.

Then God commanded Adam not to eat from a certain tree, and said "In the day that you eat of that tree, you shall surely die."

Adam ate from it and he died.
He died spiritually, and the process of physical death entered in at that point.

And every mental and physical faculty became corrupt and diseased, and he passed all of this on to his descendants.

Now, because of Adam's transgression and the consequences of that fall, all of us are born sinners, by nature.

Our very nature is sin, and all that we think and do, from the moment we are born, is sin.

And because God created Adam upright, without sin and without flaws, it is Adam, who is to blame for the fall, not God.

And furthermore, we sin in our own bodies, and our own minds. So WE are to blame for our own sins.

God is not the author of our sin, nor does he condone it, or excuse it, in any way, shape or form.

God demonstrates his absolute hatred for sin in condemning every one that transgresses his law.

He will either punish you for all of your sin at the judgment, or he has already punished you in Christ, as your substitute.

But either way, God will punish every last sinner for their sin.
He hates sin, and can not be accused of unrighteousness.

If you dare to accuse God of unrighteousness in any sense, you are deserving of eternity in Hell.

God will justly condemn you for daring, as a sinner, to point your finger of judgment at him.

The Lord says:

"Woe to him who strives with his Maker!
Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth!
Shall the clay say to him who forms it, "What are you making?"
Or shall your handiwork say, "He has no hands"?

Woe to him who says to his father, "What are you begetting?"
Or to the woman, "What have you brought forth?"
(Isaiah 45:9-10)

You'd better think twice about suggesting that your Creator is a sinner.
And you'd better seek his mercy in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Christ said:
37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.
38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.
40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day
."
(John 6:37-40)
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 9:34:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 8:48:53 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 7:59:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 5:46:35 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.
-

To have a will, is to have "volitional capabilities."
Or in other words, the ability to make decisions and choices.
-

"Volition" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. an act of making a choice or decision; also : a choice or decision made

2. the power of choosing or determining : will


-

Now, volition is certainly related to "Free Will", but Free Will is a little more specific.

"Free Will" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. the ability to choose how to act

2. the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God


Full Definition of FREE WILL

1. voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>

2. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention


-
Now,
Generally, when "Free Will" is discussed in relation to God and religion, Free Will is defined as the following:

"the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God"
OR:
"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention"

-

And the general argument put forth by those who deny "Free Will", usually goes something like this:

Human beings have volitional capablilities, and thus are morally responsible, but they are limited by mainly two factors:

Their choices are determined by their nature (i.e. natural abilities and natural predisposition toward sin).

Who is responsible for this nature?

Man is.


Ok, let's see how you argue that a being is responsible for it's own nature, when a nature is prior to any volition and therefore any responsibility.

Not God.

God created the first man, Adam, without sin and without flaws.
He was in perfect health--mentally, physically, and spiritually.

Then God commanded Adam not to eat from a certain tree, and said "In the day that you eat of that tree, you shall surely die."

Adam ate from it and he died.
He died spiritually, and the process of physical death entered in at that point.


I thought you said Adam was without sin?

If he was without sin, then whatever he did was not a sin. Therefore eating from the tree was not a sin. Do you agree with this so far? I want to make progress with you.

And every mental and physical faculty became corrupt and diseased, and he passed all of this on to his descendants.

Now, because of Adam's transgression and the consequences of that fall, all of us are born sinners, by nature.

Our very nature is sin, and all that we think and do, from the moment we are born, is sin.

And because God created Adam upright, without sin and without flaws, it is Adam, who is to blame for the fall, not God.

And furthermore, we sin in our own bodies, and our own minds. So WE are to blame for our own sins.

God is not the author of our sin, nor does he condone it, or excuse it, in any way, shape or form.

God demonstrates his absolute hatred for sin in condemning every one that transgresses his law.

He will either punish you for all of your sin at the judgment, or he has already punished you in Christ, as your substitute.

But either way, God will punish every last sinner for their sin.
He hates sin, and can not be accused of unrighteousness.

If you dare to accuse God of unrighteousness in any sense, you are deserving of eternity in Hell.

God will justly condemn you for daring, as a sinner, to point your finger of judgment at him.

The Lord says:

"Woe to him who strives with his Maker!
Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth!
Shall the clay say to him who forms it, "What are you making?"
Or shall your handiwork say, "He has no hands"?

