Did God causally determine Cain's offering

Theo1689

Well-known member
How can they have done it willingly if it was determined for them
I don’t understand the problem.
Why couldn’t they do it willingly, simply because it was determined for them?
Are you assuming they don’t have wills?!

before they were ever born without any consideration of what they might do in a particular circumstance ?

Yeah, so?
I don’t see the problem.
They still have wills.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
I don’t understand the problem.
Why couldn’t they do it willingly, simply because it was determined for them?
Are you assuming they don’t have wills?!



Yeah, so?
I don’t see the problem.
They still have wills.
What will if it was causally determined ?
 

TomFL

Well-known member
So you ARE denying that they have wills?!
If their desires and acts were determined as Calvinism teaches they have nothing that can really be called their will

It is whatever God made it and they are little more than puppets
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
If their desires and acts were determined as Calvinism teaches they have nothing that can really be called their will

That's simply false.

It is whatever God made it and they are little more than puppets

No, since they have wills, they are not puppets.
And it's the fact that they have wills, and are WILLINGLY doing those things, which is why it's just to blame them.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
That's simply false.



No, since they have wills, they are not puppets.
And it's the fact that they have wills, and are WILLINGLY doing those things, which is why it's just to blame them.
You mean you do not believe God controls their desires as compatibilism teaches ?
 

TomFL

Well-known member
I said nothing of the sort.
So if God determines their desires and circumstance thus determining what they will will how it it they can be said to really have done it willing ?

If a woman is given a date rape drug which causes her a desire for sex can it be stated she did it willingly
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
So if God determines their desires and circumstance thus determining what they will will how it it they can be said to really have done it willing ?

I don't understand your question.

It's like asking, "If Mary skipped school on Monday, then how can it be raining on Friday?"

If they have a will, and they acted in accordance with their will, then they are responsible for their actions.

If a woman is given a date rape drug which causes her a desire for sex can it be stated she did it willingly

I understand that your intent is to mock predestination, and make it look wrong.
I understand that.
But it's what the Bible teaches.
And so I will believe it, no matter what silly arguments you provide.

There are two reasons why your self-serving analogy is irrelevant.

The first is that the person who gave the woman the drug is not God, and so he has no authority to try to control her in any way. God is our Creator, and we are His creations, and not only that, but we are his SINFUL creations. We are sinners. He gave us existence, and we spit in His face and decided to sin against Him instead. So He has every right (as our Creator) to do with us whatever He wants to do.

Just like if I'm a painter, and I create a beautiful painting, a masterpiece, I as its creator can destroy it, even if people object and say I have no right to do it. As the creator, I have every right to do as I wish with my creation.

Secondly, God causes everything for good. Since the person who gave the woman the drug apparently has no "good cause" for his action, that makes Him culpable. God always has a good reason (just like with Joseph's brothers).
 

TomFL

Well-known member
I don't understand your question.

It's like asking, "If Mary skipped school on Monday, then how can it be raining on Friday?"

If they have a will, and they acted in accordance with their will, then they are responsible for their actions.



I understand that your intent is to mock predestination, and make it look wrong.
I understand that.
But it's what the Bible teaches.
And so I will believe it, no matter what silly arguments you provide.

There are two reasons why your self-serving analogy is irrelevant.

The first is that the person who gave the woman the drug is not God, and so he has no authority to try to control her in any way. God is our Creator, and we are His creations, and not only that, but we are his SINFUL creations. We are sinners. He gave us existence, and we spit in His face and decided to sin against Him instead. So He has every right (as our Creator) to do with us whatever He wants to do.

Just like if I'm a painter, and I create a beautiful painting, a masterpiece, I as its creator can destroy it, even if people object and say I have no right to do it. As the creator, I have every right to do as I wish with my creation.

Secondly, God causes everything for good. Since the person who gave the woman the drug apparently has no "good cause" for his action, that makes Him culpable. God always has a good reason (just like with Joseph's brothers).
What good was there in determining Cains offering be defective

I fail to see what you have difficulty understanding

So if God determines their desires and circumstance thus determining what they shall will; how it it they can be said to really have done it willing ?

seems plain enough to me

as for the drug; authority is not the issue. The issue is could it be stated the woman partook willingly
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
What good was there in determining Cains offering be defective

I fail to see what you have difficulty understanding

So if God determines their desires and circumstance thus determining what they shall will; how it it they can be said to really have done it willing ?

Calvinists believe that men have wills.
We believe that Cain had a will.
We believe that Can was not "forced" to do what he did, "kicking and screaming".
We believe Cain WANTED to do what he did.
Therefore he was willing.
Therefore he is to blame.

The fact that God determined it has NO BEARING on Cain's culpability for what he WILLINGLY chose to do.

I don't know how to explain that any clearer.

seems plain enough to me

Me too.
Cain had a will.
Cain is responsible for his actions.
What's the problem?


as for the drug; authority is not the issue. The issue is could it be stated the woman partook willingly

"Partook"?
She's not blamed for taking the drug.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Calvinists believe that men have wills.
We believe that Cain had a will.
We believe that Can was not "forced" to do what he did, "kicking and screaming".
We believe Cain WANTED to do what he did.
Therefore he was willing.
Therefore he is to blame.

