Free Will - its scope and purpose

[Tariki]

The idea of "free will" seems to be going the rounds at the moment.

The idea seems to raise its head as some sort of justification for "judgement" and I was reflecting on this from my own perspective. It does seem to me that in many ways the conservative/fundamentalist perspective compromises the whole concept. It seems that it is only the exercise of choice/free will when it comes to "accepting Christ" that has any real meaning.

A human being could choose the ethically sound throughout their existence, yet if the decision for "Christ" is not made, they are damned. Alternatively, a human being could indulge themselves throughout their life, causing great suffering and discord, yet at the very end "repent" and "choose Christ" and they are "saved.

And again, it seems the value of free will/choice has no need to extend into the after-life. No "free will" exists here! Only its consequences. Eternal joy or eternal suffering. Apparently "God" no longer values the idea of free will! Those in heaven are perfect yet without it (in as much as the possibilty of losing "salvation" is no longer an option), while those in hell are unable to choose annihilation/non-existence.

So "free will" is a great value, yet we only have it for one short ambiguous life that lasts for "three score years and ten" - if we are lucky............And the ethical acts performed and freely chosen by those "outside of Christ" are mere "dirty rags" in the sight of the Almighty!

I may misunderstand. Personally I live with the subjective experience of freedom...............whatever the reality may or may not be concerning "free will/determinism". And I live as being "grasped never to be abandoned" by Infinite Compassion. I can make mistakes within the embrace of such a Compassion without fear of any form of rejection. Thats the end of it. I must admit to finding certain Christian beliefs and expressions more and more obscure.........

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Tariki!

While I want to agree with your assessment, I feel it is incomplete.

Perhaps for a "fundamentalist" what you suggest may be true, or may only appear to be so.

For a deeper Biblical scholar, there are more pressing issues surrounding the matter of free-will. Those matters focus around the concept of love.

Free-will is also typically contrasted with predestination, with those advocating one or the other standing on opposing sides of a fence (wall?).

There may be other issues as well, but these two immediately jump to mind on this subject. Predestination presumes that people have no mind for themselves...that whatever will be, will be. No matter how good they conduct themselves, it is the arbitrary whim of the powers that be upon their conception as to whether or not they "make it" to heaven or not. So what is the sense or purpose of morality teachings at all, let alone the Bible? Why did Jesus even bother?

Since Jesus (and other religious leaders of other faiths) teach the significance of love, it is imperitive to see that love cannot be forced to be genuine. To the Christian, G-d is Love. Since love cannot be forced, predestined love is impossible. G-d did not create, nor did He intend to create, a bunch of little pre-selected robots to run around and mouth the words "I love you G-d" all day, every day, in heaven. G-d loves His creation, and desires that love returned to Him (don't we all?). For that love to be genuine and sincere, it must be freely and willfully given. Free will is a gift, and a test. It is what we do with the gift of free will that determines where we end up in the final analysis, when the wheat is separated from the chaff. Those who can and have displayed love in their lives (what you do to the least of these, you have done to me) will gain favor, IMHO. Those who cannot love or choose not to, gain their reward according to their actions (works).

That is how I see things in the Christian walk I follow.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Tariki

The idea of "free will" seems to be going the rounds at the moment.

The idea seems to raise its head as some sort of justification for "judgement" and I was reflecting on this from my own perspective. It does seem to me that in many ways the conservative/fundamentalist perspective compromises the whole concept. It seems that it is only the exercise of choice/free will when it comes to "accepting Christ" that has any real meaning.

A human being could choose the ethically sound throughout their existence, yet if the decision for "Christ" is not made, they are damned. Alternatively, a human being could indulge themselves throughout their life, causing great suffering and discord, yet at the very end "repent" and "choose Christ" and they are "saved.

And again, it seems the value of free will/choice has no need to extend into the after-life. No "free will" exists here! Only its consequences. Eternal joy or eternal suffering. Apparently "God" no longer values the idea of free will! Those in heaven are perfect yet without it (in as much as the possibilty of losing "salvation" is no longer an option), while those in hell are unable to choose annihilation/non-existence.

So "free will" is a great value, yet we only have it for one short ambiguous life that lasts for "three score years and ten" - if we are lucky............And the ethical acts performed and freely chosen by those "outside of Christ" are mere "dirty rags" in the sight of the Almighty!

I may misunderstand. Personally I live with the subjective experience of freedom...............whatever the reality may or may not be concerning "free will/determinism". And I live as being "grasped never to be abandoned" by Infinite Compassion. I can make mistakes within the embrace of such a Compassion without fear of any form of rejection. Thats the end of it. I must admit to finding certain Christian beliefs and expressions more and more obscure.........

No where in scripture does it state that all are damned. Nor does it state one MUST choose. What it states is that all fall short of the glory of God (I think that can be a pretty accurate statement, since none of us are even close to being God). It also states that none are completely righteous (again, I think that is a pretty accurate picture of man).

