"No, you don't control the general tendencies you or your mind has. But you can still choose to give in to them or resist them. For example, if you're a person who is very tormented by lust, you may not choose that, but you certainly do choose whether you give in to it or not."

But didnt Jesus condemn not only the actions but the inclinations towards an action too?

BTW, you lie about me saying I criticize christianity on invented basis. That I should take the moral framework that Christians hold to, not one that I have invented. I don't invent. Critizicing free will as a concept is part of my critique against christianity's "moral framework", because if fails to tell the truth already there.

Do I Believe in the Christian God? I certainly have no faith in him, but that doesnt mean I dont Believe he exists. I am not sure whether or not be exists.

No I have not read all mystics. So? Have you?

Right. I used the qualifier "so called" when speaking of natural evil earlier. I'm not a fan of this phrase, as I don't think natural disasters and the like are instances of evil. As you correctly point out, there are no moral agents involved. That being said, it's the standard term used among philosophers of religion, so that's why I use it.

Anyway, despite having said that, there may actually be moral agents in involved. An idea I have found intriguing is that Satan and his fallen angels are behind what is labeled natural evil. See here: http://reknew.org/2008/01/satan-and-the-corruption-of-nature-seven-arguments/

Regardless, there is still a problem here. I would refer you to the DBH quote once again.

Sure, so? If he wants to criticise the Christian God on moral matters, then he should take the moral framework that Christians hold to, not one that he has invented. — Agustino

Then you should adhere to trinitarian theology, heretic.

Did you get high marks at school just because you had a long time to answer the questions? — Agustino

I wasn't aware that The Philosophy Forum is the same as school.

In some regards yes, but not in all of them. With regards to morality - at least the morality we speak about - yes. — Agustino

Edit: Hmm, gif won't work. So I'll write it out. Fuck you!

No, you don't control the general tendencies you or your mind has. But you can still choose to give in to them or resist them. For example, if you're a person who is very tormented by lust, you may not choose that, but you certainly do choose whether you give in to it or not. — Agustino

lolno.

Let me guess, you also think that narcissists choose whether to lie or not, or that someone suffering from bipolar disorder can pause right before a manic episode whether or not they're going to lose their mind. Sure. Makes total sense, (Y)

But didnt Jesus condemn not only the actions but the inclinations towards an action too? — Beebert

No. Looking (actively) after a woman with lust is an action, not just a desire or an inclination.

Critizicing free will as a concept is part of nu critique against christianity's "moral framework", Because if fails to tell the truth already there. — Beebert

That's a strawman though.

No I have not read all mystics. So? Have you? — Beebert

No, but I don't make claims about who the greatest mystic is.

Then you should adhere to trinitarian theology, heretic. — Heister Eggcart

I do believe in the Trinity, so I'm not sure what you meant :s

— Heister Eggcart

Fail X-)

Let me guess, you also think that narcissists choose whether to lie or not, or that someone suffering from bipolar disorder can pause right before a manic episode whether or not they're going to lose their mind. Sure. Makes total sense, (Y) — Heister Eggcart

I'm not very familiar with bipolar so I won't comment. But narcissists CAN choose whether to lie or not. They have a tendency towards lying, meaning that's the first thing that comes to their minds, but that doesn't mean they cannot oppose that tendency and not act on it.

CBT and all of therapy pretty much is predicated on this metacognitive ability.

well of you call ny statements a strawman, then we might as well finish this discussion by saying something obvious: All metaphysical talk is a strawman.

Anyway, despite having said that, there may actually be moral agents in involved. An idea I have found intriguing is that Satan and his fallen angels are behind what is labeled natural evil. See here: http://reknew.org/2008/01/satan-and-the-corruption-of-nature-seven-arguments/ — Thorongil

Thanks, that looks quite detailed, will have a look soon!

Regardless, there is still a problem here. I would refer you to the DBH quote once again. — Thorongil

DBH?

well of you call ny statements a strawman, then we might as well finish this discussion by saying something obvious: All metaphysical talk is a strawman. — Beebert

Yes I will call all your statements strawmen if you keep strawmanning. That's not under my control what you say or do. But to say for example that you don't decide what you desire, and therefore you don't have free will (in the Christian sense) is a shameless strawman.

"But to say for example that you don't decide what you desire, and therefore you don't have free will (in the Christian sense) is a shameless strawman."

Free will=free choice?

Free will=free choice? — Beebert

Free will = possibility of making a choice, yes.

David Bentley Hart. I quoted him.

Is that all there is to your idea of free will?

Is that all there is to your idea of free will? — Beebert

Yes. If you can make a choice, you have free will.

David Bentley Hart. I quoted him. — Thorongil

Ah okay, I see, thanks for clarifying that. I agree with that quote, but obviously I don't think the actions in themselves of earthquakes, etc. are immoral. Rather they're amoral. But obviously from the POV of humans it's not right to be killed if you are innocent - and volcanoes, earthquakes, etc. take no regard of whether you're innocent or not. So it's a problem in-so-far as it's a harm, but if there is no intention behind it, it cannot be morally evil.

