walterpthefirst Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 1 minute ago, Edgarcito said: The definition says they didn't have to know anything or experience anything. Yes, exactly! This is a definition of how human free will works AFTER the fall. It doesn't describe anything about how Adam and Eve were made by god. For that, you have to go with the bible. You see how you are contradicting scripture. Ed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 But your earlier definition, where you said that Eve was devoid of knowledge, couldn't discern good from evil and had no concept of the consequences of her actions DOES agree with the bible. Here you also say that they only acquired these things after they ate. You used the word downloaded. Do you recall that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 Gotta go. Someone's got to serve up the dinner. Back later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 5 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: Yes, exactly! This is a definition of how human free will works AFTER the fall. It doesn't describe anything about how Adam and Eve were made by god. For that, you have to go with the bible. You see how you are contradicting scripture. Ed? No, that's not what the definition says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 3 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: But your earlier definition, where you said that Eve was devoid of knowledge, couldn't discern good from evil and had no concept of the consequences of her actions DOES agree with the bible. Here you also say that they only acquired these things after they ate. You used the word downloaded. Do you recall that? Yes I do, but that is independent of their free will. She used her free will by this definition to commune with the serpent. Then the information was downloaded. Free will choice first, Download knowledge second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted July 11 Share Posted July 11 4 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: Gotta go. Someone's got to serve up the dinner. Back later. Roger roger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 3 hours ago, Edgarcito said: No, that's not what the definition says. This definition... Free will is the supposed power or capacity of humans to make decisions or perform actions independently of any prior event or state of the universe1. It is the notional capacity or ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded2. Free will is also the ability to decide what to do independently of any outside influence3. With free will comes moral responsibility, which indicates that if we make a choice that is good, we deserve the resulting rewards4. ...cannot be applied to either Adam or Eve before they ate the fruit. It only refers to them once they had eaten and to every post-Fall human being who is descended from them. You said so yourself Ed, pages back, when you clearly defined Eve as not being able to choose between different possible courses of action, because she could not discern between one course of action (good) and another course of action (evil). You also said that Eve had no idea of the consequences of her actions, which means that she therefore had no responsibility for them. Only people who are aware and understand the choice they are making can be held morally responsible for that choice. That is why children are below the age of criminal responsibility and are not held responsible for their choices. They don't understand what they are choosing between. In the same way the mentally impaired are not held responsible for their choices. They too don't understand what they are choosing between. So, if they break a law they are not held responsible for CHOOSING to do so. They don't have the capacity to make a truly free-willed choice. Just stop and think for a moment about how you described Eve. A blank. An empty void, bereft of understanding of what she was doing. Unable to discern good from evil. Unable to anticipate the consequence and outcome of her actions. Young children and the mentally impaired are exactly like this. Without realising it you were describing Eve as a mental child. Unfit to know what she was doing. Young children must never and should never be held responsible for their actions because they cannot understand what they are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 3 hours ago, Edgarcito said: Yes I do, but that is independent of their free will. She used her free will by this definition to commune with the serpent. Then the information was downloaded. Free will choice first, Download knowledge second. No sir. That's wrong. You can't make that call because the definition of free will you are now using doesn't apply to Adam and Eve. You DID unknowingly define free will earlier in this thread. But now you want to go with a new version of free will, one that doesn't apply to Adam and Eve before they ate. Their free will was downloaded into them after they ate the fruit, not before. As I will now show you from the bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 Genesis 3 : 22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” This is god referring to Adam and Eve eating the fruit, not Eve alone making a free willed choice. A free willed choice can only be made between things that the person choosing understands. If they don't know and don't understand then they cannot make a free willed choice. Where there is no understanding there is no choice. When god says 'us' he's referring to himself in his three persons, Father and Son and Holy Spirit. All three know what good and evil are. Therefore, they can make free willed choices between these two things. But since god spells it out, 'HAS NOW BECOME LIKE ONE OF US' this means 'WAS NOT LIKE ONE OF US BEFORE' This is the bible itself clearly saying that neither Adam nor Eve were like god before they ate. Like, as in, understanding good and evil and therefore freely able to choose between the two. Where