What Christianity does is offer a choice to man. Live life with Christ, or live life without Christ. Now, life will continue regardless of which choice is made. But Christianity opines that after life, there will be a day of judgement. Those that did not live with Christ in their lives will be judged on their merits in life. It's a 50/50 chance of being deemed worthy to enter heaven, or not.

Those that did live with Christ in their lives, "skip" that part of judgement. Instead, they will be judged based on their merits AFTER accepting Christ (all life before being tossed away), and will be awarded "status" if you will, accordingly, in heaven. (take me for example...I'll be lucky if I'm made the doorman) Hey, as long as I'm in heaven...who cares? Of course that means I'll have to listen to St. Peter boast, for eternity...

What Christianity also opines is that if one accepts Christ, the duration of one's life will be filled with calm and self peace beyond understanding, regardless of the situation, or condition. Only it is sudden, and given and constant, not learned and efforted, and fleeting.

I'm not like my esteemed colleague Juan...(I talk from the gut), but I think we are saying the same thing.

He's just more eloq- elloc-elloqui-oh hell, he has english under his belt.

v/r

Joshua

[InLove]

You guys are great--all of you!

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by InLove

You guys are great--all of you!

Uhhhp! that gets you through the gates...Now you gotta get past Pete...

[Tariki]

juantoo3,

Thank you for your response. I do think that in a certain sense it is possible that all are predestined to love without any denial of free will.................though not if our relationship with/within God/Reality-as-is is frozen at death - which I admit does seem the teaching of much of Christianity (allowing for a bit of purgatory.... )

St Augustine once said something like we are made for God and our hearts remain restless until they find their rest in thee. Given an eternity and the assumption that a God "unwilling that any should perish" will never cease to seek our salvation, given that the only point at which a heart can rest would be "in God" and "within love", each heart will remain "restless" and "on the move" until such time as it freely accepts the call of love. (It would be possible I suppose to insist that some will hold out eternally, yet eternity is a pretty long time.......)

Obviously, if one wishes to insist that a time limit is set..............though why it ever should be I fail to see.



P.S. Please note that as a Buddhist some of the terms I am using remain problematic.............I'm merely seeking to heave some of my Universalist Pure Land pathways onto the Christian road!!

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Tariki

juantoo3,

Thank you for your response. I do think that in a certain sense it is possible that all are predestined to love without any denial of free will.................though not if our relationship with/within God/Reality-as-is is frozen at death - which I admit does seem the teaching of much of Christianity (allowing for a bit of purgatory.... )

St Augustine once said something like we are made for God and our hearts remain restless until they find their rest in thee. Given an eternity and the assumption that a God "unwilling that any should perish" will never cease to seek our salvation, given that the only point at which a heart can rest would be "in God" and "within love", each heart will remain "restless" and "on the move" until such time as it freely accepts the call of love. (It would be possible I suppose to insist that some will hold out eternally, yet eternity is a pretty long time.......)

Obviously, if one wishes to insist that a time limit is set..............though why it ever should be I fail to see.



P.S. Please note that as a Buddhist some of the terms I am using remain problematic.............I'm merely seeking to heave some of my Universalist Pure Land pathways onto the Christian road!!

Wasn't it Buddha that said "I seek the light"?..

Christ said, "I am the light".

v/r

Joshua

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Tariki!

Originally Posted by Tariki

P.S. Please note that as a Buddhist some of the terms I am using remain problematic.............I'm merely seeking to heave some of my Universalist Pure Land pathways onto the Christian road!!

Forgive me for beginning at the end. Thank you for being up front with your objective. I have no issues with this, so long as it is kept respectful, and I know you well enough to believe you will. However, if too much stink is raised, I might suggest we move the discussion to the liberal board so that others here do not feel pressed upon.

Originally Posted by Tariki

Thank you for your response. I do think that in a certain sense it is possible that all are predestined to love without any denial of free will.................though not if our relationship with/within God/Reality-as-is is frozen at death - which I admit does seem the teaching of much of Christianity (allowing for a bit of purgatory.... )

I am afraid this is foreign to me, and I mean no pun. I cannot envision a heaven where all is static, where we all sit around on clouds playing harps all day with nothing better to do. Not that I haven't tried, but I do not see it in the Bible. Perhaps some of your imagery holds a place in one form or other of orthodoxy, I cannot say. I distance myself from a great deal of the trappings of orthodoxy (traditions of men, and all of that). Matters such as purgatory are intellectual fodder for debates, but I have never seen anything of that nature from my first hand studies in the Bible. So I am struggling to understand quite what it is you mean by "it is possible that all are predestined to love without any denial of free will." I suppose anything is possible, but probable in accord with sacred scripture is another matter altogether. It is possible that the whole of the Bible is just some multi-millennial political con game, but the probability of that being so without coming to naught over the long term is pretty doggone low.

Originally Posted by Tariki

St Augustine once said something like we are made for God and our hearts remain restless until they find their rest in thee. Given an eternity and the assumption that a God "unwilling that any should perish" will never cease to seek our salvation, given that the only point at which a heart can rest would be "in God" and "within love", each heart will remain "restless" and "on the move" until such time as it freely accepts the call of love. (It would be possible I suppose to insist that some will hold out eternally, yet eternity is a pretty long time.......)

