How far can you take the arguement of free will? Did we have to AGREE to be born?

[DrFree]

Hi, Chris,

Thanks for the compliment. I'm pretty much in agreement with you, with a few quibbles.

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

I would say that the future is pre-loaded with intention, which is what gives the experience of the temporal flow of time it's smooth continuity and texture, and movie-like feel.

I'm not comfortable with the word "intention" here. It smacks too much of purpose, of Aristotle's final cause. Of course, since I believe in free will, I believe that much of what happens has purpose. I do want to resist the claim that everything has a purpose. I like Chisholm's word "intension" (with an "s"), because it comprehends all of the various psychological attitudes one might have and which might affect one's choices.

I like your expression "what gives the experience of the temporal flow of time it's smooth continuity and texture, and movie-like feel", though the verisimilitude of movies is because they are like our experience, not vice-versa. What's valuable about it is its recognition that consciousness is a model of reality assembled by complex processing of the brain; it is not merely an assemblage of our direct sensory experience.

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

If will is the active choosing function of human consciousness, having arisen as a necessary component of complex consciousness, then free will is the only kind of will there is.

I wonder whether the causality suggested here is not backwards. If the evolutionary process i suggested in my other post is accurate, what was essential for evolution to the next higher level was choice: animals had to develop the ability to choose among complex alternatives. Consciousness emerged as a support faculty to enable choice.

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

Free will is free in the sense that it doesn't cost any extra because it comes stock on the vehicle. A steering wheel comes with the car. Free will isn't a gift from God. It isn't a special added bonus. "Thank God I have free will." equals "thank God this toaster plugs into the wall." God should be saying "thank Myself I don't have to pull this creation thingy around on a string all the time."

The "free" in free will has always puzzled me. Certainly we don't pay an extra fee at the hospital when we bring it home, though I hope that hospital administrators don't read this and discover another revenue option. In some sense it means unfettered, and I've had a lot of philosopher friends argue that we can't have truly free will unless it be totally free, i.e., unless there are no limits on our choices. The trouble is, I can't have totally free will without interfering with yours, since my choices would make things happen without regard to what you are choosing.

That's why I prefer to say that my choices have influence over, i.e., are part of the cause of, what happens. That makes us all co-creators. Of course if we're to make any sense of the concept of responsibility, we have to assume we can meaningfully weigh our respective measures of influence over an occurrence.

Anyway, have a great day.

Namiste.

[AndrewX]

I have just now come across a much clearer and more direct statement of something I was trying to say in my earlier post. In the book A Treatise on Cosmic Fire, by Alice Bailey, the following concise summary of the process of spiritual (and human/intellectual, and material) evolution is presented:

The life of God comes cyclically under the influence of the different Hierarchies or forces, all of which temporarily build for it a vehicle, pass it through their substance, give to it in this way a certain quality or coloring, and increase thereby its vibratory capacity until eventually the life is set free from hierarchical limitation. It then returns to its eternal Source plus the gain of its experiences and with the increased energy which is the result of its various transitions.

Just how much insight we can gain into what evolutionary developments take place during our incarnation into each of these Hierarchies, will depend upon our willingness to consider that Humanity's Consciousness may actually exist as part of a vast continuum.

At the least pole of this continuum of consciousness is the FORM which we call an atom. Through a gradual progression - as taught in the Zohar, in the Code of Manu, and in modern esotericism even since medieval times and before - the most primitive forms of life are replaced by increasingly sophisticated forms, as vehicles for the evolving LIFE within.

Consciousness, though undetectable for most of us at so early an evolutionary stage as the atom, is readily observable in the cat or dog, and even if you watch the movements of a jellyfish on the Discovery channel, you cannot help but recognize that there is awareness - however rudimentary - on the part of these magnificent and beautiful aquatic creatures.

Between the most basic unit of evolutionary focus, the atom, and the more developed examples in the animal and human kingdoms, there are a myriad of LIFE-Forms in the mineral and vegetable kingdoms. Each kingdom represents the evolutionary progress of millions upon millions of years - not just of the FORMs which LIFE takes on for its development, but of the LIFE Itself.

And there are those who are exceptionally gifted at understanding the Life within the animal, and lower kingdoms, either through gifts such as clairvoyance and telepathy, or even by direct Spiritual Identification, in the case of advanced disciples and Initiates.

