Morally, I would say to save the more people. With the information given, the only reason to save the one and not the 5,is that the one is related to us.
That doesn’t mean that there is any more reason to save them, in the greater picture. In God’s eyes, my relatives are no more important than someone else’s. It is my own perspective.
I am a Trekkie, actually, which means I am a fan of the Star Trek series of TV shows and films.
If there are any other Trekkies out there, do you remember the dilemma Captain Kirk faced in the first series of episodes? I don’t remember if they were Klingons or Romulans, but he had only 2 choices, on a simulated program, and he chose a 3rd option, which saved everyone. I would like to think, with the help of God, I could choose a 3rd option. How about waving down the train driver? Or shouting to the people to get off the tracks? Or, how about standing in front of the train, myself, and saving all the people that way? No greater love…
That show was one of the most ethical, thought-provoking shows, of all times, in my opinion. Gene Roddenberry, was a genius, in my estimation. And, probably a unique and moral man. I don’t know if he was a Christian or not, but, he certainly had his finger on the pulse of the human condition.
If you want to watch ethical choices being made, go to YOUTUBE and watch some of the original series episodes. Whow.
But, I still don’t think this really addresses the issue of free will.
What would everyone say to the University of Chicago professor and his above column
But we can talk a bit about ethical dilemmas and Star Trek instead
Another example is in the original Star Trek. Spock’s father was visiting, as part of a delegation. But he needed a heart operation and some blood from Spock. But Kirk was mortally wounded. Spock thought the better option was to assume command and postpone his father’s operation. Both were life threatening situations. But Spock thought the greater good, was for the crew in the ship.
But Captain Kirk pretended he was OK and ordered Spock, to report for the operation. Kirk was going to turn over command to another. But then the ship was attacked. Kirk stayed (despite probability of bleeding), to command the battle (for the ship’s survival).
Actually, if you put the keywords “ethical dilemmas in star trek” into Google, some good articles come up on page 1.
You know what’s interesting? I have sat through years of homilies, from Roman Catholic, Anglican, Pentecostal, Lutheran, community church and TV evangelists. I don’t recall one instance of a homily on ethical dilemmas. But just about every expository spin they shared, regarding Old or New Testament, can be found on this forum - except for the universalist interpretation.
In the meantime, i need to get ready, for the Star Trek convention:
I think Im following your reasoning and I’ll assume you know scriptures as well to save excess in wordiness
**Woe blind guides - both fall into the pit. ** and the many other scriptures about keeping people from the kingdom as a result of false teachers, hypocrites, and also people leading others away away by exploiting their lusts. There are also stumbling blocks that Jesus said would hinder them.
“2 And He called a child to Himself and set him before them, 3 and said, “Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4“Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 “And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; 6 but **whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.” ****
We are made up of many things around us that influence us. Those things can hinder or help in our decisions of free will. They can make us evil or good, and they can predispose us to the choices that can either save us or condemn us.
Jesus said influences would be all around us, but everyone would still be held accountable. Even the poor blind guy just following the leading blind guy. Both were obviously blind to the truth, neither of them could see what they needed to see in order to avoid falling into the pit!
If our minds are made for us by our environment, the case could then be argued that if your environment harsh layden with criminal behaviors, dad’s an abusive alcoholic with a regular history of assault charges, mom stole the car we currently drive, my brothers and sisters are on the federal sexual offender list, and I got angry recently and murdered my X-best friend; but then no one here necessarily can be held accountable for their crimes, because their environment produced these behaviors in them.
Not accepting God’s way to eternal life is also a crime.
To be judged, and is punishable by an eternal death sentence by God on the day of judgement.
See the parable the wheat and the tares, and the sheep and the goats etc…
**God says even nature tells of the law so that none could have an excuse. **
Passages from Romans 1 and 2 -
"18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse."****
"9There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, 10but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11For there is no partiality with God. 12For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; 13for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus."
In an alter call to the rich guy, Jesus commended the rich ruler as doing good. What the rich ruler said were the correct answers. “You say you love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself,… now give away your riches and come with me.”
The rich guy walked away sad, but still walked. Jesus said it’s easier for a camel to go through an eye of a needle than a for a rich person to enter the kingdom. When questioned Jesus said “With man its not possible but with God all things are possible.”
Regardless of the degree or sin “We All fall short of the Glory of God.”
Jesus often had dinner with sinners. Jesus was hung on a cross between two criminals. One criminal repented right there on death row! And Jesus forgave him, promising He would see him in the Kingdom of Heaven.
And even for a good old pharisee named Nicodemus. This guy stood out as sincere, and he was even friends with Jesus. He was righteous among all the other pharasees. This guy wasn’t a hypocrite or part of theEight Woes" which Jesus spewed in harsh rebuke toward the Pharisees. biblehub.com/nasb/matthew/23.htm
Jesus didnt say “hey Nicodemus your a good guy just come on in to my Kingdom…” instead Jesus said to him "you must be born again…and said also “without which (being born again) no one will enter His Kingdom”
We were all born of a sin nature, we all need to be born of the Spirit! Scripture says - Our righteous deeds are like filthy rags before a Holy God!
