The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model

[Sketo]

Soft libertarianism, or concurrence, holds that a moral agent has the power to choose in a libertarian sense...

“Choose in a libertarian sense” What does this mean? It is never explained anywhere! There is no explanation of the actual process of the final “choosing” at all!

The Final Choice Gap Theory

...but the limits of this ability are decided by his character.

In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what? Not answered!

While a determinist argues a person’s choice is determined by his character...

So in determinism the one final “choice” landed upon is determined by something from within man? ...namely his “character”?

Determinism sounds reasonable to me!

What about “libertarianism” is there anything that even comes close to explaining how the one final “choice” is landed upon? Not yet... Let’s continue...

...soft libertarianism contends a person’s character (only) simply determines what sets of choices are available.

In this model “character” only determines “Sets of choices” but not the one final “choice” landed upon! Still no explanation of the final choice in “libertarianism”!
Maybe it’s in the next part...

Outside influences and internal dispositions are factors.......but the agent has the ability to take any one of the choices within the set.

So... still only “sets of choices” but no explanation how the one final choice is landed upon! Just a vaguely, undefined, mysterious, “agent” that apparently functions independently from “factors”!

“Outside influences and internal dispositions are factors...” (separate) “...but the agent...”

“outside influences” and “internal dispositions” are separate from this undefined, mysterious “agent” thing?

If internal dispositions are only factors, and not determiners, then what is the “agent”? Why doesn’t the “agent” include the “internal factors”? Why are they treated as only equal to “outside influences”?

How does this undefined, ambiguous “agent” come to the one final option landed upon as the final choice?

It’s still not explained...

Possessing libertarian freedom means we genuinely choose...

Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!

...but we dwell in a fallen world so it is not an easy, even, unslanted choice.

So we reach the end and there is still no explanation as to how the one final option is landed upon... so, in this model, Total Depravity has not been ruled out as a factor that totally “slants the choice”, to sin, 100% of the time!

Also this model does not rule out that God is the reason for any slant towards the righteous choice every time a righteous choice is made!

(According to libertarianism) we are finite creatures, so the range of choices is limited.

This is a great acknowledgment that man is “finite creature” and God is “infinite creator”! God is self sufficient where man is God dependent!

---

One of the inconsistencies of Libertarian Freewill-ism is its claim that God is free even though he can not sin while also assuming that man is free because he can sin!

Think about it...

When they apply “LF-ism” to God, they say, he is “free” even though his nature, or character, limits his available options to a set of sinless options only! Then out of the other side of their mouth...they apply “LF-ism” to man and say he is “free” because his nature, or character, allows sin in the final set of available options to choose from!

Actually, if libertarianism was consistent, if God is considered “free” when his character limits available option to a set of only righteous choices, then man would also be considered “free” if his character limits available option to a set of only sinful choices... IF Libertarianism was consistent!

Even Total Depravity fits the system because of the GAP that they will not explain!

 

[TomFL]

“Choose in a libertarian sense” What does this mean? It is never explained anywhere! There is no explanation of the actual process of the final “choosing” at all!

The Final Choice Gap Theory



In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what? Not answered!


So in determinism the one final “choice” landed upon is determined by something from within man? ...namely his “character”?

Determinism sounds reasonable to me!

What about “libertarianism” is there anything that even comes close to explaining how the one final “choice” is landed upon? Not yet... Let’s continue...

In this model “character” only determines “Sets of choices” but not the one final “choice” landed upon! Still no explanation of the final choice in “libertarianism”!
Maybe it’s in the next part...



So... still only “sets of choices” but no explanation how the one final choice is landed upon! Just a vaguely, undefined, mysterious, “agent” that apparently functions independently from “factors”!

“Outside influences and internal dispositions are factors...” (separate) “...but the agent...”

“outside influences” and “internal dispositions” are separate from this undefined, mysterious “agent” thing?

If internal dispositions are only factors, and not determiners, then what is the “agent”? Why doesn’t the “agent” include the “internal factors”? Why are they treated as only equal to “outside influences”?

How does this undefined, ambiguous “agent” come to the one final option landed upon as the final choice?

It’s still not explained...



Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!