The continuum of consciousness continues in a direction that most of us recognize to one degree or another ... yet somewhere between the collective subconscious and shared dream archetypes of Jungian philosophy, and the objectivity of Plato's world of FORMS and Cave Allegory, we decide that consciousness apparently empties itself into some kind of void, rather than connects with - even evolves into - Deity Itself.

The esotericist, however, can no longer embrace the nihilistic presentation of Eastern mysticism and the conception of Buddhism's Nirvana as emptiness, because s/he has found - through direct experience on perhaps every level of one's being - that Consciousness in fact DOES survive `death' ... continuing, from incarnation to incarnation, toward increasingly clear, understood and accepted GOALS, attained through intentional striving.

The Hierarchies, then, of the above quotation, prove to consist of Conscious Units of LIFE, which exist not-apart-from the Divine Life, or Deity, on the highest levels - or within the innermost reaches - both of our collective, and of our individual, Being. The Divine Spark, prior to evolving its FORM to the level of complexity of a human, with abilities to express more of the Divine than even the most evolved animal is capable .... must first undergo - through the `Cycles of Necessity' - the appropriate rounds of Incarnation within EACH prior Kingdom of LIFE (paradoxically defined, for us, according to the FORMs which this Life takes on).

If we would know more about our Highest, most Spiritual Nature, then we must first study something of the FORMs through which that LIFE - the Life of God - willingly and gladly evolves, though also of Necessity. Yet there are already hundreds of Initiates living upon our planet, in one of the worlds accessible to us or another (physical, astral, mental and Spiritual), and these Initiates of all degress are capable of teaching the serious student exactly what is necessary for our progress. They have done so, and They continue to do so, yet the student will receive only according to his or her demonstrated capacity to Serve ... and his or her willingness to sacrifice the agendas of the little self to those of the Greater, the Soul.

It is found by the student, early on, that only upon entry into the HUMAN Kingdom, does the material evolution of the FORM, fully meet with the purely Spiritual Evolution of the LIFE ... thus giving Birth to an entirely NEW Kingdom, the nature of whose evolution - for us - is primarily Intellectual (at this time). Humanity is actually a bridging Kingdom, and our entire function upon planet Earth might be described as the unification, or bridging, between the three lower kingdoms of life, and the three Spiritual Kingdoms ... each of which, it might be emphasized, has already attained to the FULL development or completion of the same Self-Consciousness which Humanity only recently began to develop.

The continuum of consciousness, if we follow the line of natural and Divinely-designed future progression (hypothetically, and then - hopefully - in thought, word and deed ... in Actualization!), leads the entirety of the Human Family through experiences of self-Initiated challange, growth and discovery (self-discovery, other-discovery and God-discovery) ... eventually concluding in several definite stages of demonstrated Self-Mastery. These have been referred to since ancient times as spiritual Initiations, and have been presented - via religious teachings - as those major, life-transforming experiences which every evolving Soul undergoes in one or another of its final series of Incarnations. Here, the key word is series ...

~+~+~

In realizing that the Life of God exists upon several levels transcending the Human, it becomes apparent to us that in fact, there is a Hierarchy of Consciousness, paralleling (or rather Expressing) the Great Chain of Being. Although ultimately Monistic and truly non-dual on some exalted level (the Supreme Cosmic as some have rendered it in Western traditions), we cannot, any of us, deny that in fact OUR experience of God is quite often subject to the mostly-limiting, and only sometimes-illumining nature of the mind. And that, of course, is when we aren't trapsing through a swamp of quasi-human emotions (much of our astral life is really quite animalistic), or all but completely blinded by the mayavic world of whirling lights, buzzers & bells ... the phantasmagora of physical, sensory experience - enough to make even poor Tommy fumble at his pinball game!

It is quite true that a simple act of kindness, preferably the intentional kind, or even the tenderness and radiant warmth of attention from someone who genuinely cares, can immediately communicate the Love, and the Light, of the Divine ... directly from the most Transcendent levels, straight into the heart and mind of even the most oppressed, or materially blinded of struggling, precious human Souls. Animals, similarly, respond to the Divine Energy by answering from within ... and the sleeping Deity Whom and which lives within their beating hearts, stirs a bit from its dormant state, when we approach our younger Brothers with this kindness. Some of us also know, that trees and plants have the capacity to respond, such that our Karma, from such massacres as widescale deforestation, will take many a kind word to our plant on the windowsill, before the balance between the Kingdoms has been fully restored.