Living under the law accuses and condemnes us to judgement. The law is written in in our conciences with or without the written law!
But being born again of the Spirit is a walk of abiding in God’s love, and Him also in us. Which is the work only possible by God like the camel through the needle. The work of Salvation is the work of God’s redemption through Jesus’ death and resurection. Being born of the Spirit is the law of love working in us which fulfills the Law.**
KNH, welcome to the forum. All new members posts go to the anti-spam catcher for a little while, which requires manual admin/mod retrieval; usually I (at least) check the net once a day for new members, but ‘work’ work has been very busy + the long weekend coming up. Only got to it this morning.
You’ll have to post once or twice more (I also passed through another post of yours, so 3 or 4 total are needed, I always forget which specifically) before the system code triggers to let you through automatically thereafter. So be patient please.
(Insert relevance to free will discussions as appropriate. )
Your quote from Chucky is missing a close-quote code, like this {/quote} but with square brackets. You should add at least one at the end of the first paragraph I suppose; and maybe other quote codes if you’re quoting various people afterward for clarity (I couldn’t tell, not being familiar with the thread). I don’t recall how long a non-mod member has to edit one’s post, so if you can’t and need some help drop me or another ad/mod a pmail and we’ll put the quote tags in where you need them.
Does anyone care to address the professor and “his ideas based upon science”? Now we can’t just argue our own spin on scripture to him. He probably will have the same view as Sigmund Freud - towards religion. And he is kicking the strong theology bucket, many stand on here - out from under us. We have to step out of our strong suit of theology and enter that of philosophy and science.
How do we deal with someone, who believes free will is just “smoke and mirrors” in the brain?
If people don’t have free will, then no one is responsible for his actions, and it makes no sense to reward heroic acts, or to punish those who commit atrocities.
And the apostle Paul must have been mistaken in his belief that God rewards those who persevere in doing good, and is angry with those who live self-serving lives, lives that result in anguish.
*For he will render to everyone according to his works: to those who by perseverance in well‑doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, he will give lasting life; but for those who are self-seeking and are not persuaded by the truth, but are persuaded by wickedness, there will be wrath and fury.
Affliction and anguish for every person who does evil … but glory and honour and well-being for every one who does good … For God shows no partiality. (Romans 2:6-11)*
By pointing out that Jerry Coyne definitely intends for us to treat him as though he has at least a little real free will. I don’t debate philosophy, science, theology, or anything else, with Furbees. He wants and very much expects other people to treat him as being more than an illusionary person made of smoke and mirrors; his arguments depend on analyses predicated on this point; consequently he ought to be sure his arguments are mistaken somewhere, even if he can’t find the mistake yet.
I will add that Coyne is somewhat notoriously atheistic: he isn’t presenting these ideas in an ideological vacuum, but as part of his suite of atheistic apologetics.
Similarly, you definitely don’t expect us to treat you like a philosophical zombie: a purely hypothetical entity who only resembles a real person by all possible tests but isn’t really a real person. Administrators delete and block such spambots.
The debate about free will, long the purview of philosophers alone, has been given new life by scientists, especially neuroscientists studying how the brain works. And what they’re finding supports the idea that free will is a complete illusion.
The poster is discussing a conditional responses.
The tests Ive seen on this discuss reflexive, automatic, trained, statistically probable responses.
1st let’s be clear what free will is and isn’t.
Movements and responses that are by reflex or that just require simple basic choices are not free will. Some trained responses to primary environment are not made by choice of free will. Some trained responses do feel wrong even if habitual, these are using free will.
Unkown unfolding of choices may beome a matter to start with interalnconfltuse free will if its there is internal conflict,
If unaware to an internal question, then it’s not usually free will till your conscience feels but not always free will. Sometimes these are learned choices, or the absence of a moral challenge, “I didnt think of it that way before.”
We all have a degree of right or wrong, and the bar does vary.
But we all still have basic law within us. And when concsience is dull and conscience no longer feels a twinge, in those free will choices it has become a state of depravity.
Free will isn’t just a matter of choices, regardless of the severity or degree of consequences resulting from those choices. For every action there is a reaction. But not every action is matter of free will or conscience.
Decissions could be a matter of conscience for 1 may, but may not be the same for another. Like 1 may feel guilty for saying "no to volunteering at a fund raiser, while another may not feel obligated to participate.
Its not necessarily a matter of if actions right or wrong to be free will, it could be a matter of conscience omission. What I’m not doing but should be doing. 1 may be more sensitive to their response toward others
If a person makes a choice to take 1 route to work than another, and they have a bad accident. Free will wasn’t part of that choice even though the consequences of choice was high, it’s simply choice.
A simple element of choice can be reflex, basic, physical dominance, right or left brained, trained, automatic, learned, strategic, calculated, and even by a guess to evoke results.
Even choosing to act or how to take action, it’s still a learned calculated response that is automatic. Like jumping in a pool as a life guard.
Free will may have even established a characteristic set of choices to be automatic decissions in your normal quick responses. So if you characteristically steal and its 2ndnature free will has take to automatic depravity even if it has a limit. Taking it beyond that boundary requires another act of free will.