So we reach the end and there is still no explanation as to how the one final option is landed upon... so, in this model, Total Depravity has not been ruled out as a factor that totally “slants the choice”, to sin, 100% of the time!

Also this model does not rule out that God is the reason for any slant towards the righteous choice every time a righteous choice is made!



This is a great acknowledgment that man is “finite creature” and God is “infinite creator”! God is self sufficient where man is God dependent!

---

One of the inconsistencies of Libertarian Freewill-ism is its claim that God is free even though he can not sin while also assuming that man is free because he can sin!

Think about it...

When they apply “LF-ism” to God, they say, he is “free” even though his nature, or character, limits his available options to a set of sinless options only! Then out of the other side of their mouth...they apply “LF-ism” to man and say he is “free” because his nature, or character, allows sin in the final set of available options to choose from!

Actually, if libertarianism was consistent, if God is considered “free” when his character limits available option to a set of only righteous choices, then man would also be considered “free” if his character limits available option to a set of only sinful choices... IF Libertarianism was consistent!

Even Total Depravity fits the system because of the GAP that they will not explain!

IF God is free ?

Actually, if libertarianism was consistent, if God is considered “free” when his character limits available option to a set of only righteous choices, then man would also be considered “free” if his character limits available option to a set of only sinful choices... IF Libertarianism was consistent!

Oh do you imagine he is determined ?

Who or what do you believe determined him ?

If free is it your argument it is impossible for God to create a being with a limited capability that he has

Did God create freely ?

Could he have not created ?

What caused God to decide to create rather than not create ?

Were to create or not create options for God and thus a set of possibilities consistent with his character

Where is your evidence for but a single option ?

Will you claim a final choice gap in relation to God's decision

Can you prove a mans nature limits him to one choice?

Give me an example

Where is your proof for one option ?

or have you just assumed it

Whatever. Your philosophy cannot account for God's decision to create

So all you offer are your assumptions

Finally

Why should your finite reasoning be exalted over the word of God ?

Philem. 1:14 —CSB
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

 

[TomFL]

“Choose in a libertarian sense” What does this mean? It is never explained anywhere! There is no explanation of the actual process of the final “choosing” at all!

PT2

Why is there so little appeal to the word of God in your argument

You question if God is free ?

Psa. 115:3 —CSB17
“Our God is in heaven and does whatever he pleases.”

but scripture shows that he is

You deny man has any free will

Philem. 1:14 —CSB
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

but the bible suggests otherwise

and your doctrine of total inability the bible rejects

Deut. 30:10–19 —ESV
“when you obey the voice of the LORD your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes that are written in this Book of the Law, when you turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
¶ “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.
It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.
¶ “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil.
If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.
But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them,
I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess.
I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,”

The bible shows God does not determine man's sin

James 1:13 ¶ No one undergoing a trial should say, “I am being tempted by God,” since God is not tempted by evil, and he himself doesn’t tempt anyone.
James 1:14 But each person is tempted when he is drawn away and enticed by his own evil desire.
James 1:15 Then after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin, and when sin is fully grown, it gives birth to death.
James 1:16 ¶ Don’t be deceived, my dear brothers and sisters.
James 1:17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

1Cor. 10:13 No temptation has come upon you except what is common to humanity. But God is faithful;a he will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation he will also provide the way outb so that you may be able to bear it.

Job 34:10 ¶ Therefore listen to me, you men of understanding.
It is impossible for God to do wrong,
and for the Almighty to act unjustly.
Job 34:11 For he repays a person according to his deeds,
and he gives him what his conduct deserves.
Job 34:12 Indeed, it is true that God does not act wickedly
and the Almighty does not pervert justice.

1John 2:16 For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride in one’s possessions—is not from the Father, but is from the world.

So if God is not determining man's sin

what is in your view ?

atheistic Material determination ?

 

[Sketo]

IF God is free ?



Oh do you imagine he is determined ?

Who or what do you believe determined him ?

If free is it your argument it is impossible for God to create a being with a limited capability that he has

Did God create freely ?

Could he have not created ?

What caused God to decide to create rather than not create ?

Were to create or not create options for God and thus a set of possibilities consistent with his character

Where is your evidence for but a single option ?

Will you claim a final choice gap in relation to God's decision

Can you prove a mans nature limits him to one choice?

