Answer to the Problem of Evil

[Thor 2]

I've given you all my work as it is. I gave you hundreds of verses. It's hard for you to digest. read it and learn:

https://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php?topic=3845.0

https://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9611966.0

As you can see, babies go to paradise according to the Quran.
And again, as you can see, according to the Quran, the good go to paradise and the bad go to hell:

https://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php?topic=3845.msg18321#msg18321

Peace

Please show us the excerpt from the Quran that says that.

 

[psionl0]

So I take it you're decoupling free will from actual effects.

Of course. You don't have to know the effects of every choice in order to make a choice. As I already pointed out, all that matters is whether you were programmed to make a certain choice or you made that choice of your own free will.

It's free will if you think you're doing something, even if you're not?

No, I do not say that. It is always possible that even though you believe you are making a free will choice, you were actually programmed to make that choice all along without being aware of it. It is not possible to know how frequently such a thing happens but there are only a couple of examples in the bible where a free will choice was apparently overridden and even then, there is no indication that other choices by the same individual were not free will choices.

Note that this is completely different to the voting machine example. It is the programming (or lack thereof) of the individual that is at question and not the programming of the device that they are using. Remember that deception is irrelevant to the question of individual programming.

e.t.a. it's hard to see how this kind of free will is to the credit of any god who is said to be good.

It would make sense if God were creating gods (maybe he tires of being the only supreme being in existence). Naturally, since free will would be an integral part of being a god, it can lead to undesirable problems on Earth which according to the bible, God will sort out in the next life.

 

[psionl0]

Ah hem ........... the thread title is about the problem of evil.

Yes and free will is a part of this problem.

 

[bruto]

Of course. You don't have to know the effects of every choice in order to make a choice. As I already pointed out, all that matters is whether you were programmed to make a certain choice or you made that choice of your own free will.


No, I do not say that. It is always possible that even though you believe you are making a free will choice, you were actually programmed to make that choice all along without being aware of it. It is not possible to know how frequently such a thing happens but there are only a couple of examples in the bible where a free will choice was apparently overridden and even then, there is no indication that other choices by the same individual were not free will choices.
Note that this is completely different to the voting machine example. It is the programming (or lack thereof) of the individual that is at question and not the programming of the device that they are using. Remember that deception is irrelevant to the question of individual programming.


It would make sense if God were creating gods (maybe he tires of being the only supreme being in existence). Naturally, since free will would be an integral part of being a god, it can lead to undesirable problems on Earth which according to the bible, God will sort out in the next life.

But I think you are saying just that, if you believe the voting machine example is not a violation of free will at least in spirit if not technically. If the decision is made before you've even voted, your part in it is empty. If the result of your act of will is just the same as the result of your not having any will, or for that matter of not acting at all, then what is your will and what does it mean?

A choice that's not a choice is not much of a choice.

And I still contend that if free will is overridden at all, then instances when it is not are not true examples of free will, but dispensations at the pleasure of a ruler who has proven he can, and occasionally will, step in when he feels like it. You can tell your slave he's free to choose the color of his hat but if he's your slave, you can turn around 40 years later and tell him what hat to wear.

As I've said, I don't see any reason a god could not grant free will, mean it, and stick to it. I just don't think the God of the Bible and most churches has done a good job of it.

 

[psionl0]

If the result of your act of will is just the same as the result of your not having any will, or for that matter of not acting at all, then what is your will and what does it mean?

It means free will. If you chose which button to press without being controlled then you exercised free will. That's it! Finito! The End! Nothing else matters.

A choice that's not a choice is not much of a choice.

So what? This is about exercising free will and not whether you had any decent options.

And I still contend that if free will is overridden at all, then instances when it is not are not true examples of free will, but dispensations at the pleasure of a ruler who has proven he can, and occasionally will, step in when he feels like it. You can tell your slave he's free to choose the color of his hat but if he's your slave, you can turn around 40 years later and tell him what hat to wear.

That is pure false dichotomy. Free will applies to the choice. It doesn't apply to eternity. And free will is about the operation of the mind. You can coerce people but you can't control their minds.

As I've said, I don't see any reason a god could not grant free will, mean it, and stick to it. I just don't think the God of the Bible and most churches has done a good job of it.

Maybe you could have done a better job of it than God but so far, all you have tried to do is redefine free will so that you can say that God didn't give free will. It doesn't fly.

