geebob
February 22nd 2003, 10:37 PM
In this thread, like to approach the question of free will from two angles. One is why I believe God what would motivate God to give us libertarian free will. These aren’t considered the most compelling reasons for libertarian free will but serves as an important part of the paradigm of free will theism. It also addresses an often neglected aspect of the free will defense against the problem of evil. Libertarian free will may necessarily lead to the possibility of evil though it severes the chain of causation and necessity back to the creator, but if there is little good reason for this aspect of creation through which evil may enter creation, then we are still left with the problem of evil. It is often said that love is the reason, but I’d like to shed a little light on that aspect as well as give other reasons.
Secondly, I will highlight other reasons why a Christian who values scripture as an authority (and has the rationality to recognize other epistemic authorities) should believe in free will mostly apart from considerations of possible motives in God.
Just a note on how I’d like this thread to proceed. This is a cumulative case thread thus it covers a wide variety of arguments. Thus a point by point argument from dissenters, if thorough, will be too long to early in the thread. Rigorous debate on a few of these issues may distract attention from other arguments. Thus I’d like to recommend that challenges be made to only a few of these at a time in different threads so as not to distract from the collection of arguments as a whole. Basically, I’d like this thread to proceed similarly as a thread would in the liberal arts section where rigorous debate is not really welcome, but questions for understanding are. Again, I am not against rigorous debate on these issues, I’d just rather that challenges are made to smaller chunks in different threads. In short, questions are welcome, polemics, in this thread are not.
Before I start, I’d like to give the following definition of libertarian free will. This comes from a well known and influential Philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, and it is a definition agreed upon by most if not all who ascribe to libertarian freedom.
If a person is free with respect to a given action, then he is free to perform the action and free to refrain from performing it; no antecedent conditions and/or causal laws determine that he will perform the action, or that he won't...It is within his power, at the time in question, to take or perform the action and within his power to refrain from it.
(Taken from Philosophy of Religion: Selected Readings by Peterson et al. pg. 267)
Possible motivations for God to create libertarian free creatures:
Love is of course the traditional reason given for making creatures with free will. The idea is that love that arises from an individual will not be as gratifying when returning to that individual. It should come from without and if the necessity for that love (necessity as in guaranteeing necessity) should arise from outside that individual. The only way for that necessity to come from within the source of love is for that source to have the possibility to not love.
Secondly, God desired to create us in his image, which would gratify himself as well as contribute to the intimacy between man and himself. We are not carbon copies of God and perhaps he did not have to give us free will as a common feature between us, as part of the image, but nevertheless, this feature was favored as part of that which we would have in common with him.
Next, there is our creative aspect. This is sort of an extension of the argument from the image of God but deserves it’s own consideration. As the creator made us in the image of the creator, naturally it would be most reasonable for us to be little creators. If all of our creative endeavors where preplanned, in particular how we would create and when, it’s not really the case that we created. Of course we could say that there is no creation we could think of that God didn’t already conceive, but for us to arrive at it by tracing steps that arise from our own volition clearly adds a creative quality that would not be there otherwise.
Finally, one reason that I know the least about is the notion that the flavor of consciousness that we have is only obtainable with free will. This argument is based upon our experience of free will. (this is not an argument that I will put much effort into defending. I suspect that arguments from Peter Van Inwagen’s An Essay on Free Will would provide the meat for the support for this argument. I still haven’t obtained a copy yet).
Scriptural and philosophical Evidence for libertarian free will:
So why should the Christian believe in free will? Scripturally speaking, it becomes necessary when you take from scripture God’s universal Salvific will and the real chance of damnation. Naturally, those who reject that the scriptures indicates that God desires and has made possible salvation for all will reject this argument.
Basically, if every individual has the real chance to respond to salvation and the real chance of damnation regardless of prior antecedent conditions, then the glove of the definition given fits. Somehow, we can act such that we will be saved or refrain from that action (the action in Christianity being belief).
Secondly, scriptures that indicate that more than one possibility for us to choose amongst as real is proof for lfw. The only way to answer this type of proof is to show that the scripture does not present more than one truly available possibility. I believe that the strongest scriptural statement to the end of showing the availability of multiple possibilities is 1 Corinthians 10:13:
No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it.
If you reject that Christians do sin, then this will not be a convincing argument. If Christians do sin, then this verse means that it was also truly possible for the Christian to not sin. If it was not possible for the Christian to avoid sin, then it is not true that there was a “way out” thus God was not faithful.
Thirdly, for many, moral blame is meaningless outside a libertarian system. Scripture is of course filled with the designations of moral accountability.
Fourth, any scripture in which an unresolved potential within man’s heart is indicated is evidence for free will. Free will is of course the reason that the unresolved potential exists.
A classic example is God’s exclamation to Abraham “Now I know that you fear the Lord because you did not withhold your only son from the Lord”.
Also, a few times we read that God says that he tests “to see” what man will do. Exodus 16:4.
Free will theists who are not open theists may not like the notion that God gives these tests “to see” what people will do, but I believe they may still take advantage of the notion of the test as indicative of free will regardless of the apparent epistemic claims God is making here. But we open theists will point out that it is God’s claim to new knowledge that is what really anchors the notion of the test as indicative of free will, since the only reason that God could not be aware of the certainty of how the test will turn out because no such certainty exists to be known. This is all that will be said on the issue of foreknowledge (in terms of arguing with other free will theists :smile: ) the debate on whether free will really negates certain foreknowledge will in general be considered off topic.