Give me an example

Where is your proof for one option ?

or have you just assumed it

Whatever. Your philosophy cannot account for God's decision to create

So all you offer are your assumptions

Finally

Why should your finite reasoning be exalted over the word of God ?

Philem. 1:14 —CSB
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

You did not address the “unexplained GAP” in your Libertarian Model!
Your deflection away from the MODEL itself, and your refusal for an explanation is proof of my OP’s Conclusion!

If you would like to use the Bible to answer for the HUGE.....GAP in your theoretical model then have at it!

I await your MODEL explanation...

 

[TomFL]

You did not address the “unexplained GAP” in your Libertarian Model!
Your deflection away from the MODEL itself, and your refusal for an explanation is proof of my OP’s Conclusion!

If you would like to use the Bible to answer for the HUGE.....GAP in your theoretical model then have at it!

I await your MODEL explanation...

And you ignored the question of God's freedom

Did God have a huge gap in his decision processes ?

Was creation determined for him ?

Did he have no other option ?

Is it impossible for God to create a creature with a limited amount of his capability

If you want to ignore that and the bible and Cleave to your philosophical determinations then you have it

 

[Sketo]

And you ignored the question of God's freedom

Did God have a huge gap in his decision processes

Is it impossible for God to create a creature with a limited amount of his capability

If you want to ignore that and the bible and Cleave to your philosophical determinations then you have it

Still no answer for The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model?

If you can’t account for, and the Bible can’t account for, the unexplained GAP in your MODEL then your model is an inadequate representation of the Bible!

It’s not my job to prove your MODEL... it’s yours... and you are unable to account for your GAP!

 

[TomFL]

Still no answer for The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model?

If you can’t account for, and the Bible can’t account for, the unexplained GAP in your MODEL then your model is an inadequate representation of the Bible!

It’s not my job to prove your MODEL... it’s yours... and you are unable to account for your GAP!

And if you cannot address God's freedom

Whether his nature allowed him to create or not create

you have no evidence to disprove my claim

or prove your determinism

You want to claim mystery fine

I claim your model of determinism is unbiblical and the bible supports both God's freedom and mans free will within limitation as have been defined in the op

 

[Sketo]

And if you cannot address God's freedom

Whether his nature allowed him to create or not create

you have no evidence to disprove my claim

Still no answer for The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model
Your MODEL has not been proven in the first place!

This is like saying...
I claim there is a flying-spaghetti-monster on planet zoltar on the other side of the universe!
“you have no evidence to disprove my claim”

You have to prove your claim first... and you have not!

You want to claim mystery fine

It’s up to you to either explain the GAP or claim it’s a mystery

Are you saying that The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model is a mystery?

Possessing libertarian freedom means we genuinely choose...

Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!

If it is a mystery as to how the will makes its final one choice among the “sets of choices avaliable” then the MODEL proves nothing!

Anything could b a cause in the GAP!

...but the limits of this ability are decided by his character.

In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what?

---

You claim that the will has “sets of choices” to choose from but you can’t prove in your model, or from the Bible, how it chooses among the “final set of choices”...

Mystery?
Sin nature?
God?
Flip-a-coin?
Roll-a-die?

If you can’t explain it, you can’t prove it is a result of “freedom”!

 

[TomFL]

Still no answer for The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model
Your MODEL has not proven anything, in the first place, to be disprovyet!

It’s up to you to either explain the GAP or claim it’s a mystery

Are you saying that The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model is a mystery?

And you still refuse to defend your determinism

And if you cannot address God's freedom

Whether his nature allowed him to create or not create

you have no evidence to disprove my claim

or prove your determinism

You want to claim mystery fine

I claim your model of determinism is unbiblical and the bible supports both God's freedom and mans free will within limitation as have been defined in the op

Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!

If it is a mystery as to how the will makes its final one choice among the “sets of choices avaliable” then the MODEL proves nothing!

Anything could b a cause in the GAP!



In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what?

There are other factors like circumstance, mood, variable conditions which go into the decision

However the fact is you cannot apply your random or determined model to account for God decision to create

you cannot deal with the fact the bible shows God is free

Psa. 115:3 —KJV
“But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.”

