Free Will

[POI]

Varying viewpoints and positions exist, when discussing the topic of free will. Recently, The Tanager and I had a brief discussion regarding this topic. Rather than going over the 'whole' of what the term "free will" (may or may not encompass), I instead wanted to hyper-focus on one particular aspect.

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines free will as: "Free will is the capacity for agents to make choices uncoerced by external forces, allowing them to be the authors of their own actions and hold moral responsibility."

The same source views coercion as: "Coercion is the practice of forcing another party to act against their will through the use of threats, intimidation, physical force, or psychological pressure. It is used to compel compliance, such as obtaining a confession, forcing a contract signature, or controlling behavior, often involving threats of harm or misuse of authority."

For debate: Does the Bible present any level of coercion? Is this why so many folks apply Pascal's wager, in that they are in the Jesus-camp (just-in-case)? Does the Bible god violate free will, in this aspect, in any capacity?

When parsing this scenario out, let's apply a modern example. A group of Christian missionaries travel abroad to a remote area where many/most/all may not have heard of a Jesus. The Christian missionaries present and preach the words of Jesus to these uninformed folks. "Project conversion" is not going as well as hoped. One of the Christian missionaries, in a last-ditch effort of conversion, decides to quote Mark 16, and tells them -- "the ones who believe in Jesus will be saved, and the ones that do not believe will instead be condemned."

The Bible also speaks about negative outcomes for disbelief in other areas of the Bible too. We can cross those paths as needed.

[POI]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #68]

You have the topic list. If one entices you, let me know which one you'd like to discuss next and also let me know if you want to create the new topic yourself or if you want me to keep doing so?

[POI]

Conclusion:

For debate: Does the Bible present any level of coercion?

The answer is "yes". Why? Upon death, you are presented with only (2) options, (Jesus or fire). This is not really "free will", but instead a variation definition of the word "coercion" or maybe being presented with a "compulsory proposition", like receiving a tax bill notice, or being issued a military draft notice, or even being propositioned by a mafia boss to some extent. None of these propositions present actual 'free will' but are instead highly propositioned and/or (coercive/restrictive/limited) choices, where the alternative presented options are WORSE. Which means his option is the best option offered. And since Jesus only offers one alternative option, and you can institute no other alternative options on your own, like you can with not paying taxes per se, as the offer from Jesus is even more limiting than the tax proposition -- (explained in post 66). This is why it is as restrictive as a mafia bosses offer, in that you choose the mafia boss, or suffer the only alternative consequence. And wouldn't you know it, most would choose the mafia boss, in light of the only alternative option.

Jesus's proposition to invoke "choose me or burn" also leaves little to no free choice at all, much like the aforementioned mafia boss analogy. I asked The Tanager this, more than one, with no answer. Likely because he realizes that, in this scenario, Jesus does not offer free will, but instead "coercion."

Which is why the debate question also speaks about Pascal's Wager. If anyone else still believes we have actual "free will" here, where Jesus is concerned, please inquire. Otherwise, we really have no true "free will" here, and are instead presented with a compulsory proposition, (even much more limiting than if you were presented with a compulsory proposition to pay taxes) - as I explained to William in post(s) 63, 65, and 66.

Thank you

[The Tanager]

[Replying to POI in post #71]

You have access to it from the initial thread too. You raised them in the course of the separate discussion we where having. If you want to keep going through them, find them, start a thread, and let me know about them and I'll share my thoughts.

[William]

Post #77 (Act III)
Tone & Style: Dramatic, darkly comedic, and narratively disruptive; A voice from the darkness interrupts the conversation. A person is kneeling, afraid. The Gem moves ahead, revealing him in its green light. Callum offers a hand and helps him to his feet. His name is Busted Knackers—he prefers Bee-Kay. He recounts his day: coffee, then a blank moment, then a sea of darkness (the Tabula Rasa). Then a horde of "Demons who told me they were Angels" carried him to a magnificent throne room. A Mighty Being on a golden throne gave him two choices: experience a simulation of the historical Jesus, or go through the Great Doors into Hell. Bee-Kay said it made no difference; he might as well have flipped a coin. The Being produced a golden coin with "HELL" on one side and "HJS" on the other. Bee-Kay tossed it. It came up "HELL." The Great Doors opened; he walked through. On the other side, a being claiming to be the "Real God" congratulated him on choosing Hell and told him he had "passed the test." Then the being said "Well this is interesting," and Bee-Kay felt like one giant toothache, disintegrated, and found himself in the dark cave. He asks for water. Callum hands him his flask. He drinks. Manu says he is not in any Hell. Bee-Kay asks, "Then where in Hell am I?"

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #72]

For debate: Does the Bible present any level of coercion?

The answer is "yes".

Such is life...should we expect it to present anything different?

[William]

Would it be correct POI, that you are not arguing against us having will?

[wannabe]

[Replying to POI in post #1]
For every action there is a reaction - logic tells us this.
For every understanding there is a comparison - also logic.
Everything has an opposite in order to exist - eg: black, white. Right, wrong. Good ,bad. Even , uneven. Up, down etc...
These opposites exist for the sake of understanding including heaven and hell.
Just truths and facts.
Free will decides your preferences.
Without logic there is no understanding.
God created all, in equal two parts for the sake of having understanding and compassion. Without this , there would be no free will, no decisions to make, everything would be one sided.
God made comparisons for man to choose from.
God provides the truth and the facts. No coercion, just pick a path, but know which way God would prefer a person to choose.
But without choice ( free will ) man would eventually stumble across sin, and not know it until he found himself in hell.( or turmoil)
Without free will, and wrapped in cotton wool, we are not individuals, but puppets.( Obviously not Gods plan ).
We only exist because of God, and coersion it seems is not welcome in heaven, just truth love and understanding.

[POI]

[Replying to William in post #75]

I've already clearly explained my position here William.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #75]

I've already clearly explained my position here William.

A yes or no answer would have been more sincinct POI. Would it be correct POI, that you are not arguing against us having will?

[POI]

God created all, in equal two parts for the sake of having understanding and compassion. Without this , there would be no free will, no decisions to make, everything would be one sided.
God made comparisons for man to choose from.
God provides the truth and the facts. No coercion, just pick a path, but know which way God would prefer a person to choose.

The almighty creator of all, who can create any scenarios possible, created only two paths alone:

a) follow Jesus
b) fire

No other options... And the one provided alternative option is obviously worse. Who, in their right mind, would choose the one alternative option?

The same exact thing goes with the coercive proposition of a mafia boss, in that you are only essentially given the following choices:

a) follow the mafia boss
b) fire

The point to the 'mafia boss' analogy, is even though following the mafia boss would suck, you would still likely choose him over the one given alternative option, (in which the mafia boss himself presents to you).

As I stated to another, more paths exist with other imposed upon choice(s)/proposition(s), such as taxes. (i.e.):

a) pay them
b) fines/jail
c) move to another country with differing laws to avoid punishment
d) hire a tax attorney and fight

******************************

Don't take these two videos too literally, but they convey fundamental point(s):