Woe to him who says to his father, "What are you begetting?"
Or to the woman, "What have you brought forth?"
(Isaiah 45:9-10)

You'd better think twice about suggesting that your Creator is a sinner.
And you'd better seek his mercy in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Christ said:
37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.
38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.
40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day
."
(John 6:37-40)

Please stop filling my page with a wall of preaching. No one reads it except for you. I want to discuss with you, it's much easier to do that if you leave the drivel out.
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 10:20:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 9:34:48 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 8:48:53 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 7:59:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 5:46:35 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.
-

To have a will, is to have "volitional capabilities."
Or in other words, the ability to make decisions and choices.
-

"Volition" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. an act of making a choice or decision; also : a choice or decision made

2. the power of choosing or determining : will


-

Now, volition is certainly related to "Free Will", but Free Will is a little more specific.

"Free Will" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. the ability to choose how to act

2. the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God


Full Definition of FREE WILL

1. voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>

2. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention


-
Now,
Generally, when "Free Will" is discussed in relation to God and religion, Free Will is defined as the following:

"the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God"
OR:
"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention"

-

And the general argument put forth by those who deny "Free Will", usually goes something like this:

Human beings have volitional capablilities, and thus are morally responsible, but they are limited by mainly two factors:

Their choices are determined by their nature (i.e. natural abilities and natural predisposition toward sin).

Who is responsible for this nature?

Man is.


Ok, let's see how you argue that a being is responsible for it's own nature, when a nature is prior to any volition and therefore any responsibility.

Not God.

God created the first man, Adam, without sin and without flaws.
He was in perfect health--mentally, physically, and spiritually.

Then God commanded Adam not to eat from a certain tree, and said "In the day that you eat of that tree, you shall surely die."

Adam ate from it and he died.
He died spiritually, and the process of physical death entered in at that point.


I thought you said Adam was without sin?

If he was without sin, then whatever he did was not a sin. Therefore eating from the tree was not a sin. Do you agree with this so far? I want to make progress with you.

And every mental and physical faculty became corrupt and diseased, and he passed all of this on to his descendants.

Now, because of Adam's transgression and the consequences of that fall, all of us are born sinners, by nature.

Our very nature is sin, and all that we think and do, from the moment we are born, is sin.

And because God created Adam upright, without sin and without flaws, it is Adam, who is to blame for the fall, not God.

And furthermore, we sin in our own bodies, and our own minds. So WE are to blame for our own sins.

God is not the author of our sin, nor does he condone it, or excuse it, in any way, shape or form.

God demonstrates his absolute hatred for sin in condemning every one that transgresses his law.

He will either punish you for all of your sin at the judgment, or he has already punished you in Christ, as your substitute.

But either way, God will punish every last sinner for their sin.
He hates sin, and can not be accused of unrighteousness.

If you dare to accuse God of unrighteousness in any sense, you are deserving of eternity in Hell.

God will justly condemn you for daring, as a sinner, to point your finger of judgment at him.

The Lord says:

"Woe to him who strives with his Maker!
Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth!
Shall the clay say to him who forms it, "What are you making?"
Or shall your handiwork say, "He has no hands"?

Woe to him who says to his father, "What are you begetting?"
Or to the woman, "What have you brought forth?"
(Isaiah 45:9-10)

You'd better think twice about suggesting that your Creator is a sinner.
And you'd better seek his mercy in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Christ said:
37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.
38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.
40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day
."
(John 6:37-40)

Please stop filling my page with a wall of preaching. No one reads it except for you. I want to discuss with you, it's much easier to do that if you leave the drivel out.

Well, the Bible is my source text. So if you insist on calling it drivel, then we're not going to get anywhere, now are we?

Try again.
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 10:22:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:20:18 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 9:34:48 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 8:48:53 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 7:59:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 5:46:35 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.
-

To have a will, is to have "volitional capabilities."
Or in other words, the ability to make decisions and choices.
-

"Volition" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. an act of making a choice or decision; also : a choice or decision made

2. the power of choosing or determining : will


-

Now, volition is certainly related to "Free Will", but Free Will is a little more specific.

"Free Will" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. the ability to choose how to act

2. the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God


Full Definition of FREE WILL

1. voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>

2. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention


-
Now,
Generally, when "Free Will" is discussed in relation to God and religion, Free Will is defined as the following:

"the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God"
OR:
"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention"

-

And the general argument put forth by those who deny "Free Will", usually goes something like this:

Human beings have volitional capablilities, and thus are morally responsible, but they are limited by mainly two factors:

Their choices are determined by their nature (i.e. natural abilities and natural predisposition toward sin).

Who is responsible for this nature?

Man is.


Ok, let's see how you argue that a being is responsible for it's own nature, when a nature is prior to any volition and therefore any responsibility.