At any rate, As Above, So Below. Just as we can recognize that Consciousness is progressing in its evolution through the lesser kingdoms, we can gain some insight into what things might be like in the Superhuman (the Devic, or Angelic) by looking at certain correspondences. For the next immediate kingdom of life beyond Humanity, the Kingdom of Heaven or of `Souls,' it is not inaccurate to say that we are something like beloved animals. The metaphor will only break down when we feel our Conscience reminding us that our behavior towards our younger animal Brethren is not quite on par with what we KNOW the Divine Law indicates (the Law of Love, written in every human heart, however faintly it is as yet recognized by some).

Our Souls, we know, do not abuse us, or use us for sport, or treat us as anything other than a beloved Friend, adopted for the duration (many, many long cycles of incarnation) ... that through their Loving Sacrifice WE might slowly develop, and ultimately ATTAIN (rather than freely receive, as some kind of handout) the Divine Consciousness which they already possess. And, just as it is true that our animal friends often try to understand us but do not fully "get it" (owing to the lack of the mental principle within them ... or rather, to its development), we may safely say that except in the rarest of instances - the Adept, Master or advanced Initiate - we, too, often miss the mark. The only possible value of GUILT, it will be observed, would be to inspire REFORM ... for otherwise, the resultant self-devaluation - which is often observed in religious types - only further serves to spiritually (or ethically) incapacitate us, adding insult to injury as it were.

The Kingdom of Souls, it should be noted, is one wherein Love and Light already prevail ... yet this does not mean that there is always full agreement, or cooperation, between the various GROUPS which comprise the Human Family. Although it is true that evil as we commonly know it, including all unnecessary suffering and unproductive conflict, does not exist upon the Soul levels, it is also true that there are distinctions which continue to demonstrate as the Power of Choice (or Free Will, if we like). These choices include observation, learning and Spiritual growth as the Soul subjectively experiences the results of its activity under the same Cyclic Law as we are subject to ... just on a higher subsequent turn of the spiral.

Now imagine the relationship between Humanity and that Kingdom which lies one full step beyond that of our own Spiritual Soul(s). Exoteric religions speak little about Beings of this stature, except in Myth and Allegory, in stories, poetry and symbolism. We have the Elohim of Judaism, borrowed by Christianity and revisited in St. John's Vision of the Seven Spirits before the Throne. The Hindu knows these as the Seven Prajapati, the Seven Rishis, or the Seven Mind-Born Sons of Brahma. And Buddhism, especially the secret practices of Tantra, recognizes five exoteric, seven esoteric Dhyani Buddhas, and Dhyani Bodhisattvas.

Each of these systems is the outward product of many, many generations of seekers, finders and codifiers, as well as the direct Revelation(s) of one or another of the same body of Adept Teachers which has always existed upon our Planet, guiding Humanity, guarding the Truth & the Light, and teaching the Wisdom to those willing & capable of living and practicing it. This Conscious Hierarchy of Beings, called by some the Masters of the Wisdom, by others simply the Elder Brothers or the Great Ones, represent the Vanguard, the Pinnacle, the Ultimate, Crowning Glory - and Highest Achievement - of which any man or woman is capable upon our planet, at any given time. In a curious way, They also indicate our own distant and inevitable future, though only up to a certain point (taking into consideration the Divine Efficiency - in terms of presentation of the Divine Plan, much being `over the horizon') ... and only as fully as Humanity's own KARMA will permit!

So, what the esotericist has come to understand, is that the Hierarchy, though technically the Divine Representation of the greatest possible achievement of the 4th Kingdom, as full-fledged, Spiritually-Perfected members of the 5th Kingdom (Souls, having completed their evolutionary trek upon this globe) ... symbolically, and also quite actually, the Adept Hierarchy serves the next highest Kingdom, the Elohim, or Planetary Spirits, as THEIR Representative(s) upon this Planet, for Humanity - thereby BRIDGING between GOD (the Throne), and the Kingdom of evolving Spiritual Souls, just as Humanity bridges between the Soul and all lesser kingdoms.