 

[bruto]

I suppose I'll have to hand it to you. In the narrow sense of theory without consequence, voice without influence, action without history, an afterlife that doesn't count as part of our existence, I guess the Biblical God has given us something we can call free will. It's the song of the caged bird, a pyrrhic gift to the sinners from an angry God, but it's true in its own small way: give the headsman the finger and die free.

 

[Mojo]

It is always possible that even though you believe you are making a free will choice, you were actually programmed to make that choice all along without being aware of it.

How would you test whether we have free will or just the illusion of free will?

 

[psionl0]

How would you test whether we have free will or just the illusion of free will?

You don't. Free will is not a scientific concept. It is more of a "supernatural" quality.

In a deterministic universe, there is no free will. Every thought/action is pre-programmed. Even in a probabilistic universe, it is doubtful that quantum effects are such that an individual might make a different choice given identical circumstances.

This thread is a thought experiment. Assuming that the biblical God exists, why would he allow "evil" in this world? One thought experiment answer is that God gave people the ability to make evil choices autonomously. We label this ability "free will".

 

[GDon]

In a deterministic universe, there is no free will.

Compatibulists like myself would disagree. In fact, I'd argue that the concept of "will" only makes sense in a causal deterministic universe. I'd define "free will" as "free" if the decisions made are based in the brain (so biologically based) and my actions follow from my will.

For example, lets say I make a decision at a particular point in time. That decision is based on all previous actions and events.

If time is rolled back to that point, would I make the same decision again? Yes I would, because my will is the same as well. All circumstances (the previous actions and events) are the same at that point, and so is my will, and thus so is my decision.

Repeat a million times, and the decision is the same. The idea that 20% of the time I'd make one decision and 80% of the time I'd choose another makes a nonsense of the idea of "will" and in particular "free will". If we are generating decisions at random, there is NO will, much less free will. That means that for "will" to have any meaning, it must be in a deterministic universe.

What about the activities within the brain? If "will" is a biologically based concept, then as long as the actions aren't being coerced from outside of the brain, then that "will" is free.

Are there implications for this with regards to other questions, like a Prime Mover starting things off the way It wants to? Sure. But the problem with the discussions around "free will" is that people focus on the "free" part and not the "will" part. It's not that they are showing that free-will conflicts with determinism, but that they are defining "free-will" out of existence in the first place.

 

[psionl0]

Compatibulists like myself would disagree. In fact, I'd argue that the concept of "will" only makes sense in a causal deterministic universe. I'd define "free will" as "free" if the decisions made are based in the brain (so biologically based) and my actions follow from my will.

I don't find that a particularly useful definition. In a deterministic universe, people are only doing what they were programmed to do from the beginning. How in any universe is that "free"?

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Compatibulists like myself would disagree. In fact, I'd argue that the concept of "will" only makes sense in a causal deterministic universe.

The Universe is not deterministic, so you are saying that free will doesn't exist?

But according to The Bible free will does exist, so that's another thing it has wrong!

the problem with the discussions around "free will" is that people focus on the "free" part and not the "will" part. It's not that they are showing that free-will conflicts with determinism, but that they are defining "free-will" out of existence in the first place.

No, the problem is people don't understand what 'free will' is in the Bible. It is simply having the freedom to disobey God.

Imagine if God had made Man not be able to disobey Him. That would solve a lot of problems, right? But then Man's will would be constrained to what God wanted. So God wants Man to love Him, but if He makes Man do this automatically then it's not real love because it's not given freely. In order for it to have any meaning, Man must be free to decide whether or not to love God.

You see, loving God is defined as following all His commandments. And the first Commandment is to love God with all your heart, all your soul and all your mind. Anything less than that is a conscious decision to reject God in some way, which we are able to do because we have free will (not a constrained will that doesn't include rejecting God).

IOW, God is a nutcase. "You must love me with all your heart, all your soul and all your mind, or I will throw you into the fiery pits of Hell! But hey, I'm not forcing you. If you can't make the 'right' decision that's on you."

 

[GDon]

I don't find that a particularly useful definition. In a deterministic universe, people are only doing what they were programmed to do from the beginning. How in any universe is that "free"?

If free-will comes from the brain, then in a deterministic universe people will be biologically programmed to have free-will.

Take the concept of self-awareness, for example. In a deterministic universe, is "self-awareness" an illusion? I'd say "no", because like free-will, self-awareness is a function of the brain:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-awareness

There are questions regarding what part of the brain allows us to be self-aware and how we are biologically programmed to be self-aware. V.S. Ramachandran has speculated that mirror neurons may provide the neurological basis of human self-awareness... "I also speculated that these neurons can not only help simulate other people's behavior but can be turned 'inward'—as it were—to create second-order representations or meta-representations of your own earlier brain processes. This could be the neural basis of introspection, and of the reciprocity of self awareness and other awareness. There is obviously a chicken-or-egg question here as to which evolved first, but... The main point is that the two co-evolved, mutually enriching each other to create the mature representation of self that characterizes modern humans."