Not God.

God created the first man, Adam, without sin and without flaws.
He was in perfect health--mentally, physically, and spiritually.

Then God commanded Adam not to eat from a certain tree, and said "In the day that you eat of that tree, you shall surely die."

Adam ate from it and he died.
He died spiritually, and the process of physical death entered in at that point.


I thought you said Adam was without sin?

If he was without sin, then whatever he did was not a sin. Therefore eating from the tree was not a sin. Do you agree with this so far? I want to make progress with you.

And every mental and physical faculty became corrupt and diseased, and he passed all of this on to his descendants.

Now, because of Adam's transgression and the consequences of that fall, all of us are born sinners, by nature.

Our very nature is sin, and all that we think and do, from the moment we are born, is sin.

And because God created Adam upright, without sin and without flaws, it is Adam, who is to blame for the fall, not God.

And furthermore, we sin in our own bodies, and our own minds. So WE are to blame for our own sins.

God is not the author of our sin, nor does he condone it, or excuse it, in any way, shape or form.

God demonstrates his absolute hatred for sin in condemning every one that transgresses his law.

He will either punish you for all of your sin at the judgment, or he has already punished you in Christ, as your substitute.

But either way, God will punish every last sinner for their sin.
He hates sin, and can not be accused of unrighteousness.

If you dare to accuse God of unrighteousness in any sense, you are deserving of eternity in Hell.

God will justly condemn you for daring, as a sinner, to point your finger of judgment at him.

The Lord says:

"Woe to him who strives with his Maker!
Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth!
Shall the clay say to him who forms it, "What are you making?"
Or shall your handiwork say, "He has no hands"?

Woe to him who says to his father, "What are you begetting?"
Or to the woman, "What have you brought forth?"
(Isaiah 45:9-10)

You'd better think twice about suggesting that your Creator is a sinner.
And you'd better seek his mercy in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Christ said:
37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.
38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.
40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day
."
(John 6:37-40)

Please stop filling my page with a wall of preaching. No one reads it except for you. I want to discuss with you, it's much easier to do that if you leave the drivel out.

Well, the Bible is my source text. So if you insist on calling it drivel, then we're not going to get anywhere, now are we?

Try again.

Oh, sorry, did I hurt your feelings?

Nice evasion of the rest of my post.
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 10:25:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:22:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:20:18 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 9:34:48 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 8:48:53 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 7:59:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 5:46:35 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.
-

To have a will, is to have "volitional capabilities."
Or in other words, the ability to make decisions and choices.
-

"Volition" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. an act of making a choice or decision; also : a choice or decision made

2. the power of choosing or determining : will


-

Now, volition is certainly related to "Free Will", but Free Will is a little more specific.

"Free Will" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. the ability to choose how to act

2. the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God


Full Definition of FREE WILL

1. voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>

2. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention


-
Now,
Generally, when "Free Will" is discussed in relation to God and religion, Free Will is defined as the following:

"the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God"
OR:
"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention"

-

And the general argument put forth by those who deny "Free Will", usually goes something like this:

Human beings have volitional capablilities, and thus are morally responsible, but they are limited by mainly two factors:

Their choices are determined by their nature (i.e. natural abilities and natural predisposition toward sin).

Who is responsible for this nature?

Man is.


Ok, let's see how you argue that a being is responsible for it's own nature, when a nature is prior to any volition and therefore any responsibility.

Not God.

God created the first man, Adam, without sin and without flaws.
He was in perfect health--mentally, physically, and spiritually.

Then God commanded Adam not to eat from a certain tree, and said "In the day that you eat of that tree, you shall surely die."

Adam ate from it and he died.
He died spiritually, and the process of physical death entered in at that point.


I thought you said Adam was without sin?

If he was without sin, then whatever he did was not a sin. Therefore eating from the tree was not a sin. Do you agree with this so far? I want to make progress with you.

And every mental and physical faculty became corrupt and diseased, and he passed all of this on to his descendants.

Now, because of Adam's transgression and the consequences of that fall, all of us are born sinners, by nature.

Our very nature is sin, and all that we think and do, from the moment we are born, is sin.

And because God created Adam upright, without sin and without flaws, it is Adam, who is to blame for the fall, not God.

And furthermore, we sin in our own bodies, and our own minds. So WE are to blame for our own sins.

God is not the author of our sin, nor does he condone it, or excuse it, in any way, shape or form.

God demonstrates his absolute hatred for sin in condemning every one that transgresses his law.

He will either punish you for all of your sin at the judgment, or he has already punished you in Christ, as your substitute.