there is no knowledge there is no free choice. But once knowledge arrives, there is free choice. Do you see it now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 3 hours ago, Edgarcito said: Yes I do, but that is independent of their free will. She used her free will by this definition to commune with the serpent. Then the information was downloaded. Free will choice first, Download knowledge second. If you want to go with your new definition of free will Ed, then you'll find that you've contradicted yourself and Eve did not make a free willed choice. She was influenced by Satan. Here's your new definition. I'll show you where it doesn't work in three places. Free will is the supposed power or capacity of humans to make decisions or perform actions independently of any prior event or state of the universe. Eve was not making her mind up independently. She was (your words) communing with Satan. Strike one. It is the notional capacity or ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded. Eve was not freely choosing between different possible courses of action. Satan was impeding her choice. The bible says so. In Genesis 3 : 13 Eve tells the truth. "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." The bible also refers to Satan as the Father of Lies. So Eve was not unimpeded. According to scripture she was deceived and lied to. Strike two. Free will is also the ability to decide what to do independently of any outside influence. Eve was not deciding what to do independently of any outside influence. Satan influenced her. Strike three. That's three strikes and you're out, sir. Your new definition fails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted July 11 Super Moderator Share Posted July 11 To add to the above: With free will comes moral responsibility, which indicates that if we make a choice that is good, we deserve the resulting reward. This statement, which Ed included in his revised definition of "free will" would be irrelevant to Adam and Eve because they had no knowledge of good and evil and thus could not have determined any choice as "good" nor the resulting reward. Their moral responsibility only became reality after they made the choice, which means that, at the time the decision was made, without their knowledge of the difference, moral responsibility was also irrelevant. So, literally, all four points of Ed's definition fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 11 Author Share Posted July 11 It's almost midnight here and I'll be logging off. But before I go I'll cite the bible twice, to show Ed that Eve was influenced and impeded by Satan, in contradiction to the wording of his new definition of free will. One quote from the apostle John and the other from Paul. John 8 : 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 2 Corinthians 11 : 3 But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. Good night! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 16 hours ago, walterpthefirst said: If you want to go with your new definition of free will Ed, then you'll find that you've contradicted yourself and Eve did not make a free willed choice. She was influenced by Satan. Here's your new definition. I'll show you where it doesn't work in three places. Free will is the supposed power or capacity of humans to make decisions or perform actions independently of any prior event or state of the universe. Eve was not making her mind up independently. She was (your words) communing with Satan. Strike one. It is the notional capacity or ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded. Eve was not freely choosing between different possible courses of action. Satan was impeding her choice. The bible says so. In Genesis 3 : 13 Eve tells the truth. "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." The bible also refers to Satan as the Father of Lies. So Eve was not unimpeded. According to scripture she was deceived and lied to. Strike two. Free will is also the ability to decide what to do independently of any outside influence. Eve was not deciding what to do independently of any outside influence. Satan influenced her. Strike three. That's three strikes and you're out, sir. Your new definition fails. No sir, free will was the capacity prior to or state of the universe. So she had free will prior to being influenced. Thx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 15 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: To add to the above: With free will comes moral responsibility, which indicates that if we make a choice that is good, we deserve the resulting reward. This statement, which Ed included in his revised definition of "free will" would be irrelevant to Adam and Eve because they had no knowledge of good and evil and thus could not have determined any choice as "good" nor the resulting reward. Their moral responsibility only became reality after they made the choice, which means that, at the time the decision was made, without their knowledge of the difference, moral responsibility was also irrelevant. So, literally, all four points of Ed's definition fail. Speaking of reading comprehension.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 12 Author Share Posted July 12 You got your definition of free will from here, didn't you, Ed? No need to answer. Free will | Definition, Determinism, & Facts | Britannica That's not a definition of the mental and moral condition of Adam and Eve before they ate the fruit. That's a definition of human mentality and morality after the Fall and throughout history since then. The only place where you can get reliable information about Adam and Eve in Eden is from the pages of the bible. Not the pages of a modern online encyclopaedia. So, you can't just backdate the Britannica definition and force Adam and Eve into it. You have to use the bible. So, please show us from the bible where it says that they had free will before they ate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 12 Author Share Posted July 12 Proverbs 30 : 5 & 6 5 “Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. 