The fact that God determined it has NO BEARING on Cain's culpability for what he WILLINGLY chose to do.

I don't know how to explain that any clearer.



Me too.
Cain had a will.
Cain is responsible for his actions.
What's the problem?




"Partook"?
She's not blamed for taking the drug.


The problem is the will has been externally determined

Do you not understand determinism hard or compatibilistic as taught in Calvinism

As for the woman

The sex afterwards

Can it be stated she did so willingly after ingesting the drug which caused her desire so she could not resist
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
The problem is the will has been externally determined

Why do you label that a "problem"?

Do you not understand determinism hard or compatibilistic as taught in Calvinism

Why don't you simply let me answer for myself, instead of trying to put me in a box?

And why don't you stop suggesting I "don't understand"?

Is the only way you can win an argument, to call the other person "stupid"?
And if I'm so "stupid", as you say, why do you expect me to give any answers that you'll accept at all?

Christians treat others with respect.
Maybe you should try it sometime.

As for the woman

The sex afterwards

Can it be stated she did so willingly after ingesting the drug which caused her desire so she could not resist

I already explained to you the flaws in your analogy.
If you want to ignore them, that's not my problem.
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
The problem is the will has been externally determined

Do you actually think the will is INTERNALLY determined?

Can you "will" yourself to not believe in God?
Can you "will" yourself to find dirt to be delicious?
 

Sketo

Well-known member
If a woman is given a date rape drug which causes her a desire for sex can it be stated she did it willingly
This exposes that you assume man is neutral!

In Soft Libertarian Freewill-ism Satan’s “character” and “nature” only allow sin as the “set of options” available for his “will” to choose from, and you say Satan still “has freewill”!
Satan only has a “set of options” that equate to 1 option... sin... and you claim he still has “freewill”!

The date rape drug alters the character of the women and creates a “set of desire for sex options”, that does not include “non-desire for sex”, therefor, according to SLF-ism, it “can still be stated she did it willingly” because that option was in the set of options available!

What if (like Satan) the “desire for sex” is the only “set of options” that the women’s “character” and “nature” allowed for her “will” to choose from?

Then she wouldn’t even need an outside force, like a “date rape drug”, “to cause her desire for sex”!

If her “character” and “nature” doesn’t allow “non-desire for sex” into the final set of options (like Satan) then her “will” can’t choose “non-desire for sex”!
If this is the case then, in SLF-ism, she still chooses “willingly” but her “will” is not free from her “character” or “nature” to choose a “non desire for sex” option!

According to SLF-ism, Her “nature” creates a “set of options” for the will to choose from!
 

Sketo

Well-known member
Do you actually think the will is INTERNALLY determined?

Can you "will" yourself to not believe in God?
Can you "will" yourself to find dirt to be delicious?
According to Soft Libertarian Freewill-ism the “character” and “nature” are external to the “Will”! So the will is determined by an external force from the “Will” the “character” and “nature”!
It’s an illusion of “freewill”!
In order for the will to be “truly” free the creator of the set-of-options must also be free! If the “character” and “nature” that determines the set of options for the will are not free then the will is not free either! It’s just an illusion!
Because of this, the “Will” is not free to choose anything other than the set created by the sin “nature”!
If the “character” and “nature” are corrupt then the will can not get a non-corrupt set of options to choose from... like Satan!

Tom has already affirmed that Satan has “freewill”!
 
Last edited:

TomFL

Well-known member
This exposes that you assume man is neutral!I

It has nothing at all to do with that

If a woman is given a date rape drug which causes her a desire for sex can it be stated she did it willingly

Can you answer the question ?
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Do you actually think the will is INTERNALLY determined?

Can you "will" yourself to not believe in God?
Can you "will" yourself to find dirt to be delicious?
So if the will is externally determine how can it be stated it was done willingly
 

Sketo

Well-known member
It has nothing at all to do with that

If a woman is given a date rape drug which causes her a desire for sex can it be stated she did it willingly

Can you answer the question ?
In Soft Libertarian Freewill-ism “desire for sex” is in the “set of options” available to the will... therefore it is considered “willingly”!


In Soft Libertarian Freewill-ism Satan’s “character” and “nature” only allow sin as the “set of options” available for his “will” to choose from, and you say Satan still “has freewill”!
Satan only has a “set of options” that equate to 1 option... sin... and you claim he still has “freewill”!
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Do you actually think the will is INTERNALLY determined?

Can you "will" yourself to not believe in God?
Can you "will" yourself to find dirt to be delicious?
So if the will is externally determine how can it be stated it was done willingly

You are a master at DODGING my questions, Tom.
Will you please answer them this time?

Can you "will" yourself to not believe in God?
Can you "will" yourself to find dirt to be delicious?

So if the will is externally determine how can it be stated it was done willingly

Because "willingly" simply means, "according to the will".
No more.
No less.
Regardless of whether the will is determined "internally" or "externally".
This is a red herring on your part.
 
Top