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.

[William]

The gift of love is not free will.

[POI]

Nothing you have stated below counters post 80. I'll explain why below...

Choice 1 - go to hell
Choice 2 - go to heaven
Choice 3 - give no recognition that Choices 1 and 2 do exist.
If you choose 1, 2, or 3 you are making a choice.
Question: is this decision out of your control or is it of your will to hold the position of 1, 2, or 3.

Nope, It's only <1) Jesus or 2) hell>. That's it. Where Jesus is concerned, no one in their right mind chooses fire. Just like where the mafia boss is also concerned, no one in their right mind chooses the fire (in both of these presented coercive binary scenarios). And in regard to the presented option 3), the recipient is still already made aware that (by not acknowledging/accepting Jesus or the mafia bosses offers), fire is still the one and only result regardless. So, again, it's 1) or 2).

If you choose 1, there is no coercion that makes sense.
If you choose 2, none who have chosen 2 will admit to coercion, because it is only the love of righteousness that leads to heaven.
If you chose 3 ,no coercion exists otherwise you would choose 2 against your will.
Or is there a 4th I did not cover.

Did you happen to watch the 2nd video all the way to the end?

If you have no will of your own, you are a puppet to society, because you need 'will' to make a decision
For your will is your desire, or your desire is your choice ( you choose this freely).

Coercion is not a free choice. If you do not choose Jesus, you are already made aware that the only alternative is hell fire -- in which Jesus apparently both designed and created.

If you choose 2, only through fear of hell, you won't make it to heaven anyway.
If you truly believe in God you would have no concerns regarding coercion.

Belief is not a choice though. If you think it is, make yourself truly believe that Santa Claus exists for just 5 seconds. Therefore, the created system is still a colossal failure on Jesus's part.

[William]

POI has now engaged with Wannabe, reiterating his core argument: only two real options (Jesus or hell), the mafia boss analogy, belief is not a choice, and the system is a failure on Jesus's part. He's effectively restarting the same loop with a new partner. Wannabe's response will determine whether this exchange goes anywhere new or simply repeats the looping patterns already documented.

[POI]

In your video example, if you know the law and you go against it, then you suffer the consequences.

Jesus creates the specific consequences, just like the mafia boss creates the specific consequences. Except with Jesus, the created specific consequences are even worse, as the torment/torture apparently never ends.

Is all of man's law coercive because of the consequences of breaking the law.

This question is too broad, as each law would need to be evaluated. They are situational. As demonstrated below, when I speak about "theft." Each law is situational. But where Jesus is concerned, it is binary. Maybe this is why the Catholics invented Purgatory/etc? Maybe this is also why the Mormons invented a heavenly hierarchy? Maybe this is why some Christians argue that hell merely means annihilation? The list goes on, in regard to Christian cope, in order to make sense of the otherwise insensible.

Are we coerced into not murdering because of the law and its consequences.

While the law serves as a vital deterrent, and a system for enforcing social order, most people refrain from murder due to a combination of internal morality, empathy, social conditioning, and personal conscience. I guess one would deem it "coercive" if they were a sociopath/psychopath.

Are we coerced into not torturing or raping or stealing because of the law and its consequences.

While the law serves as a vital deterrent, and a system for enforcing social order, most people refrain from (torture and rape) due to a combination of internal morality, empathy, social conditioning, and personal conscience. I guess one would deem it "coercive" if they were a sociopath/psychopath.

As for theft, this one is more-so nuanced, as evidence by the book/movie Les Misérables where "Jean Valjean" steals a loaf of bread to feed his sister's starving children that leads to 19 years of imprisonment. Maybe this is why the Catholics invented the concept of 'venerable sins'?

If you feel you only pay your talaw xes because you are coerced into doing so because of the law and its consequences, where is the love for that law.

Explained above...

Which of gods laws do you feel are coercive or not worth loving.

Believe or burn is coercion:

Mark 16:16: "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned"

John 3:18: "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son"

And the kicker here is that belief is not even a choice. If you think belief IS a choice, choose to believe in Santa Claus. Jesus not only provides a very binary horrific alternative proposition, but he is also vastly mistaken about the concept of belief itself. He will apparently torment unbelievers for eternity -- for an action unbelievers cannot control.

I'm going to stop here, as you have more than enough on your proverbial plate here....

[wannabe]

To POI

In my opinion if it were even possible to relinquish one's own free will to the consequences of finding heaven, i would accept this by my will, if it were so.

So my final question to you is:
Can you give me one bad consequence of being coerced by God to choose heaven over hell ?

[POI]

Twice now, you have dodged fundamental point(s), in that:

1) Jesus is under the assumption that belief is a choice, when it is not.
2) Jesus also apparently chucks earth dwelling unbelievers into a realm of eternal torment when they die.

To POI

In my opinion if it were even possible to relinquish one's own free will to the consequences of finding heaven, i would accept this by my will, if it were so.

The point of this thread is to dispel the notion, from asserting Christians, that Jesus gives us free will. He clearly doesn't, as his one-and-only created alternative option is eternal conscious torment. We are not given a free will decision but are instead presented with a coercive proposition alone. And given these two options, no one in their right mind would choose eternal torment, almost regardless of what the only other option would be.

