Hi,
Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. Scrim, thanks for taking the time to respond.
Anyway,
But part of our "biological nature" is our conscience and intellect. Our conscience and intellect can override any impulse at any time, so we can still be held accountable for our decisions.
Fair enough. Yet, why must we always fight our biological impulses? Lets look at the biblical sin of fornication. We see an attractive potential mate of the opposite sex, and if this mate advances on us sexually, people in general find it extremely difficult to overcome our biologial urges. Why must be we hindered by a biological nature that
wants to sin?
This is a classic example of what I mean when I say that our will is not entirely free... although we are indeed capable of what the bible describes as "good", it seems as though we strongly tend to "evil". (I place good and evil in quotes because I believe that good and evil are relative). People in general tend to be selfish and carnal. It is our nature. Only our intellect allows us to overcome this and form structured societies and civilizations. My question is -
if we were created by an intelligent, all-powerful, all-loving being, why isn't our nature more inline with what God wants from us?
My old church preached that the harmful effects of the original sin passed down through the generations to all humanity, the result being that we all inherit a sinful natue. However, this has problems, colorfully stated by Ayn Rand, which I provided in my last post. I'll quote it again in part here -
"...A free will saddled with a tendency is like a game with loaded dice. It forces man to struggle through the effort of playing, to bear responsibility and pay for the game, but the decision is weighted in favor of a tendency that he had no power to escape. If the tendency is of his choice, he cannot possess it at birth; if it is not of his choice, his will is not free."
Asinine. There are many that do works of righteousness and the Bible identifies that fact over and over again. You are submitting a false conclusion based on your misinterpretation of a verse you isolated from it's context. Furthermore, the notion of "only one choice" is logically flawed because the term "choice" implies that there is more than one possible option. You can't "choose" only one "option". For, if there is only one possibility, then it's not an option OR a choice! It would simply be an unavoidable condition.
I've responded to this in part above, but I'd like to point out that by saying "our only choice is evil", I was referring to the belief that some Christians hold that man is incapable of being good by his own accord... that is, according to the bible, man cannot win out against his own sinful nature.
The flaw in your arugment here is that you equate "perfection" with "immutability". But the actual definition of perfection is "completeness; wholeness". There is nothing in the definition of "perfection" that includes the attribute of "immutability". Something mutable can be perfect. Something mutable can begin it's existence in a state of perfection, and self-corrupt over time. To be immutable (in a permanent, unchangable state) is a separate and distinct condition.
Your idea of a "perfect" free will is a logical contradiction. "Free will" only exists when it is *possible* for a creature to make an evil choice. If God rigged a reality where Luficer would only make "good choices", that means that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for him to make evil choices. But if it is impossible for him to make evil choices, then he would not be free at all. He would merely be a good-choosing puppet that resides in a reality that God jerry-rigged just for him.
Dictionary.com defines "perfection" as -
\Per*fec"tion\, n. [F. perfection, L. perfectio.] 1. The quality or state of being perfect or complete, so that nothing requisite is wanting; entire development; consummate culture, skill, or moral excellence; the highest attainable state or degree of excellence; maturity; as, perfection in an art, in a science, or in a system; perfection in form or degree; fruits in perfection.
2. A quality, endowment, or acquirement completely excellent; an ideal faultlessness; especially, the divine attribute of complete excellence. --Shak.
What tongue can her perfections tell? --Sir P. Sidney.
This is very close the the definition I had in mind, which, asserts that perfection is a state of flawlessness.
Now, lets discuss free will for a second. First, I've got to ask you -
1.) Does God himself have a free will?
2.) If yes to #1, is god capable of choosing to do evil?
3.) If yes to #2, why doesn't he?
I believe that a perfect free will does exist, biblically. One such free will was held by Jesus during his time in human form. There is a difference between a will that always freely chooses good, and a will that is forced to choose good as it's only option. As you have said before, the latter is not a free will at all.
Thus, it is logically feasabile for God to have given his creation Lucifer a free will identical to his own, preseving choice and freedom, yet effectively closing the door on evil. But he didn't. Lucifer's free will was flawed, which leads to the inevitable conclusion that Lucifer himself was created in a flawed state, and we have the problem of a perfect being creating imperfection.
The classic error in this argument is there is a fourth option that is deceptively and purposefully omitted. And that is
4) God is good, and has an appointed time when he will defeat evil.
I didn't mean to be deceptive, but rather I feel that I have eliminated this option due to the logical contradictions it entails.
So the terminal flaw in your argument is it makes the arrogant assumption that since God has not defeated evil YET, he never will. But this assumption implies that you have some inside information about the future. Secondly, you should consider the fact that evil cannot be "destroyed" without destroying freedom, since freedom is the cause of evil. But Freedom is also the cause of LOVE. According to the Bible, God considers love to be the greatest good for all free creatures. Therefore, to destroy evil would be evil itself, because it would mean destroying free will which is the catalyst of LOVE. It would be evil to destroy love since love is mankind's greatest good. So evil cannot be destroyed, but it can be defeated with good.
I disagree.
A free will that always freely chooses good, as God himself has, is free to love, yet effectively eliminates the problem of evil because though evil is still theoretically possible and existant, it never happens.
Of course, there remains the possiblity that God is outside the realm of logic, which governs everything in this universe, but that is a discussion for another day.
Cheers!
