Libertarian Free Will???

[thatbrian]

There is no such animal as Libertarian Free WIll. It is a logical impossibility. If you disagree, state your case.

John Frame

1. Choices are either caused or uncaused.

2. If a choice is uncaused, then it springs from nothing and is, therefore, morally irrelevant.

3. Choices are morally relevant.

4. Therefore, choices are caused (and therefore necessary).

5. The causes of choices are either chosen or not chosen.

6. If the causes of choices are chosen, then an infinite regress of choices and causes must precede any choice.

7. An infinite regress of causes and choices is impossible, therefore, the causes of choices are not chosen.

8. From 4 and 7 --> Choices are causally necessitated by something not chosen.

9. LFW contradicts 8, therefore, LFW is false.​

 

[thatbrian]

One might imagine he has Libertarian Free Will when he sees himself free to choose among various alternatives, but the ability to choose among various alternatives in no way proves that our choices are uncaused. Those are two separate matters.

 

[Wesley Briggman]

Would a free-will proponent define free-will as unbiased will?

 

[Yeshua1]

Would a free-will proponent define free-will as unbiased will?

Would it not be free as in unable to be moved by any external agent?

 

[thatbrian]

Would a free-will proponent define free-will as unbiased will?

The will, according to proponents, is autonomous, not internal nor external force is acting upon the will to the degree that the will has not been thoroughly influenced by that force.

 

[padredurand]

Deuteronomy 30:19-20 NAS77

19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
20 by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them."
​

When it comes to following God we've never had a choice. Or so we've been told.

 

[thatbrian]

Deuteronomy 30:19-20 NAS77

19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
20 by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them."
​

When it comes to following God we've never had a choice. Or so we've been told.

Look at the context of that text.

 

[padredurand]

Look at the context of that text.

Deuteronomy 30:14-18 NAS77

14 "But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it.
15 "See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity;
16 in that I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the LORD your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it.
17 "But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them,
18 I declare to you today that you shall surely perish. You shall not prolong your days in the land where you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess it.​

You mean the part where Moses tells Israel that he has set before them life and prosperity or death and adversity? And that they could choose between obeying God. walking in His way and keeping the commandments? And that they could choose between one or the other? Do you mean the very clear and concise way Moses stated that Israel could choose to walk in life or death?

So, yes. I have looked at the context of that text.

 

[thatbrian]

Deuteronomy 30:14-18 NAS77

14 "But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it.
15 "See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity;
16 in that I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the LORD your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it.
17 "But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them,
18 I declare to you today that you shall surely perish. You shall not prolong your days in the land where you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess it.​

You mean the part where Moses tells Israel that he has set before them life and prosperity or death and adversity? And that they could choose between obeying God. walking in His way and keeping the commandments? And that they could choose between one or the other? Do you mean the very clear and concise way Moses stated that Israel could choose to walk in life or death?

So, yes. I have looked at the context of that text.

Like, who was his audience? Was he explaining soteriology? What was the reason for his words to the Children of Israel?

 

[padredurand]

Like, who was his audience? Was he explaining soteriology? What was the reason for his words to the Children of Israel?

The reason was to confront them with a choice. Life or death. The blessing or the curse. Then he said CHOOSE one of them. How could they possibly do that unless they had the ability to do so.

Edited to answer the first two questions. His audience was God's chosen people: Israel. Was he explaining soteriology?

16 in that I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the LORD your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it.
17 "But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them,
18 I declare to you today that you shall surely perish. You shall not prolong your days in the land where you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess it.
​

The Law was all they had. What else would he be explaining here?

 

[thatbrian]

The reason was to confront them with a choice. Life or death. The blessing or the curse. Then he said CHOOSE one of them. How could they possibly do that unless they had the ability to do so.

How did their choice work out for them? We know the history.

 

[padredurand]

How did their choice work out for them? We know the history.

Obviously many of them were not.

 

[TCassidy]

The reason was to confront them with a choice. Life or death. The blessing or the curse. Then he said CHOOSE one of them. How could they possibly do that unless they had the ability to do so.

Except "free will" has absolutely nothing to do with making choices. Everybody makes choices, every day.