But either way, God will punish every last sinner for their sin.
He hates sin, and can not be accused of unrighteousness.

If you dare to accuse God of unrighteousness in any sense, you are deserving of eternity in Hell.

God will justly condemn you for daring, as a sinner, to point your finger of judgment at him.

The Lord says:

"Woe to him who strives with his Maker!
Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth!
Shall the clay say to him who forms it, "What are you making?"
Or shall your handiwork say, "He has no hands"?

Woe to him who says to his father, "What are you begetting?"
Or to the woman, "What have you brought forth?"
(Isaiah 45:9-10)

You'd better think twice about suggesting that your Creator is a sinner.
And you'd better seek his mercy in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Christ said:
37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.
38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.
40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day
."
(John 6:37-40)

Please stop filling my page with a wall of preaching. No one reads it except for you. I want to discuss with you, it's much easier to do that if you leave the drivel out.

Well, the Bible is my source text. So if you insist on calling it drivel, then we're not going to get anywhere, now are we?

Try again.

Oh, sorry, did I hurt your feelings?

Nice evasion of the rest of my post.

Well, I freely admit I'm not looking for a discussion.
I'm 100% sure what I'm saying is true.

Now why don't you admit you're not looking for a discussion either? And we can just go our separate ways and call it a day.

How's that sound?
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 10:31:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:25:19 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:22:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:20:18 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 9:34:48 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 8:48:53 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 7:59:15 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 5:46:35 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
"Volition" and "Free Will" are not the same thing.
-

To have a will, is to have "volitional capabilities."
Or in other words, the ability to make decisions and choices.
-

"Volition" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. an act of making a choice or decision; also : a choice or decision made

2. the power of choosing or determining : will


-

Now, volition is certainly related to "Free Will", but Free Will is a little more specific.

"Free Will" is defined as (according to Merriam-webster Online):

1. the ability to choose how to act

2. the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God


Full Definition of FREE WILL

1. voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>

2. freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention


-
Now,
Generally, when "Free Will" is discussed in relation to God and religion, Free Will is defined as the following:

"the ability to make choices that are not controlled by fate or God"
OR:
"freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention"

-

And the general argument put forth by those who deny "Free Will", usually goes something like this:

Human beings have volitional capablilities, and thus are morally responsible, but they are limited by mainly two factors:

Their choices are determined by their nature (i.e. natural abilities and natural predisposition toward sin).

Who is responsible for this nature?

Man is.


Ok, let's see how you argue that a being is responsible for it's own nature, when a nature is prior to any volition and therefore any responsibility.

Not God.

God created the first man, Adam, without sin and without flaws.
He was in perfect health--mentally, physically, and spiritually.

Then God commanded Adam not to eat from a certain tree, and said "In the day that you eat of that tree, you shall surely die."

Adam ate from it and he died.
He died spiritually, and the process of physical death entered in at that point.


I thought you said Adam was without sin?

If he was without sin, then whatever he did was not a sin. Therefore eating from the tree was not a sin. Do you agree with this so far? I want to make progress with you.

And every mental and physical faculty became corrupt and diseased, and he passed all of this on to his descendants.

Now, because of Adam's transgression and the consequences of that fall, all of us are born sinners, by nature.

Our very nature is sin, and all that we think and do, from the moment we are born, is sin.

And because God created Adam upright, without sin and without flaws, it is Adam, who is to blame for the fall, not God.

And furthermore, we sin in our own bodies, and our own minds. So WE are to blame for our own sins.

God is not the author of our sin, nor does he condone it, or excuse it, in any way, shape or form.

God demonstrates his absolute hatred for sin in condemning every one that transgresses his law.

He will either punish you for all of your sin at the judgment, or he has already punished you in Christ, as your substitute.

But either way, God will punish every last sinner for their sin.
He hates sin, and can not be accused of unrighteousness.

If you dare to accuse God of unrighteousness in any sense, you are deserving of eternity in Hell.

God will justly condemn you for daring, as a sinner, to point your finger of judgment at him.

The Lord says:

"Woe to him who strives with his Maker!
Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth!
Shall the clay say to him who forms it, "What are you making?"
Or shall your handiwork say, "He has no hands"?

Woe to him who says to his father, "What are you begetting?"
Or to the woman, "What have you brought forth?"
(Isaiah 45:9-10)

You'd better think twice about suggesting that your Creator is a sinner.
And you'd better seek his mercy in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Christ said:
37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.
38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.
40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day
."
(John 6:37-40)

Please stop filling my page with a wall of preaching. No one reads it except for you. I want to discuss with you, it's much easier to do that if you leave the drivel out.