Ah, what a clever way to insert the concept of reincarnation and / or rebirth. While I have heard some interesting arguments in that regard, some even from Jewish quarters, I am still inclined to hedge my wager along with Pascal. I do not close the door to the possibility, but again, in my personal untethered studies I do not find such written. Besides, I have known a few persons in my life who come to take such possibility for granted...oh, if I don't get it right this lifetime, I'll make up for it next time. Me, I would rather not have that safety net beneath me to make me lazy and carefree (careless?) when I walk the straight and narrow high wire. In accord with my understanding of Karma...if I get it right this time, I step to a higher level next time. Conversely, if there is no next time, I still advance. The poor person who wagered their life on a next time and doesn't get one, is in for a rude surprise, no?

Originally Posted by Tariki

Obviously, if one wishes to insist that a time limit is set..............though why it ever should be I fail to see.

Those are command decisions, they don't pay me to make command decisions. I'm just a lowly grunt taking orders like just about everybody else.

I am thinking kinda like a basketball game (Go Gators, National Champs two years in a row!!! Whooo whoo!). You have to focus on the game you are playing right now, you can't be worrying about next week's game when your opponent is charging down the court right at you. If the whole Karma / rebirth thing turns out to be correct (and I am not one to say outright it is not), then so be it. I find I guide myself more diligently if I do not play my game by that assumption.

How rebirth factors in with predestination, love and free-will, I haven't got a clue. But I don't see love possible without free-will, otherwise it is not genuine love. It is forced, and love cannot be forced for very long at all, certainly not for eternity. I hesitate to say, but I don't think even G-d could do that. Besides, why would He want to? Which would you prefer...a forced love that lasts for a fleeting moment?...or a genuine and sincere love that lasts forever? Isn't it a wonderful feeling to love somebody or something, and have your love unquestionably returned? It's such a rush, such a positive feedback loop that feeds itself, like a perpetual motion machine. Forced love is like a windup toy, once it runs out or the spring breaks, it's no fun anymore.

[Quahom1]

See what I mean? Juan's got english...

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Q!

Originally Posted by Quahom1

I'm not like my esteemed colleague Juan...(I talk from the gut), but I think we are saying the same thing.

Close enough for Jazz.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

He's just more eloq- elloc-elloqui-oh hell, he has english under his belt.

Thanks for the vote of confidence!

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, Q!

Close enough for Jazz.


Thanks for the vote of confidence!

Za za, shaboom.

[earl]

Well Derek, while it's a minority position in Christian theology, you might find the notion of Christian universalism interesting-has some parallels to Pure Land in its notions of mercy and ultimate reconciliation-see for instance Christian universalism--Ultimate Reconcilation: The True "Good News" Gospel of the Bible

It would certainly be the only Christian theology I'd ever entertain & I believe it's Luna's orientation. We'd be in good company though as it apparently is also Huston Smth's, (the man also apparently believes rebirth/reincarnation is not contradictory to a Christian theology):
http:jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/15877.htm

have a good one, earl

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by earl

Well Derek, while it's a minority position in Christian theology, you might find the notion of Christian universalism interesting-has some parallels to Pure Land in its notions of mercy and ultimate reconciliation-see for instance Christian universalism--Ultimate Reconcilation: The True "Good News" Gospel of the Bible

It would certainly be the only Christian theology I'd ever entertain & I believe it's Luna's orientation. We'd be in good company though as it apparently is also Huston Smth's, (the man also apparently believes rebirth/reincarnation is not contradictory to a Christian theology):
http:jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/15877.htm

have a good one, earl

Beg your pardon Earl, but didn't Juan just state, "so long as it is kept respectful..." That means respectful of those who adhere to strict Christian standards. And forgive me if I an in error, but did you not just slight those basic Christians?

Again, if I am in error I apologize...

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Beg your pardon Earl, but didn't Juan just state, "so long as it is kept respectful..." That means respectful of those who adhere to strict Christian standards. And forgive me if I an in error, but did you not just slight those basic Christians?

Again, if I am in error I apologize...

Q, we know Earl well enough...I seriously doubt there was any intentional slight within anything he wrote. Personally, I have no problem entertaining discussions such as these, but there are others who do feel jeopardized by such "foreign excursions." It is well to protect their interests too. If it becomes a burden, perhaps it would be better to carry this to the other board? Like Paul said, eating meat offered to idols is no sin, because the idol is nothing. However, if this is offensive to a brother, do not eat meat offered to idols in front of him and lay a stumbling block before him.

I do not wish to seem to equate Buddhism with idolatry, that is not my intent. The point is that sometimes it is better to refrain from deeper discussions in the presence of those who haven't fully developed their understanding. These things sometimes seem offensive when they are misunderstood, which is why it may be best to take this elsewhere.

Oh yes, thank you for your contribution, Earl!

[Quahom1]

I stand corrected.

v/r

Joshua