That the bible shows man has a free will (although limited)

Philem. 1:14 —CSB17
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

that man has alternative possibilities

1 Cor. 10:13 —ESV
“No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.”

Deut. 30:10–19 —CSB17
“when you obey the LORD your God by keeping his commands and statutes that are written in this book of the law and return to him with all your heart and all your soul.
¶ “This command that I give you today is certainly not too difficult or beyond your reach.
It is not in heaven so that you have to ask, ‘Who will go up to heaven, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
And it is not across the sea so that you have to ask, ‘Who will cross the sea, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
But the message is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, so that you may follow it.See, today I have set before you life and prosperity, death and adversity.For I am commanding you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, statutes, and ordinances, so that you may live and multiply, and the LORD your God may bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
But if your heart turns away and you do not listen and you are led astray to bow in worship to other gods and serve them,
I tell you today that you will certainly perish and will not prolong your days in the land you are entering to possess across the Jordan.
I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live,”

That God treats man as a responsible aqent

---

You claim that the will has “sets of choices” to choose from but you can’t prove in your model, or from the Bible, how it chooses among the “final set of choices”...

You were just given a set of choices above

God could create or not create

Philemon could have accepted back Onesimus

The Israelites could have obeyed God

Those are a range of choices and from scripture

so your claim is false

You ignored the scriptures in positing your philosophical reflections

 

[Sketo]

You want to claim mystery fine

Are you claiming mystery because you cannot answer for your GAP?

You were just given a set of choices above

God could create or not create

Ok... then what caused him to land on “create” instead of “not create”?
This is the GAP you, and your MODEL, can not account for!

If you say because he “wanted” to then that just simply shows a “cause” for the final choice landed upon and this is not allowed as a “cause” in your MODEL!

Therefore The Unexplained Gap remains In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model

Philemon could have (but why didn’t he) accepted back Onesimus

2 options available how did he decide to land on the one final option?

The Israelites could have (but why didn’t he) obeyed God

2 options available what caused him to land on the one final option instead of the other?

Those are a range of choices and from scripture

so your claim is false

I don’t see where you cleared up The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model

You assume God is free merely because he made a choice? This does not prove mans, or Gods, will is free!

My dog has multiple options available to pee on... he chose to pee on the tree therefore, according to you, he has “libertarian freewill”!

Is that how your MODEL works?

You have not addressed...

Soft libertarianism, or concurrence, holds that a moral agent has the power to choose in a libertarian sense...

“Choose in a libertarian sense” What does this mean? It is never explained anywhere! There is no explanation of the actual process of the final “choosing” at all!

The Final Choice Gap Theory

...but the limits of this ability are decided by his character.

In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what? Not answered!

While a determinist argues a person’s choice is determined by his character...

So in determinism the one final “choice” landed upon is determined by something from within man? ...namely his “character”?

Determinism sounds reasonable to me!

What about “libertarianism” is there anything that even comes close to explaining how the one final “choice” is landed upon? Not yet... Let’s continue...

...soft libertarianism contends a person’s character (only) simply determines what sets of choices are available.

In this model “character” only determines “Sets of choices” but not the one final “choice” landed upon! Still no explanation of the final choice in “libertarianism”!
Maybe it’s in the next part...

Outside influences and internal dispositions are factors.......but the agent has the ability to take any one of the choices within the set.

So... still only “sets of choices” but no explanation how the one final choice is landed upon! Just a vaguely, undefined, mysterious, “agent” that apparently functions independently from “factors”!

“Outside influences and internal dispositions are factors...” (separate) “...but the agent...”

“outside influences” and “internal dispositions” are separate from this undefined, mysterious “agent” thing?

If internal dispositions are only factors, and not determiners, then what is the “agent”? Why doesn’t the “agent” include the “internal factors”? Why are they treated as only equal to “outside influences”?

How does this undefined, ambiguous “agent” come to the one final option landed upon as the final choice?

It’s still not explained...

Possessing libertarian freedom means we genuinely choose...

Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!

...but we dwell in a fallen world so it is not an easy, even, unslanted choice.

So we reach the end and there is still no explanation as to how the one final option is landed upon... so, in this model, Total Depravity has not been ruled out as a factor that totally “slants the choice”, to sin, 100% of the time!

Also this model does not rule out that God is the reason for any slant towards the righteous choice every time a righteous choice is made!