So even if someone is living a lifestyle of depravity, the free will part decided that already and has built it’s parameters, it’s not a matter for free will again till consulting conscience is required again.
Like if your friend is always asking ypu to do expensive outings. You may have a degree of criteria to run his invite through and respond within a set of parameters. And that applies to every part of your life. Its the part that isnt a decission tgat neefs to consult concsience. But every choice you make after that aren’t necessarily free will.
Free will is the response of choice consulting 1st with conscience.
So even not choosing to not rob a bank today isn’t a matter of free will. Its obvious choice down to our basic social cues. Its not needed as choice and if asked concience wouldnt need to be consulted because its obvious choice and it would be crazy to rob a bank, let alone it’s illegal.
So even if there is a trained response and its over ridden because conscience has raised an objection or question. That’s free will. So even if you choose not to moon on stage at graduation or even to moon. Neither of these are even free will choices. Their basic choices.
Free will is in the element of choice that has any sliver of an option to consult conscience. The second guess. Its the weighing of consequences to what you value in life and its what you answer to that makes you consider shame internally and privately or if known publically. So the consequence of cutting your hand choosing to use a meat slicer isn’t a free will consequence. But feeling guilty or damaging a relationship or credibility or trust or breaking a promise. Free will has the element of internal conflict regarding choices. Its not random luck or average or statistical it’s internal conflict with private or public consequences.
I see it as a type of choice. Not every choice is an act of will.
That’s free choice not free will.
Free will doesn’t even need to new a choice it just needs to be a decission of will.
So we are all born with the ability to exercise our will according to our desires. Sometime desires don’t present choice.
Its an act of will.
Being stubborn is an act of will
Being kind is an act of will.
So free well has choice. I choose to do this or be this or perform this or neglect this. So its action of will.
Its force of will either will to do harm damage chase a desire.
An act of will is on purpose.
You can’t by accident act on will.
An act of will can be a New Years resolution.
Free will that’s Biblical has an action of will that has conscience attached, and has moral consequence to do good or to do bad
The concept has been discussed for about 3500 years that we know of. And still being discussed today. Methinks it will also be discussed in another 1000 years. And people will still be in disagreement.
I freely chose to use the nerdy word ‘methinks’, methinks.
Since God is Omniscient, knows ahead our choices and He also predestined prophesy, but also gives free will, the idea of election and vessels seems complicated.
God is Omniscient and Omnipresent
Its actually simple not complicated.
He knows my choices before I make them, but they are still choices made by free will, which we would make or have made regardless.
In other words if I make a choice of free will today, it’s my choice of free will. Whether or not God knew 1st, or didn’t know my choices 1st is irrelevant to my free will.
God pre-knowing my choices before my choices were made, doesn’t change the free will that God gave to us. Although it may change how God uses that choice.
God alters consequence for
1 - His own will and purpose and prophesy. “He works all things for good” 2 - He alters consequences at times for us because of His kindness toward us. But even those interjections of God in time where also foreknown by God.
Romans 8
“28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.”
He chose the exact time to come, at the right time, according to His will, to bring forth His prohesies, working all things together so God did it.
He predestined Judas’ betrayal. Not because God made Judas’ choice for him, but because he knew already that Judas would be offered 30 pieces of silver and he would choose and agree to betray Jesus. So God chose him to be predestined the Son of perdition.
So then God predestined Judas and his choices to occur in order to fulfill prophesy, occuring in the day and hour required according to His prophesy. Same with Pharoah. And other events like the killing of the babies when both Moses and Jesus were born. Weeping in Israel for her sons were no more" (paraphrased)
Prophesy is God’s response at the appropriate time and to every choice ever made and to every consequence that ever unfolded, past, present and future, and for His purpose to reveal the “anxiously awaited sons of God”
Romans 8
"anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. "
Romans 8
26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; 27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God."
He already had complete foreknowledge of all choices and events ever to be made. Prophesy is His free will. He predestined prophesies at a designated time. And sometimes prophesies of God are simply just foreknowledge of events known from all the known choices and every action and reaction.
Prophesy is destiny.
Foreknown always! And predestined often! But in all thing according to His Will and purpose.
Our choices, and the consequences and the events that follow are simply used by God. We are jars of clay “should the created complained to the Creator, is He unjust?” (paraphrased)
God acts on His free will using our known choices and consequences. And He set in motion a purpose to have many like Jesus, the first born of many brethern"
God’s acts on our behalf, God knowing His actions beforehand doesn’t change God or His intervention, His purposes, His prophesies, nor their outcomes.
Whether happy or sad consequences, or objects of mercy or objects of wrath, or vessels of honor or for dishonor, He uses ALL for good, to fulfill His prophesies, and for His purposes throughout time.
His purposes could be as simple as feeding birds, confirming our faith, disciplining us to obedience, blessing us, and softening hearts or hardening hearts, to revealing to all of creation His children.
God knows all hearts and choices, preknown by an Omnicient God.
But knowing ahead of time doesn’t change free will, He doesnt change our choices because free will still makes choices our own.
)