The question of Free Will will not finally be answered, until and unless we are willing to take a look into the possible Magnitude, and the occult (esoteric) significance, of precisely the Kingdom of Elohim - that PLURALITY of Beings which nonetheless comprise, in the totality of Their expression, our Solar System ... working out the Will of God, from on High. These Seven Spirits before the Throne are clearly observable only in their outermost peregrinations around our central Deity, save to the rarest of Initated and Adept-trained clairvoyants. Those familiar with the custom of the Tibetan Buddhists to circumambulate the stupa, will appreciate how this tradition can be seen as a humble, microcosmic mirror, an emulation, of the motion of the Planets Themselves, as They Journey around the Solar God.

If I have room, I will try to close with the Gayatri, which I will write about on another thread, since this may make some sense to those who can't figure out why I think the Sun is actually `God' ...

Oh Thou,
From Whom all things proceed,
To Whom all things return,
Reveal to us the face of the true Spiritual Sun
Hidden by a disc of golden light
And help us to know the Truth
And to do our whole Duty
As we journey to Thy Sacred Lotus Feet.

OM OM OM

Namaskara,

~Andrew

[fourgrtkidos]

I was hoping for some simple statements. But, you have all gone above my head again. I'll re- read and mull over.

I was trying to convey a feeling in my OP of this: Supposedly "G!D" does not impose will on us. (Does this theory work if you talk about a collective Divine Universe and not a single G!d- diety?) So it seems to me that G!d wouldn't thrust you into a horrible existance here on earth, without your agreement. But, maybe that only works out in religions that believe in pre-existance like a well of souls sort a theory- don't Mormons believe that we agree to be born here in order to learn lessons........
If you are "nothing" before and after you die then I get that you do not have any say.
And, I get that if everyone has free will.... my free will may get stampeeded for the collective free will.

[AndrewX]

I would only say that IF, for one of several possible reasons, you do not progress as fully as a SOUL as it is intended in some particular cycle ... then your free will might be kind of temporarily suspended. What that means, is that there's no incarnation, and thus no opportunity for spiritual progress, until another set of circumstances comes around again which is conducive to your Soul's Holy progress.

Theosophists, as also Hindus, Buddhists and Western esotericists, understand that this can and will take place upon other planets - some physical, some non-physical. It already has, in our past, and it accounts for a great portion of current Humanity (which Individualized long ago, while many of us also became Human just a few million years ago, on this planet).

But Earth is generally taught as being the least evolved of the Spiritual evolutions within our particular Solar System, so it only behooves us to get on ahead with it, put our nose to the grindstone, and do our level best to `Come Into Life' - in the Divine sense. In other words, God ain't gonna hatch us up our own, private little planet, if we screw this one up.

Sure, that doesn't fit with what a lot of folks have been taught ... but then, I didn't exactly say I wanted to reincarnate here in some endless cycle, either. I'm afraid a lot of people in the Judeo-Christian tradition, or of a Western mindset, just haven't been exposed to what the Ageless Wisdom has to say about the Law of Rebirth, and instead they are told from a very early age that simple faith, and faith alone, will somehow solve all their problems for them ... and get them into an eternal `Heaven' - where they won't have to worry about it anymore!

We might wish that things were that simple, but of course, if wishes were horses ... then beggars would ride!

Anyway, I would suggest that the kind of `free will' which it is Divinely intended that we DO exercise, will not actually be capable of stampeding another person's corresponding power of choice - including that person's own judgment, decision and willingness to cooperate with God's Will for their own highest Good. I can tell you that only Rebirth, of the various other possibilities, makes sense to me as the Soul's means of progress upon this or any other planet ... and yet, the moment I try to coerce, or force you to accept that, I cease to express either a Divine quality, or really anything Holy whatsoever. About the only thing I succeed in doing, in fact, is coming across Holier-than-thou!

So just what did you mean about the stampeding? How would it be possible for this to occur, if in fact, you know, deep within you - as CERTAIN as the stars above - that such 'n such is true, or that thus 'n such is how things are?

You see, that's pretty much how I see a lot of my beliefs, even after I leave plenty of room for the inevitable human error, and inaccuracy of vision, judgment and discernment. There are things which I know I don't know, such as pretty much all of higher mathemathics, and I will not pretend that I have any great gift - or accomplishment, as yet - in that area. But if you ask me something about computers, I can tell you what I know, although there again, I will quickly reach my limit if I even try to fathom the simplest workings of the microchip. Ones and zeros, sure, but do you really know how a three petaflop computer manages to do all that computation? It's like, a dude with an abacus, and about fifty years, to do what that computer just did in .008 seconds!

If God gave us all this Free Will, then what about Divine Responsibility? Is that just God's business? Okay, how about `Spiritual responsibility' then? At what point does our human responsibility meet with the kind of grown-up-ness, maturity and even that tendency to look out for other people that makes God a Loving being, and not just some big tyrant up in the sky, zapping the infidels and idol-worshippers with thunderbolts? Or is God just a larger, equally-selfish version of any one of us, different only in the possession of infinite power, while Salvation and Love - if we are so fortunate - can only be bartered from him, at the cost of our immortal soul?

You know I'm not addressing that last bit just to you, fourgrtkidos ... I'm only mentioning that kind of rhetorically, but of course, I am interested in what folks actually think. I am not so sure everyone equates Free Will with the Power-to-Choose, but it's something I have a tendency to do ... and I continue to ask questions as to whether or not this is accurate. Just because I do not buy into the choose-God's-ways-or-suffer-eternal-hell, doesn't meant I don't ponder this question, even from a Judeo-Christian angle ...

Oh well, so much for a short reply!

~Andrew

[Nick the Pilot]

fourgrtkidos, you said,

"Supposedly "G!D" does not impose will on us."

--> I agree that "He" does not.

"Does this theory work if you talk about a collective Divine Universe and not a single G!d- diety?"

--> It does.

"So it seems to me that G!d wouldn't thrust you into a horrible existance here on earth, without your agreement."

It see it as "God" allowing us to come here, not forcing us. This may be a horrible place, but I do not see another system as being better.

"...maybe that only works out in religions that believe in pre-existance like a well of souls sort a theory...."

--> I believe in the pre-existence of "souls", and my belief system does not believe we were thrust into this existence against our will.

"If you are "nothing" before and after you die then I get that you do not have any say."

--> This assumes we are "nothing" before and after we die. I see no reason to make this assumption. Do you?

"...if everyone has free will.... my free will may get stampeeded for the collective free will."

--> I think that, once you achieve cosmic consciousness, you will be so busy helping other people, you will forget your own needs entirely.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by DrFree

I'm not comfortable with the word "intention" here. It smacks too much of purpose, of Aristotle's final cause. Of course, since I believe in free will, I believe that much of what happens has purpose. I do want to resist the claim that everything has a purpose. I like Chisholm's word "intension" (with an "s"), because it comprehends all of the various psychological attitudes one might have and which might affect one's choices.

I'm not suggesting that the future is made of intention, and maybe that isn't a good word. Imagine a floating envelope of temporal time, half of which is the immediate past, the other half the immediate future, and an infinitesimally thin line at the center representing the present. This is the movie frame. Right at the center on that razor thin line is the conscious observer. The conscious observer is collapsing the quantum wave to create the experience of localized phenomena associated with physical reality. The weight of probability created by the models and mechanisms deployed in observation, the built in bias factor of the parameters of the observation if you will, predisposes the immediate, if virtual, future in all of the ways necessary for the experience of time-space dimensionality to function. A simpler way to put it would be that for particles to have apparent locality and motion they need to appear to come from somewhere and go somewhere. Where they appear to come from is is weighted by the probability of the observation's parameters. Where they appear to go is similarly weighted. This creates the envelope of space for dimensional reality to play out in.

I like your expression "what gives the experience of the temporal flow of time it's smooth continuity and texture, and movie-like feel", though the verisimilitude of movies is because they are like our experience, not vice-versa. What's valuable about it is its recognition that consciousness is a model of reality assembled by complex processing of the brain; it is not merely an assemblage of our direct sensory experience.

I agree. I'm thinking of the experience of suddenly noticing something, like a big tree, that I never saw before even though it's right there in plain sight on a route I've traveled regularly for years driving to work. It clued me in to the extent to which a modeled reality, like what you're describing, supplants, or substitutes for the actual objective reality of the physical experience. I was, and am all the time, driving and walking through a modeled virtual reality created by my consciousness. It is a greatly simplified caricature of objective reality not unlike a cartoon scenery background that keeps repeating. Kind of like the Flintstones where Fred and Barney keep running past the same background.

I wonder whether the causality suggested here is not backwards. If the evolutionary process i suggested in my other post is accurate, what was essential for evolution to the next higher level was choice: animals had to develop the ability to choose among complex alternatives. Consciousness emerged as a support faculty to enable choice.

Chicken and egg? Yeah, I don't know which arose to to support the other. Probably shouldn't look at it as a linear process like that.

The "free" in free will has always puzzled me. Certainly we don't pay an extra fee at the hospital when we bring it home, though I hope that hospital administrators don't read this and discover another revenue option. In some sense it means unfettered, and I've had a lot of philosopher friends argue that we can't have truly free will unless it be totally free, i.e., unless there are no limits on our choices. The trouble is, I can't have totally free will without interfering with yours, since my choices would make things happen without regard to what you are choosing.

That's why I prefer to say that my choices have influence over, i.e., are part of the cause of, what happens. That makes us all co-creators. Of course if we're to make any sense of the concept of responsibility, we have to assume we can meaningfully weigh our respective measures of influence over an occurrence.

I don't see how your free will impinges on mine. The fact that my choices are in some way limited by the available options doesn't affect the function of my free will. I can freely choose between all the options available, as can you. It does suggest that when group consciousness occurs the aggregate weight of the probabilities induced both increases the depth of complexity and the stability of the temporal time envelope. One the one hand this creates more possibilities, but the increase in stability tends to buffers out other, possibly more radical diversions. What you get is more choices but in a diminished range of possibility.

All of that is entirely speculative on my part. I don't have a clue how it all actually works.

Chris

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by fourgrtkidos

I was trying to convey a feeling in my OP of this: Supposedly "G!D" does not impose will on us. (Does this theory work if you talk about a collective Divine Universe and not a single G!d- diety?)

It would imply that the animating Force of the collective divine universe is chaotic and violent just like the the physical universe itself since All is a reflection, emanation, or body of the One.

Chris

[China Cat Sunflower]

Bump.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by fourgrtkidos

I was hoping for some simple statements. But, you have all gone above my head again. I'll re- read and mull over.

I was trying to convey a feeling in my OP of this: Supposedly "G!D" does not impose will on us. (Does this theory work if you talk about a collective Divine Universe and not a single G!d- diety?) So it seems to me that G!d wouldn't thrust you into a horrible existance here on earth, without your agreement. But, maybe that only works out in religions that believe in pre-existance like a well of souls sort a theory- don't Mormons believe that we agree to be born here in order to learn lessons........
If you are "nothing" before and after you die then I get that you do not have any say.
And, I get that if everyone has free will.... my free will may get stampeeded for the collective free will.

Everyone asserts their will on their neighbors. The question is the method the assertion is made. Is God any different?

To me the term 'free will' was never an absolute term. It does not mean free of all assertion, influence, physical laws, or bodily requirements. Unless you are able to separate those influences from the will, then it is always a 'partially free will'. No man has a free will over the entire world, or even a single neighbor, so there is an obvious limit to their will. But many people feel as though they are able to identify some choices that they make which can be considered theirs no matter how small, bound up and imprisoned they are. That choice, that will, if only a decision within a few neurons of the mind, is still free. So the 'free' is more like a quality and the magnitude of power or the sphere of influence that the will asserts on the world is the scope of it. For example if you lose arms, legs, eyes, or ears, then the scope of opportunity in the world is going to decrease.

To me, a relationship is not a matter of losing or shackling the 'free will'. Some people view marriage for example as the 'ball and chain'... no longer a 'free' man or woman. Any contract or agreement can be viewed as solely a commitment. Whereas I view in a relationship that my will extends over someone and theirs extends over me. The scope of the 'free will' increases in one way and it decreases in another way. The scope increases, but overlaps. With any cooperative effort or relationship something is gained, and something material is lost. I view the relationship with God in a similar way... as a relationship.

[Neemai]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

To me, a relationship is not a matter of losing or shackling the 'free will'. Some people view marriage for example as the 'ball and chain'... no longer a 'free' man or woman. Any contract or agreement can be viewed as solely a commitment. Whereas I view in a relationship that my will extends over someone and theirs extends over me. The scope of the 'free will' increases in one way and it decreases in another way. The scope increases, but overlaps. With any cooperative effort or relationship something is gained, and something material is lost. I view the relationship with God in a similar way... as a relationship.

Nicely put!

[fourgrtkidos]

[quote=17th Angel;125269]I think some people just wish they were smarter than they are, and seek after questions which are masked as intelligent yet reek with stupidity..... [quote]


I wasn't going to ask, but now I think I may....... So What did you mean by this? That the question I posed was "stupid"???