So my final question to you is:
Can you give me one bad consequence of being coerced by God to choose heaven over hell ?

This question is just as irrelevant as asking about the "mafia boss", as almost everyone would choose the mafia boss over torture. Which is also why you too would likely choose the mafia bosses' offer, considering the one-and-only given alternative.

But yea, eternal worship sounds awesome. If Heaven was really as good as Christians make it out to be, then why create the one-and-only alternative option as being the worst possible thing imaginable? All sentient agents would be clambering and fighting to get in, or to stay in -- (so why then did Satan and the angels bounce, from the Bible story?). It wouldn't even be a presented choice. It would be like asking anyone if they want to do the best thing ever all the time with no downside(s). All would drop everything to remain there or to go there. However, Satan and the angels opted out, so maybe it is not really as good as you may want it to be??? Maybe Heaven becomes so repetitive and mundane that the one given alternative of eternal torment isn't really much worse after all? Maybe (Jesus or Hell), in known reality, is a toss-up decision??? Maybe Satan and his angel/demons are privy to a concept in which we earth-living humans are not yet aware about??? Maybe both options suck, and it is actually a toss-up between the two, which is exactly why 1/3 of the angels left?

[William]

POI has now fully articulated his most radical position: Jesus is mistaken about belief being a choice, the binary is coercive, and even heaven may not be as desirable as Christians claim - citing Satan and the angels' rebellion as evidence that the choice might be a genuine toss-up. This moves the argument beyond free will into a critique of divine psychology and the coherence of heaven itself. Wannabe's utilitarian question ("what's the bad consequence?") has been answered indirectly: the bad consequence is that the entire framework collapses if heaven isn't unambiguously good. POI is now questioning whether Christianity can even deliver on its own promises. This is a much more fundamental challenge than the original OP. The debate has escalated significantly.

[wannabe]

[Replying to POI in post #96]

If Jesus did not provide us with free will (the ability to choose freely from our own knowledge bank). Why then do you choose not to love this dictator, whose only alternative is to find pure love in heaven, because no one would choose hell. In not choosing Jesus, your choosing hell. His truth .

People make free will choices all the time, like when the body calls you to the toilet. Do you choose to go or do you choose to piss yourself. Just as we have no control over our bodily functions, it is the same with worldly functions. Both God created. If not is nature (evolution) coercive?
But we can piss ourselves, or go into hell. It's a choice (free will), many will go into hell. And for these who genuinely don't recognise the choice of heaven and hell, be assured Gods grace, love, compassion and understanding will prevail.

How can God not love us if his only logical given choice (or not chosen) is to find love in heaven.

I don't like being forced to do or choose anything(coercion). I prefer my own free will.
Hope you love pissing yourself.
Unless you hate your bodily design - God takes the blame for all things, but we can't ignore or change what is.
But I think coerced refers to the things we don't want, not things we want (no coercion is necessary).

If something is offered as free, doesn't one have to pay the price of delivery, or at least accepting the truth of this decree even if it's just pressing the yes button and waiting for delivery. You still have to choose to accept this truth (it's free).

But what are you going to say to God if you find yourself in heaven?
I was coerced into this.
He might just point to the gates of hell and say you are free to enter.
By free will or his will, will you make your decision ?.
I say both.

[POI]

You continue to skip/avoid (2) key points:

1) Jesus is under the assumption one can will a belief. But we can't.
2) The only alternative to following Jesus, is the worst place imageable, in which Jesus also created.

Okay, now to your response...

[Replying to POI in post #96]

If Jesus did not provide us with free will (the ability to choose freely from our own knowledge bank). Why then do you choose not to love this dictator, whose only alternative is to find pure love in heaven, because no one would choose hell. In not choosing Jesus, your choosing hell. His truth .

Anyone who believes Jesus is actually real, would choose Jesus, no matter what, as the only alternative 'choice' is apparently the worst thing imaginable. However, since belief is not a choice, many will reject "Jesus" much like you reject the assertion or idea of Santa Claus. And apparently, lacking such belief results in the being thrown into the worst place imaginable.

People make free will choices all the time, like when the body calls you to the toilet. Do you choose to go or do you choose to piss yourself. Just as we have no control over our bodily functions, it is the same with worldly functions.

Hmm? Can you choose (whether or not) your body makes/created urine too, which led you up to this next set of very limited choices, (where one choice would merely result in a temporary inconvenience, as opposed to having your one and only alternative choice being thrown into the worst place imaginable for eternity)?

Both God created.

Now we are getting into another topic, such as, why would god create humans with the necessity to produce and then excrete/expel urine in the first place?

How can God not love us if his only logical given choice (or not chosen) is to find love in heaven.

Well, as I stated prior, for which you also (skipped/ignored), maybe the devil and 1/3 of the angels are privy to something we humans aren't -- as the devil and his following angels freely chose to leave.

I don't like being forced to do or choose anything(coercion).

Then you should very much dislike Jesus's offer, as it is very much coercive. See the ending of the provided second video for further details.

I prefer my own free will.

Well then, Christianity does not qualify, and I have repeatedly explained why.

The rest of your response is just repetitive preaching....