Well, the Bible is my source text. So if you insist on calling it drivel, then we're not going to get anywhere, now are we?

Try again.

Oh, sorry, did I hurt your feelings?

Nice evasion of the rest of my post.

Well, I freely admit I'm not looking for a discussion.
I'm 100% sure what I'm saying is true.

Now why don't you admit you're not looking for a discussion either? And we can just go our separate ways and call it a day.

How's that sound?

I am looking for a discussion, I asked several polite and non-accusatory questions that you refused to answer.

I called the rest of your post drivel not because it was biblical, but because it is utterly irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I did that exactly because I want to have a real discussion with you.

Further, I don't enjoy being told I'm going to hell. Think what you want, but that kind of behavior is very counter-productive to healthy discussion.

I question why you are on a debate forum if you have no intention to persuade. If you want to persuade me, the path to that is discussion. I want to persuade you, and the path to that is discussion. So why don't we do that, and leave out the doomsaying for some other forum and some other time?
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 10:44:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:31:26 PM, Hematite12 wrote:

I am looking for a discussion, I asked several polite and non-accusatory questions that you refused to answer.

I called the rest of your post drivel not because it was biblical, but because it is utterly irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I did that exactly because I want to have a real discussion with you.

Further, I don't enjoy being told I'm going to hell. Think what you want, but that kind of behavior is very counter-productive to healthy discussion.

I question why you are on a debate forum if you have no intention to persuade. If you want to persuade me, the path to that is discussion. I want to persuade you, and the path to that is discussion. So why don't we do that, and leave out the doomsaying for some other forum and some other time?

If that's your way of inviting discussion, you need to work on your social skills, and consider whether or not you may have some form of autism.

Even if I were looking for a discussion, which I'm not, your "invitation" would not have persuaded me to spend one precious second with you.

Now, if you think I'm being unreasonable, then you are clueless about yourself, and it's no wonder you blame God for your sin.
Hematite12
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2014 10:00:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:44:39 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:31:26 PM, Hematite12 wrote:

I am looking for a discussion, I asked several polite and non-accusatory questions that you refused to answer.

I called the rest of your post drivel not because it was biblical, but because it is utterly irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I did that exactly because I want to have a real discussion with you.

Further, I don't enjoy being told I'm going to hell. Think what you want, but that kind of behavior is very counter-productive to healthy discussion.

I question why you are on a debate forum if you have no intention to persuade. If you want to persuade me, the path to that is discussion. I want to persuade you, and the path to that is discussion. So why don't we do that, and leave out the doomsaying for some other forum and some other time?

If that's your way of inviting discussion, you need to work on your social skills, and consider whether or not you may have some form of autism.


Pointlessly offensive, and reported. Oh the irony, you criticize the social skills of other, when you can hardly make a post that doesn't condemn everyone to eternal torture who doesn't agree with you.

Even if I were looking for a discussion, which I'm not, your "invitation" would not have persuaded me to spend one precious second with you.


If you're not looking for a discussion get off of the debate forum.

Now, if you think I'm being unreasonable, then you are clueless about yourself, and it's no wonder you blame God for your sin.

God doesn't exist, so it would certainly be strange if I were blaming him for anything.
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2014 1:08:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/6/2014 10:00:30 PM, Hematite12 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:44:39 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:31:26 PM, Hematite12 wrote:

I am looking for a discussion, I asked several polite and non-accusatory questions that you refused to answer.

I called the rest of your post drivel not because it was biblical, but because it is utterly irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I did that exactly because I want to have a real discussion with you.

Further, I don't enjoy being told I'm going to hell. Think what you want, but that kind of behavior is very counter-productive to healthy discussion.

I question why you are on a debate forum if you have no intention to persuade. If you want to persuade me, the path to that is discussion. I want to persuade you, and the path to that is discussion. So why don't we do that, and leave out the doomsaying for some other forum and some other time?

If that's your way of inviting discussion, you need to work on your social skills, and consider whether or not you may have some form of autism.


Pointlessly offensive, and reported. Oh the irony, you criticize the social skills of other, when you can hardly make a post that doesn't condemn everyone to eternal torture who doesn't agree with you.

Even if I were looking for a discussion, which I'm not, your "invitation" would not have persuaded me to spend one precious second with you.


If you're not looking for a discussion get off of the debate forum.

I don't know what makes you think I'm under obligation to discuss anything with anyone.

I will decide whether or not I feel like discussing things.

If you don't like it, why don't YOU leave the forum?