These are some examples that have stuck out for me in terms of evidence of libertarian free will from scripture. If anyone else would like to add to these, that would be beuno!
Secondly, I will highlight other reasons why a Christian who values scripture as an authority (and has the rationality to recognize other epistemic authorities) should believe in free will mostly apart from considerations of possible motives in God.
Just a note on how I’d like this thread to proceed. This is a cumulative case thread thus it covers a wide variety of arguments. Thus a point by point argument from dissenters, if thorough, will be too long to early in the thread. Rigorous debate on a few of these issues may distract attention from other arguments. Thus I’d like to recommend that challenges be made to only a few of these at a time in different threads so as not to distract from the collection of arguments as a whole. Basically, I’d like this thread to proceed similarly as a thread would in the liberal arts section where rigorous debate is not really welcome, but questions for understanding are. Again, I am not against rigorous debate on these issues, I’d just rather that challenges are made to smaller chunks in different threads. In short, questions are welcome, polemics, in this thread are not.
Before I start, I’d like to give the following definition of libertarian free will. This comes from a well known and influential Philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, and it is a definition agreed upon by most if not all who ascribe to libertarian freedom.
If a person is free with respect to a given action, then he is free to perform the action and free to refrain from performing it; no antecedent conditions and/or causal laws determine that he will perform the action, or that he won't...It is within his power, at the time in question, to take or perform the action and within his power to refrain from it.
(Taken from Philosophy of Religion: Selected Readings by Peterson et al. pg. 267)
Possible motivations for God to create libertarian free creatures:
Love is of course the traditional reason given for making creatures with free will. The idea is that love that arises from an individual will not be as gratifying when returning to that individual. It should come from without and if the necessity for that love (necessity as in guaranteeing necessity) should arise from outside that individual. The only way for that necessity to come from within the source of love is for that source to have the possibility to not love.
Secondly, God desired to create us in his image, which would gratify himself as well as contribute to the intimacy between man and himself. We are not carbon copies of God and perhaps he did not have to give us free will as a common feature between us, as part of the image, but nevertheless, this feature was favored as part of that which we would have in common with him.
Next, there is our creative aspect. This is sort of an extension of the argument from the image of God but deserves it’s own consideration. As the creator made us in the image of the creator, naturally it would be most reasonable for us to be little creators. If all of our creative endeavors where preplanned, in particular how we would create and when, it’s not really the case that we created. Of course we could say that there is no creation we could think of that God didn’t already conceive, but for us to arrive at it by tracing steps that arise from our own volition clearly adds a creative quality that would not be there otherwise.
Finally, one reason that I know the least about is the notion that the flavor of consciousness that we have is only obtainable with free will. This argument is based upon our experience of free will. (this is not an argument that I will put much effort into defending. I suspect that arguments from Peter Van Inwagen’s An Essay on Free Will would provide the meat for the support for this argument. I still haven’t obtained a copy yet).
Scriptural and philosophical Evidence for libertarian free will:
So why should the Christian believe in free will? Scripturally speaking, it becomes necessary when you take from scripture God’s universal Salvific will and the real chance of damnation. Naturally, those who reject that the scriptures indicates that God desires and has made possible salvation for all will reject this argument.
Basically, if every individual has the real chance to respond to salvation and the real chance of damnation regardless of prior antecedent conditions, then the glove of the definition given fits. Somehow, we can act such that we will be saved or refrain from that action (the action in Christianity being belief).
Secondly, scriptures that indicate that more than one possibility for us to choose amongst as real is proof for lfw. The only way to answer this type of proof is to show that the scripture does not present more than one truly available possibility. I believe that the strongest scriptural statement to the end of showing the availability of multiple possibilities is 1 Corinthians 10:13:
No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it.
If you reject that Christians do sin, then this will not be a convincing argument. If Christians do sin, then this verse means that it was also truly possible for the Christian to not sin. If it was not possible for the Christian to avoid sin, then it is not true that there was a “way out” thus God was not faithful.
Thirdly, for many, moral blame is meaningless outside a libertarian system. Scripture is of course filled with the designations of moral accountability.
Fourth, any scripture in which an unresolved potential within man’s heart is indicated is evidence for free will. Free will is of course the reason that the unresolved potential exists.
A classic example is God’s exclamation to Abraham “Now I know that you fear the Lord because you did not withhold your only son from the Lord”.
Also, a few times we read that God says that he tests “to see” what man will do. Exodus 16:4.
Free will theists who are not open theists may not like the notion that God gives these tests “to see” what people will do, but I believe they may still take advantage of the notion of the test as indicative of free will regardless of the apparent epistemic claims God is making here. But we open theists will point out that it is God’s claim to new knowledge that is what really anchors the notion of the test as indicative of free will, since the only reason that God could not be aware of the certainty of how the test will turn out because no such certainty exists to be known. This is all that will be said on the issue of foreknowledge (in terms of arguing with other free will theists :smile: ) the debate on whether free will really negates certain foreknowledge will in general be considered off topic.
These are some examples that have stuck out for me in terms of evidence of libertarian free will from scripture. If anyone else would like to add to these, that would be beuno!