(According to libertarianism) we are finite creatures, so the range of choices is limited.

This is a great acknowledgment that man is “finite creature” and God is “infinite creator”! God is self sufficient where man is God dependent!

---

One of the inconsistencies of Libertarian Freewill-ism is its claim that God is free even though he can not sin while also assuming that man is free because he can sin!

Think about it...

When they apply “LF-ism” to God, they say, he is “free” even though his nature, or character, limits his available options to a set of sinless options only! Then out of the other side of their mouth...they apply “LF-ism” to man and say he is “free” because his nature, or character, allows sin in the final set of available options to choose from!

Actually, if libertarianism was consistent, if God is considered “free” when his character limits available option to a set of only righteous choices, then man would also be considered “free” if his character limits available option to a set of only sinful choices... IF Libertarianism was consistent!

Even Total Depravity fits the system because of the GAP that they will not explain!

 

[TomFL]

Are you claiming mystery because you cannot answer for your GAP?

No you are claiming mystery

I am demonstrating the defectiveness of your random - determined dichotomy as it applies to God and the bible

Showing from scripture alternative possibilities and thus a set of choices

as well as biblical evidence for choice

Why did you not address it

And refuse to defend your determinism

And why did you not address God's freedom

Whether his nature allowed him to create or not create

you have no evidence to disprove my claim

or prove your determinism

You want to claim mystery fine

I claim your model of determinism is unbiblical and the bible supports both God's freedom and mans free will within limitation as have been defined in the op

Sketo said:
Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!

If it is a mystery as to how the will makes its final one choice among the “sets of choices avaliable” then the MODEL proves nothing!

Anything could b a cause in the GAP!



In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what?
Click to expand...

There are other factors like circumstance, mood, variable conditions which go into the decision

However the fact is you cannot apply your random or determined model to account for God decision to create

you cannot deal with the fact the bible shows God is free

Psa. 115:3 —KJV
“But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.”

That the bible shows man has a free will (although limited)

Philem. 1:14 —CSB17
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

that man has alternative possibilities

1 Cor. 10:13 —ESV
“No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.”

Deut. 30:10–19 —CSB17
“when you obey the LORD your God by keeping his commands and statutes that are written in this book of the law and return to him with all your heart and all your soul.
¶ “This command that I give you today is certainly not too difficult or beyond your reach.
It is not in heaven so that you have to ask, ‘Who will go up to heaven, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
And it is not across the sea so that you have to ask, ‘Who will cross the sea, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
But the message is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, so that you may follow it.See, today I have set before you life and prosperity, death and adversity.For I am commanding you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, statutes, and ordinances, so that you may live and multiply, and the LORD your God may bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
But if your heart turns away and you do not listen and you are led astray to bow in worship to other gods and serve them,
I tell you today that you will certainly perish and will not prolong your days in the land you are entering to possess across the Jordan.
I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live,”

That God treats man as a responsible aqent

Sketo said:

---

You claim that the will has “sets of choices” to choose from but you can’t prove in your model, or from the Bible, how it chooses among the “final set of choices”...

You were just given a set of choices above

God could create or not create

Philemon could have accepted back Onesimus

or could have refused

Those were choices

The Israelites could have obeyed God

Those are a range of choices and from scripture

so your claim is false

You ignored the scriptures in positing your philosophical reflections

 

[Sketo]

TomFL said:
You want to claim mystery fine

Are you claiming mystery because you cannot answer for your GAP?

TomFL said:
You were just given a set of choices above

God could create or not create

Ok... then what caused him to land on “create” instead of “not create”?
This is the GAP you, and your MODEL, can not account for!

If you say because he “wanted” to then that just simply shows a “cause” for the final choice landed upon and this is not allowed as a “cause” in your MODEL!

Therefore The Unexplained Gap remains In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model

TomFL said:
Philemon could have (but why didn’t he) accepted back Onesimus

2 options available how did he decide to land on the one final option?

TomFL said:
The Israelites could have (but why didn’t he) obeyed God

2 options available what caused him to land on the one final option instead of the other?

TomFL said:
Those are a range of choices and from scripture

so your claim is false

I don’t see where you cleared up The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model

You assume God is free merely because he made a choice? This does not prove mans, or Gods, will is free!