6 Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar. You are adding the words of men to the Word of god, Ed. That's a sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted July 12 Super Moderator Share Posted July 12 45 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: No sir, free will was the capacity prior to or state of the universe. So she had free will prior to being influenced. Thx. But, according to your own argument, Ed, she did not make any decision until after she had been influenced. According to your own argument, because the serpent spoke first (you were quite adamant on that point) he influenced Eve's decision. I believe the word you used was actually "impregnated," which carries a somewhat stronger connotation than "influence." So, even if she had free will before being influenced, she did not exercise her free will until afterwards, by which point, per your own definition, it was no longer free will. The simple truth is that although your definition is valid for morally responsible individuals, it cannot be applied to Adam and Eve's situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 19 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said: But, according to your own argument, Ed, she did not make any decision until after she had been influenced. According to your own argument, because the serpent spoke first (you were quite adamant on that point) he influenced Eve's decision. I believe the word you used was actually "impregnated," which carries a somewhat stronger connotation than "influence." So, even if she had free will before being influenced, she did not exercise her free will until afterwards, by which point, per your own definition, it was no longer free will. The simple truth is that although your definition is valid for morally responsible individuals, it cannot be applied to Adam and Eve's situation. Thank you, you're finally understanding. According to "that' definition, she didn't have to. Then, yes, she accepted influence.... which per the definition was independent of the initial free will. And I've stated that I don't know why she accepted gossip, essentially, over truth. I'm open to other definitions. I honestly had never looked up an official definition that I remember... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 33 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said: You got your definition of free will from here, didn't you, Ed? No need to answer. Free will | Definition, Determinism, & Facts | Britannica That's not a definition of the mental and moral condition of Adam and Eve before they ate the fruit. That's a definition of human mentality and morality after the Fall and throughout history since then. The only place where you can get reliable information about Adam and Eve in Eden is from the pages of the bible. Not the pages of a modern online encyclopaedia. So, you can't just backdate the Britannica definition and force Adam and Eve into it. You have to use the bible. So, please show us from the bible where it says that they had free will before they ate. The mental and moral condition of A&E is irrelevant to the definition... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 4 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: gossip, essentially, over truth. How precisely would that be determined in Eve's situation? mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgarcito Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 1 minute ago, mwc said: How precisely would that be determined in Eve's situation? mwc I think it goes to things we don't understand.... spirituality, "feels right or wrong", communion, trust, distrust. What are innate human qualities at birth minus generations of behaviors. I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted July 12 Share Posted July 12 1 minute ago, Edgarcito said: I think it goes to things we don't understand.... spirituality, "feels right or wrong", communion, trust, distrust. What are innate human qualities at birth minus generations of behaviors. I don't know. I see. Seems fair enough. However, in this situation it seems like it's important to push the issue. If you can't say how it would be determined after all these ages then it also seems fair to say that it wouldn't be something that could be determined in the moment. What I mean is that a sort of "gut feeling" as a guide, as we all know, varies widely by person and what's truth to one person is a lie to someone else and vice-versa. I seems like Eve shouldn't be expected to rely on it here. I would say given that Eve couldn't discern truth from gossip here unless we find some other way to sniff out the truth. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 12 Author Share Posted July 12 18 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: The mental and moral condition of A&E is irrelevant to the definition... A definition which you cannot use. You can only use the bible. Otherwise you are committing the sin of adding men's words to god's Word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 12 Author Share Posted July 12 21 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: The mental and moral condition of A&E is irrelevant to the definition... And yet the mental and moral condition of Adam and Eve was totally relevant to you, just a few days ago. She did not yet possess the understanding, the consequences, the results, the discernment of good and evil. Those were in the fruit. She did not download all that entails until she ate. Why the change, Ed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterpthefirst Posted July 12 Author Share Posted July 12 26 minutes ago, Edgarcito said: The mental and moral condition of A&E is irrelevant to the definition... Yes, exactly. That's because the definition doesn't apply to them. And you've yet to give a good reason why it should. Please do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts