seebs: yr view on free will/sin

[swamp]

I was reading through the "what if you're wrong!?" thread, and while I didn't make it all the way through, I enjoyed a lot of the insights within.

seebs ( :notworthy ), your views on Free Will and sin gave me pause. I read this post, http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showpost.php?p=2588480&postcount=104, wherein you claim that infinite punishment may be fitting for infinite sin. I am sympathetic to your point: if you are free to choose, and you choose incorrectly, punishment--simple as that!

But I get tripped up a little with my intuitions about free will. For instance: what does it mean to say that someone is going to choose incorrectly for eternity? Though my understanding of free will is indubitably imperfect, it surely implies an ability to change one's behavior. If a person were to choose to smack the child for eternity, knowing the consequences, could she really be free? Is it sensible to say that a person could "prefer the wrong choice" for eternity, and literally never learn the lesson? Wouldn't it indicate something about the person's inherent character moreso than anything she could willfully change? It seems like God gave this person free will, but he must also have constructed the person in a way that (if, indeed, she chooses wrong for all eternity) negates free will.

And expanding my question ... do you know of any bible passages that discuss the strength of the will? I didn't put it into the context of God, but it is a good starter for a discussion along those lines. Now, I don't know anybody's feelings as much as I know my own. It so happens that I can pretty much pick up smoking and drop it with little problem. I may be delusional, but take the personal aspect out of it: some folks just don't seem to have an addictive personality. I've also spent some time on the dreaded H, only to drop it like the bad habit it was. But many people don't seem to be blessed with this willpower.

If I recall, I was at first proud of this fact. "I can quit and they can't, I must have way more willpower!" But I've come to consider it more likely that (and I'm sure someone on this board can provide a more authoratative source than my musing) many people actually experience addiction on a much greater level. I believe it's possible/likely that other people literally feel withdrawal more acutely than I do, due to differences in brain chemistry. I would say I'm sure, but I don't have a background in neuroscience.

And on a similar note, some people seem to be endowed with extraordinary willpower. Does the bible ever claim that everyone has the same ability to control their impulses, and if not, then why construct some people to be more likely to fail?

[swamp]

PS, this post was inspired by seebs, but any/all are encouraged to respond.

[Neo-Nietzschean]

I think there seems to be some confusion as to what frree-will is. Judging from the way I hear many people use the word, it seems to imply choice, thereby making free-will and choice synonymous. Therefore we can say, people have the choice to either sin or not to sin. but it seems to me, that such a superficial understanding of free-will limits human possibility. The conception of free-will, taken literally, is that of a boundlessness, in human endeavors and behavoirs. It is a conceptualization of human character in which there are only horizons and we are responsible for our own actions. Free-will, if taken literally, would have to be on the level of reality, it is not merely making choices, but inventing whole realities in which choices are therein made. So the ultimate question is, what is the relationship between God and human free-will? Did God create us and give to us the power to invent reality or did we invent God and assign to Him the power to create us and give us free-will? :confused:

[seebs]

Oh, man. You don't start off with the easy ones.

I have no idea how to evaluate strength of will, and I do not know whether it varies inherently. I know that some people are stronger-willed in practice than others. However, I have no way of distinguishing between stronger will and weaker impulses to fight, for instance.

Ironically, I think choosing badly forever would require comparatively great strength of will. Really, the choice you're making is whether or not to admit you were wrong; the rest is window-dressing.

I wrote about some predatory lenders once. I've talked to at least one other person they ripped off. All the available evidence seems to suggest that they're still doing it, even though they got caught. They know it's "wrong" in some sense; they avoid former victims, etcetera. They keep doing it. They are so committed to their view that money will solve their problems that they are unwilling to admit that it's not working.

This, I think, is why "pride" is often described as the greatest sin. It is the one that makes others harder to cure.

Past that... I don't think the Bible talks much directly about will or strength of will. We see that some people seem to have an easier time than others, but mostly, we see that the will is not very strong in and of itself. My current theological position is that, in many cases, the moral failing we have is not in not wanting to do some particular nice thing, but in not being willing to admit we need help to do it without falling to impulses to the contrary.

[swamp]

Ok, seebs, I got a few answers that satisfied, but I hope you don't mind if my probing continues :)

Ironically, I think choosing badly forever would require comparatively great strength of will. Really, the choice you're making is whether or not to admit you were wrong; the rest is window-dressing.

I wrote about some predatory lenders once...

I guess I might be splitting hairs, but this seems more willful than what I have in mind. Do you think the same pride afflicts both the lender and the hopeless junky? Is a person who feels they have given over their will entirely to a highly addictive drug in the same moral boat as a person who feels that their only way to survive is to cheat and steal? I suppose the case could be made ... I'll have to think a bit more on this one.


We see that some people seem to have an easier time than others, but mostly, we see that the will is not very strong in and of itself. My current theological position is that, in many cases, the moral failing we have is not in not wanting to do some particular nice thing, but in not being willing to admit we need help to do it without falling to impulses to the contrary.

Well put. How explicit is the bible regarding free will? I haven't cracked the old tome in ages. And I suppose I've gotten an "I don't know" on this one ... but eh, you don't want to grant that "impulses to the contrary" are more acute in some people than in others? It didn't strike me as a piercing problem for Christianity at first, but it rather does now. It would be like God stacking the deck.

Edit: Good arg about exceedingly strong will + pride.

[seebs]

I guess I might be splitting hairs, but this seems more willful than what I have in mind. Do you think the same pride afflicts both the lender and the hopeless junky? Is a person who feels they have given over their will entirely to a highly addictive drug in the same moral boat as a person who feels that their only way to survive is to cheat and steal? I suppose the case could be made ... I'll have to think a bit more on this one.

I don't know. I understand the mechanisms of physical addiction better, but this doesn't rule out the possibility that the lender is just as addicted, only in a way I don't understand.

In general, though, I see physical addiction as a thing which happens to you, and which you may have limited options in responding to.

Well put. How explicit is the bible regarding free will? I haven't cracked the old tome in ages. And I suppose I've gotten an "I don't know" on this one ... but eh, you don't want to grant that "impulses to the contrary" are more acute in some people than in others? It didn't strike me as a piercing problem for Christianity at first, but it rather does now. It would be like God stacking the deck.

I don't know whether such impulses are stronger in some people than in others.

Keep in mind that I don't use the Big List Of Forbidden Verbs view of sin. The moral question has to do with your choices, not with the options you chose among. If you have stronger "bad" impulses, then I think you have less moral culpability for mistakes.

The Bible does address this, in passing. This is the verse everyone loves to use to show Jesus "supporting" slavery, but the passage as a whole tells a somewhat different story, IMHO:

Luke 12:
[42] And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?
[43] Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
[44] Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.
[45] But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
[46] The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
[47] And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
[48] But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

This is frequently quoted as evidence that Jesus "supported" slavery. IMHO, it is evidence that Jesus used examples familiar to His listeners.

The message of this story, it seems to me, is that the differences we have in our impulses and natures are taken into account. If it is easy for me to avoid wrongdoing, but I don't put in even that minimal effort, I will be judged more harshly than someone who struggles greatly and still fails.

In fact, it is quite easy to imagine it being fair for a "worse" offender to be judged more leniently than a "minor" offender. Imagine for the sake of argument that, in fact, God really does object to gay sex. I would guess that a straight guy who fools around with another guy because he's bored, even though he's quite happy with girls, would be judged as a greater offender than a gay man who settles into a committed relationship with lots of fucking. The first guy is seeking out the "wrong" behavior; the second is mitigating it. (Love, we are told, covers a multitude of sins.)

(Note that I think it less likely that God objects to gay sex than that God sees a significant moral distinction between eating tofu and eating vegetables.)

[Stumpjumper]

The Bible does address this, in passing. This is the verse everyone loves to use to show Jesus "supporting" slavery, but the passage as a whole tells a somewhat different story, IMHO:

In fact, it is quite easy to imagine it being fair for a "worse" offender to be judged more leniently than a "minor" offender.

I'd like to add upon Seebs' interpretation with this parable that shows how even those who had a hard time first accepting a given message are rewarded the same as those who accepted all along.


Matthew 20

For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire men to work in his vineyard. 2He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard.
3"About the third hour he went out and saw others standing in the marketplace doing nothing. 4He told them, 'You also go and work in my vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.' 5So they went.

"He went out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour and did the same thing. 6About the eleventh hour he went out and found still others standing around. He asked them, 'Why have you been standing here all day long doing nothing?'

7" 'Because no one has hired us,' they answered.
"He said to them, 'You also go and work in my vineyard.'

8"When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, 'Call the workers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first.'

9"The workers who were hired about the eleventh hour came and each received a denarius. 10So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a denarius. 11When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner. 12'These men who were hired last worked only one hour,' they said, 'and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.'

13"But he answered one of them, 'Friend, I am not being unfair to you. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? 14Take your pay and go. I want to give the man who was hired last the same as I gave you. 15Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?'

I don't usually post large portions of the Bible but this seemed very appropriate. I am pretty much in agreement with Seebs about how people with different willpower will experience a different afterlife. I have very weak willpower to overcome chemical addiction. I also have a higher tolerance for most substances than most. I, luckily, have cut back my vice to alchohol but it is difficult. I wish I had the power to cut back further; maybe in due time.

However, my point in this post is that everyone experiences difficulties with experiences. The experiences differ from person to person. In the end it is what you do with your difficulties. Do not let your vices control your life.

[seebs]

The parable of the vineyard is much-hated among some Christian groups, because it implies that those horrible atheists, what with all the mad sex they have, may still end up happy.

This, too, is pride.

[Demigawd]

The parable of the vineyard is much-hated among some Christian groups, because it implies that those horrible atheists, what with all the mad sex they have, may still end up happy.

This, too, is pride.

You're my favorite theist here, Seebs. :notworthy

[Stumpjumper]

You're my favorite theist here, Seebs. :notworthy

Hey now I posted it :Cheeky:

[Stumpjumper]

The parable of the vineyard is much-hated among some Christian groups, because it implies that those horrible atheists, what with all the mad sex they have, may still end up happy.

This, too, is pride.

You know its funny but its true. I was in a book group with a fundementalist church that I did not attend. My neighbor is a member and he invited me to come (I'm pretty social so I'll hang out with pretty much anybody). But the topic of the last book discussion I attended was tolerance. In specific we were actually discussing a book about early Christianity and how Christian's would not acknowledge the pagan gods so they were persecuted etc. To make a long story short, my fundamentalist friends used that as an argument that supports "many are called few are chosen." Well that was the last book group I attended with a bunch of fundamentalists (Baptist Church). So yes most Christians don't like that passage very much and I have not been invited to any more book discussions from that fundy church. (I'm rarely quiet).

[Demigawd]

Hey now I posted it :Cheeky:

Oops, I overlooked the post above Seebs. Here's a :notworthy for you too.

[swamp]

If you have stronger "bad" impulses, then I think you have less moral culpability for mistakes.

I think that's what I wanted you to say ;)

seebs, singletrack, your insights have been much appreciated.

[seebs]

The important question isn't whether I say it, but whether Jesus said it; I think that's more normative for Christianity. :p