My dog has multiple options available to pee on... he chose to pee on the tree therefore, according to you, he has “libertarian freewill”!

Is that how your MODEL works?

You have not addressed...

Soft libertarianism, or concurrence, holds that a moral agent has the power to choose in a libertarian sense...

“Choose in a libertarian sense” What does this mean? It is never explained anywhere! There is no explanation of the actual process of the final “choosing” at all!

The Final Choice Gap Theory

...but the limits of this ability are decided by his character.

In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what? Not answered!

While a determinist argues a person’s choice is determined by his character...

So in determinism the one final “choice” landed upon is determined by something from within man? ...namely his “character”?

Determinism sounds reasonable to me!

What about “libertarianism” is there anything that even comes close to explaining how the one final “choice” is landed upon? Not yet... Let’s continue...

...soft libertarianism contends a person’s character (only) simply determines what sets of choicesare available.

In this model “character” only determines “Sets of choices” but not the one final “choice” landed upon! Still no explanation of the final choice in “libertarianism”!
Maybe it’s in the next part...

Outside influences and internal dispositions are factors.......but the agent has the ability to take any one of the choices within the set.

So... still only “sets of choices” but no explanation how the one final choice is landed upon! Just a vaguely, undefined, mysterious, “agent” that apparently functions independently from “factors”!

“Outside influences and internal dispositions are factors...” (separate) “...but the agent...”

“outside influences” and “internal dispositions” are separate from this undefined, mysterious “agent” thing?

If internal dispositions are only factors, and not determiners, then what is the “agent”? Why doesn’t the “agent” include the “internal factors”? Why are they treated as only equal to “outside influences”?

How does this undefined, ambiguous “agent” come to the one final option landed upon as the final choice?

It’s still not explained...

Possessing libertarian freedom means we genuinely choose...

Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!

...but we dwell in a fallen world so it is not an easy, even, unslanted choice.

So we reach the end and there is still no explanation as to how the one final option is landed upon... so, in this model, Total Depravity has not been ruled out as a factor that totally “slants the choice”, to sin, 100% of the time!

Also this model does not rule out that God is the reason for any slant towards the righteous choice every time a righteous choice is made!

(According to libertarianism) we are finite creatures, so the range of choices is limited.

This is a great acknowledgment that man is “finite creature” and God is “infinite creator”! God is self sufficient where man is God dependent!

---

One of the inconsistencies of Libertarian Freewill-ism is its claim that God is free even though he can not sin while also assuming that man is free because he can sin!

Think about it...

When they apply “LF-ism” to God, they say, he is “free” even though his nature, or character, limits his available options to a set of sinless options only! Then out of the other side of their mouth...they apply “LF-ism” to man and say he is “free” because his nature, or character, allows sin in the final set of available options to choose from!

Actually, if libertarianism was consistent, if God is considered “free” when his character limits available option to a set of only righteous choices, then man would also be considered “free” if his character limits available option to a set of only sinful choices... IF Libertarianism was consistent!

Even Total Depravity fits the system because of the GAP that they will not explain!

 

[TomFL]

Are you claiming mystery because you cannot answer for your GAP?

Still no response to what was posted

.....................................................................

No you are claiming mystery

I am demonstrating the defectiveness of your random - determined dichotomy as it applies to God and the bible

Showing from scripture alternative possibilities and thus a set of choices

as well as biblical evidence for choice

Why did you not address it

And you refuse to defend your determinism

And why did you not address God's freedom

Whether his nature allowed him to create or not create

you have no evidence to disprove my claim

or prove your determinism

You want to claim mystery fine

I claim your model of determinism is unbiblical and the bible supports both God's freedom and mans free will within limitation as have been defined in the op

Sketo said:
Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!

If it is a mystery as to how the will makes its final one choice among the “sets of choices avaliable” then the MODEL proves nothing!

Anything could b a cause in the GAP!



In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

There are other factors like circumstance, mood, variable conditions which go into the decision

However the fact is you cannot apply your random or determined model to account for God decision to create

you cannot deal with the fact the bible shows God is free

Psa. 115:3 —KJV
“But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.”

