Good and Just?

[Eightcrackers]

I believe it does, at least in a western society.

Possibly the most arrogant thing you've ever said.

Psychologists have confirmed that that is true in many cases of repressed knowledge. Many adults dont realize that they repressed knowledge about their childhood until they become adults.

I'll take that as a "yes".

You cannot prove that any atheist is repressing, then?

 

[El Cid]

Why can't one turn aside from a moral decision without a free choice. If you're saying that any turning aside for a moral decision is a free choice, you're just stating your claim again (or making a circular argument).

My point is that it is a moral choice. Most of your moral choices are freely made. And in context it is Gods will that the choice be free and yet also understand the consequences of that choice.

It doesn't have to imply that, you're reading something into the text that isn't there.

It is implied in the larger context.

 

[El Cid]

They both entail that the action is agential. But there's hardly anything here about free choice.

It's worth reflecting that Christianity is pretty relaxed about holding people accountable for actions that they could not have avoided. I actually think that's to its credit, or at least not to its discredit.

In the context of the Bible as a whole it is free choice but you do need to recognize the consequences of that choice. Yes not all choices are freely made but the scripture plainly teaches that the choice to follow Christ is freely made. Christ and his disciples never used force to convert people.

 

[Eightcrackers]

Yes not all choices are freely made but the scripture plainly teaches that the choice to follow Christ is freely made.

Follow, perhaps, but not believe in.

You can only choose to follow once you believe.

 

[Lucian]

In the context of the Bible as a whole it is free choice but you do need to recognize the consequences of that choice. Yes not all choices are freely made but the scripture plainly teaches that the choice to follow Christ is freely made. Christ and his disciples never used force to convert people.

They may not have used force to convert people, but that doesn't mean that the choice to follow Christ is supposed to be 'free' in the sense you might be imagining. I suppose the question is what sense that is.

 

[Gus Bovona]

My point is that it is a moral choice. Most of your moral choices are freely made. And in context it is Gods will that the choice be free and yet also understand the consequences of that choice.

That's a bare assertion.

It is implied in the larger context.

You're merely asserting that to which I've already replied. Why go in circles?

 

[El Cid]

If one cannot believe in the god of Moses, one cannot choose to serve the god of Moses.

Correct?

We all have the ability to believe but not everyone chooses to do so.

 

[Eightcrackers]

We all have the ability to believe but not everyone chooses to do so.

This does not engage the hypothetical - if one cannot believe, one cannot choose to serve.

Please note the "if", and answer accordingly.

 

[El Cid]

That's a bare assertion.

Can you provide any evidence to the contrary?

You're merely asserting that to which I've already replied. Why go in circles?

It is not circles if in the context of the Bible as a whole teaches that we have a free choice regarding God.

 

[El Cid]

They may not have used force to convert people, but that doesn't mean that the choice to follow Christ is supposed to be 'free' in the sense you might be imagining. I suppose the question is what sense that is.

In what sense are you referring?

 

[Lucian]

In what sense are you referring?

I think early Christian thought seems to be comfortable with the idea that people's salvific status is wholly determined, and yet can be framed as a result of a decision for which people are responsible.

 

[Gus Bovona]

Can you provide any evidence to the contrary?

Not my job before you've provided your evidence for your claim. Burden of proof, 'n all.

It is not circles if in the context of the Bible as a whole teaches that we have a free choice regarding God.

The circularity is that I've already replied to your point directly above and you haven't refuted my reply yet.

 

[El Cid]

This does not engage the hypothetical - if one cannot believe, one cannot choose to serve.

Please note the "if", and answer accordingly.

If one has brain damage and cannot understand in order to believe then yes. But God will take that into account and not hold that against them. But any healthy person has that ability.

 

[El Cid]

I think early Christian thought seems to be comfortable with the idea that people's salvific status is wholly determined, and yet can be framed as a result of a decision for which people are responsible.

Correct.

 

[El Cid]

Not my job before you've provided your evidence for your claim. Burden of proof, 'n all.


The circularity is that I've already replied to your point directly above and you haven't refuted my reply yet.

What is circular about Moses saying "Choose this day whom you will serve"?

 

[Gus Bovona]

What is circular about Moses saying "Choose this day whom you will serve"?

Nothing. I’m not saying you’re making a circular argument. I’m saying you’re taking the conversation in a circle, circling back to points I’ve already addressed.

it’s been long enough ago that I’m not sure on the details and I don’t feel like researching it.