Okay, then Perhaps we do agree to a certain extent. But yet, you as a Christian say that I can not come to God by my free choice without him making me able to through his grace right? He has to reveal himself, is that correct?
To my ears, creation ex nihilo is a mockery of the whole concept of freedom. And of Free will.

I do believe in the Trinity, so I'm not sure what you mean — Agustino

the Trinity is a logical contradiction — Agustino

2+2=5 is a logical contradiction, do you believe that, too? >:O

2+2=5 is a logical contradiction, do you believe that, too? >:O — Heister Eggcart

If I believe whether it's possible, then maybe! X-) God doesn't have the limitations of logic, being the source of both logic and illogic.

If I want to destroy myself, but I dont want to want that, what shall I then do? Change my Will? Or prsy to God and det "Please make me stop being willing to destroy myself!". Perhaps that Will work. I have tried though. A lot. It is like speaking to empty air. So then how can I be sure that is not what God wants? If I want my own destruction, but at the same time dont want to want my destruction(which is very common among people), then Perhaps the reason for this is that God actually wants my destruction? I guess you have read Romans 9? It seems to suggest something similar

If I want to destroy myself, but I dont want to want that, what shall I then do? Change my Will? Or pray to God and say "Please make me stop being willing to destroy myself!". Perhaps that Will work. I have tried though. A lot. It is like speaking to empty air. So then how can I be sure that is not what God wants? If I want my own destruction, but at the same time dont want to want my destruction(which is very common among people), then Perhaps the reason for this is that God actually wants my destruction? I guess you have read Romans 9? It seems to suggest something similar

Take logic away, and anything is possible. Yet, clearly you don't believe every possibility.

Agu, just c'mon, please stop being dumb.

To my ears, creation ex nihilo is a mockery of the whole concept of freedom. And of Free will. — Beebert

What does creation ex nihilo have to do with free will?

But yet, you as a Christian say that I can not come to God by my free choice without him making me able to through his grace right? — Beebert

No I don't say that. You need grace to hear about God, but you've already heard about God. I don't think God withholds grace from anyone.

If I want to destroy myself, but I dont want to want that, what shall I then do? Change my Will? — Beebert

Simple. Keep wanting that, but don't act on it. You don't control what you want. So you pray for the strength to resist that urge/temptation, and for God to hopefully lift it away (but this may never be granted - the possibility of not acting on the urge and discovering your own freedom through that is sufficient). Also, if you don't get a miracle for yourself, you may be a miracle for someone else, by showing them that it is possible to live with such a condition!

So then how can I be sure that is not what God wants? — Beebert

God may certainly want this. Resisting the urge/temptation is a great thing - it is finding your own freedom. Your own freedom cannot be found except in the opposition to such urges.

Take logic away, and anything is possible. Yet, clearly you don't believe every possibility. — Heister Eggcart

Yeah so what? :s logical possibility tells me jack shit about anything anyway. It's logically possible I'll wake up a duck tomorrow, logically possible the sun won't rise, etc. etc. Logical possibility is such bullshit anyway, might as well get rid of it completely. Utter nonsense this logical possibility, tells me jack shit about the world.

Logical possibility also tells me the fuckin' electron can't both pass through the slit and not pass through the slit at the same time, but yet it fucking does both! So fuck logic - useless masturbatory device.

The Only one with a truly Free choice is God. If I am not free to choose whether I want to exist eternally or not, If I am FORCED to play a part in God's mean little muppet show, then Calling me free is just a mockery of the concept. To my ears, God is an invisible tyrant. And I feel sorry for mankind. I believe Scripture is obvious: God wants some people to be destroyed.

If I am not free to choose whether I want to exist eternally or not — Beebert

No, you are not free to choose whether you WANT to exist eternally or not, but you are absolutely free to choose how you will act. That's what free will means.

I believe Scripture is obvious: God wants some people to be destroyed. — Beebert

Nope, I've already outline why that's not the case.

I am FORCED to play a part in God's mean little muppet show, that is, I am forced to strive to be with him and exist and live forever. The other alternative is eternal suffering. This sounds like pure tyranny to me. The unfortunate accident of being Born Into this short and horrible life of misery and suffering is enough. Why do you Christians and your God extend that in to all eternity?

Why do you Christians and your God extend that in to all eternity? — Beebert

"extend"? I thought we've already clarified eternity isn't infinite temporal duration.

I am FORCED to play a part in God's mean little muppet show — Beebert

You're given the opportunity to play a part, do you want to waste it?

Romans 9. Try Reading that with an honest mind. Or all those parts in the "gospel" of John where he talks about how many of the jews not Only did not choose to Believe, But COULD NOT believe because God has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts.

Romans 9. Try Reading that with an honest mind. Or all those parts in the "gospel" of John where he talks about how many of the jews not Only did not choose to Believe, But COULD NOT believe because God has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts. — Beebert

We've already gone through this. Please re-read the corresponding answer. You've never addressed it.