What if someone said that in a deterministic universe self-awareness is just an illusion? I'd say that it isn't a needed conclusion. It's the same with free-will. It might be we are biologically programmed to have free-will. Whether the universe is deterministic or not is irrelevant.

 

[GDon]

The Universe is not deterministic, so you are saying that free will doesn't exist?

In my view, "will" doesn't make much sense if the decisions are made at random. If the universe doesn't run on consistent laws so that our decisions aren't consistent with our will, then I'd find it hard to understand what "free-will" would look like.

But according to The Bible free will does exist, so that's another thing it has wrong!

Well, I'm a theist but not a Christian, so that doesn't matter to me. Though I do love theological discussions!

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Of course, the offered solutions about free will still do not answer why a benevolent god (as is claimed in the various holy texts) would allow evil things to happen to those that do not choose evil.

Babies dying to artillery barrages in our various wars did not get to choose between good and evil. Their free will was never in question when evil happened to them.

 

[psionl0]

If free-will comes from the brain, . . ..

It doesn't. You are attempting to make a circular definition of free will.

Free will is a God given ability to defy your biological programming. It may or may not exist but if it exists, it is not a part of our biological make up.

 

[psionl0]

Of course, the offered solutions about free will still do not answer why a benevolent god (as is claimed in the various holy texts) would allow evil things to happen to those that do not choose evil.

It was a while ago when I offered biblical verses that might explain why God allows evil to persist in this world. Basically, if God were to remove the evil now, he might destroy the innocent along with it so he will deal with it in the next life.

Free will is a possible explanation for why evil exists in the first place.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

It was a while ago when I offered biblical verses that might explain why God allows evil to persist in this world. Basically, if God were to remove the evil now, he might destroy the innocent along with it so he will deal with it in the next life.

Free will is a possible explanation for why evil exists in the first place.

Yes and you keep ignoring the fact that such a god is therefore clearly not all powerful nor all knowing.
An all powerful god could remove evil without destroying free will.
An all knowing god could have ensured that situations like the holocaust do not happen in advance while still retaining free will.
A benevolent god would take up the innocent and re-make the world knowing things will be better then.

Yet the various followers of the various versions of the Abrahamic god keep claiming it is all three and then go with weak cop-outs like the verses you mentioned.
Maybe good enough if you are a believer, but utterly unconvincing if you are not.

 

[Robin]

Of course, the offered solutions about free will still do not answer why a benevolent god (as is claimed in the various holy texts) would allow evil things to happen to those that do not choose evil.

Babies dying to artillery barrages in our various wars did not get to choose between good and evil. Their free will was never in question when evil happened to them.

Yes, exactly. Or a victim of child sex trafficking, a child held prisoner and raped several times a night for years on end. What exactly is being tested? What constitutes a pass, what constitutes a fail? If the child fails, shouldn't God stopmtje test.

The "God is testing you" theodicy is possibly the stupidest theodicy of all. Why anyone is still advocating this one is beyond me.

 

[psionl0]

Yes and you keep ignoring the fact that such a god is therefore clearly not all powerful nor all knowing.
An all powerful god could remove evil without destroying free will.
An all knowing god could have ensured that situations like the holocaust do not happen in advance while still retaining free will.
A benevolent god would take up the innocent and re-make the world knowing things will be better then.

Yet the various followers of the various versions of the Abrahamic god keep claiming it is all three and then go with weak cop-outs like the verses you mentioned.
Maybe good enough if you are a believer, but utterly unconvincing if you are not.

I am not defending this. I am only putting up the biblical explanation of why evil exists. Other passages suggest that evil will increase towards the end times (Matthew 24:12).

It is obviously not good enough for you. Some posters here seem to believe that they could have done a better job of it but I guess we will never know.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

I am not defending this. I am only putting up the biblical explanation of why evil exists. Other passages suggest that evil will increase towards the end times (Matthew 24:12).

It is obviously not good enough for you. Some posters here seem to believe that they could have done a better job of it but I guess we will never know.

That's the thing.
We *could* do better.
Our morality now is better than that of the supposedly morally superior god.
If that is not a sign that the various holy texts are anything but holy, then what is?