Israel, God's elect, were told to make a choice. Choose right and prosper, choose wrong and suffer. No big mystery here.

The will is not free. It is in bondage to the law of sin and death or it is bound to the law of New Life in Christ.

 

[padredurand]

Except "free will" has absolutely nothing to do with making choices. Everybody makes choices, every day.

Israel, God's elect, were told to make a choice. Choose right and prosper, choose wrong and suffer. No big mystery here.

The will is not free. It is in bondage to the law of sin and death or it is bound to the law of New Life in Christ.

The premise of the OP makes the claim that there is no LFW and then cites Frame's convoluted explanation about choices>>>>

There is no such animal as Libertarian Free WIll. It is a logical impossibility. If you disagree, state your case.

John Frame

1. Choices are either caused or uncaused.

2. If a choice is uncaused, then it springs from nothing and is, therefore, morally irrelevant.

3. Choices are morally relevant.

4. Therefore, choices are caused (and therefore necessary).

5. The causes of choices are either chosen or not chosen.

6. If the causes of choices are chosen, then an infinite regress of choices and causes must precede any choice.

7. An infinite regress of causes and choices is impossible, therefore, the causes of choices are not chosen.

8. From 4 and 7 --> Choices are causally necessitated by something not chosen.

9. LFW contradicts 8, therefore, LFW is false.​

If there is a disconnect between choices and will then the premise of the OP is flawed from the beginning.

 

[TCassidy]

If there is a disconnect between choices and will then the premise of the OP is flawed from the beginning.

Well, uh, yeah!

 

[thatbrian]

The premise of the OP makes the claim that there is no LFW and then cites Frame's convoluted explanation about choices>>>>



If there is a disconnect between choices and will then the premise of the OP is flawed from the beginning.

Please show us where Frame is wrong.

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Deuteronomy 30:14-18 NAS77

14 "But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it.
15 "See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity;
16 in that I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the LORD your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it.
17 "But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them,
18 I declare to you today that you shall surely perish. You shall not prolong your days in the land where you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess it.​

You mean the part where Moses tells Israel that he has set before them life and prosperity or death and adversity? And that they could choose between obeying God. walking in His way and keeping the commandments? And that they could choose between one or the other? Do you mean the very clear and concise way Moses stated that Israel could choose to walk in life or death?

So, yes. I have looked at the context of that text.

Don't expect much sense of what the Bible actually does say, from those who call themselves "Reformed/Calvinists". They have a knack of ignoring the plain teachings of Scripture, and have their own theological reasoning which allows them to keep following their folly!

 

[InTheLight]

Don't expect much sense of what the Bible actually does say, from those who call themselves "Reformed/Calvinists". They have a knack of ignoring the plain teachings of Scripture, and have their own theological reasoning which allows them to keep following their folly!

Yep, they'll complain that the passages in Deuteronomy apply only to Israel, then they will appropriate Ezekiel 36 to apply to all people.


And now, a selection from the Calvinist's dictionary:

God's permissive will: Stuff that God makes happen by allowing it to happen and/or doesn't stop from happening. (if regular Calvinists see: Adam's sin)

God's decretive will: Stuff that God makes happen. (if hyper-Calvinists see: Adam's sin)

God’s secret will: To save a few and reprobate the rest (secret to Arminians but not to us).

God’s revealed will: a mystery

 

[Saved-By-Grace]

Yep, they'll complain that the passages in Deuteronomy apply only to Israel, then they will appropriate Ezekiel 36 to apply to all people.


And now, a selection from the Calvinist's dictionary:

God's permissive will: Stuff that God makes happen by allowing it to happen and/or doesn't stop from happening. (if regular Calvinists see: Adam's sin)

God's decretive will: Stuff that God makes happen. (if hyper-Calvinists see: Adam's sin)

God’s secret will: To save a few and reprobate the rest (secret to Arminians but not to us).

God’s revealed will: a mystery

I have been told that it is God's "revealed will" to save only the elect, while His "secret will", the entire world! Sounds like a "double-minded" God to me!

 

[Yeshua1]

I have been told that it is God's "revealed will" to save only the elect, while His "secret will", the entire world! Sounds like a "double-minded" God to me!

Sounds non biblical!