That the bible shows man has a free will (although limited)

Philem. 1:14 —CSB17
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

that man has alternative possibilities

1 Cor. 10:13 —ESV
“No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.”

Deut. 30:10–19 —CSB17
“when you obey the LORD your God by keeping his commands and statutes that are written in this book of the law and return to him with all your heart and all your soul.
¶ “This command that I give you today is certainly not too difficult or beyond your reach.
It is not in heaven so that you have to ask, ‘Who will go up to heaven, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
And it is not across the sea so that you have to ask, ‘Who will cross the sea, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
But the message is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, so that you may follow it.See, today I have set before you life and prosperity, death and adversity.For I am commanding you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, statutes, and ordinances, so that you may live and multiply, and the LORD your God may bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
But if your heart turns away and you do not listen and you are led astray to bow in worship to other gods and serve them,
I tell you today that you will certainly perish and will not prolong your days in the land you are entering to possess across the Jordan.
I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live,”

That God treats man as a responsible aqent

Sketo said:

---

You claim that the will has “sets of choices” to choose from but you can’t prove in your model, or from the Bible, how it chooses among the “final set of choices”...

You were just given a set of choices above

God could create or not create

Philemon could have accepted back Onesimus

or could have refused

Those were choices

The Israelites could have obeyed God

Those are a range of choices and from scripture

so your claim is false

You ignored the scriptures in positing your philosophical reflections

 

[Sketo]

Still no response to what was posted

.....................................................................

No you are claiming mystery

I am demonstrating the defectiveness of your random - determined dichotomy as it applies to God and the bible

Showing from scripture alternative possibilities and thus a set of choices

as well as biblical evidence for choice

Why did you not address it

And you refuse to defend your determinism

And why did you not address God's freedom

Whether his nature allowed him to create or not create

you have no evidence to disprove my claim

or prove your determinism

You want to claim mystery fine

I claim your model of determinism is unbiblical and the bible supports both God's freedom and mans free will within limitation as have been defined in the op



There are other factors like circumstance, mood, variable conditions which go into the decision

However the fact is you cannot apply your random or determined model to account for God decision to create

you cannot deal with the fact the bible shows God is free

Psa. 115:3 —KJV
“But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.”

That the bible shows man has a free will (although limited)

Philem. 1:14 —CSB17
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

that man has alternative possibilities

1 Cor. 10:13 —ESV
“No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.”

Deut. 30:10–19 —CSB17
“when you obey the LORD your God by keeping his commands and statutes that are written in this book of the law and return to him with all your heart and all your soul.
¶ “This command that I give you today is certainly not too difficult or beyond your reach.
It is not in heaven so that you have to ask, ‘Who will go up to heaven, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
And it is not across the sea so that you have to ask, ‘Who will cross the sea, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
But the message is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, so that you may follow it.See, today I have set before you life and prosperity, death and adversity.For I am commanding you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, statutes, and ordinances, so that you may live and multiply, and the LORD your God may bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
But if your heart turns away and you do not listen and you are led astray to bow in worship to other gods and serve them,
I tell you today that you will certainly perish and will not prolong your days in the land you are entering to possess across the Jordan.
I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live,”

That God treats man as a responsible aqent






You were just given a set of choices above

God could create or not create

Philemon could have accepted back Onesimus

or could have refused

Those were choices

The Israelites could have obeyed God

Those are a range of choices and from scripture

so your claim is false

You ignored the scriptures in positing your philosophical reflections

You still have not demonstrated that mans choice is the result of “freedom” anywhere!

“Man has multiple options and he chose one” does not prove the choice was the result of “freedom”!

You have not proven that mans will is free!

Your MODEL has not proven that one choice, from a “set of choices”, is the result of “freedom”! GAP remains!

Saying that God is free because he made a choice does not prove God is “free”... nor does it prove that man is free!

You have not cleared up The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model!

 

[TomFL]

You still have not demonstrated that mans choice is the result of “freedom” anywhere!

“Man has multiple options and he chose one” does not prove the choice was the result of “freedom”!

You have not proven that mans will is free!

Your MODEL has not proven that one choice, from a “set of choices”, is the result of “freedom”! GAP remains!

Saying that God is free because he made a choice does not prove God is “free”... nor does it prove that man is free!

You have not cleared up The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model!

Actually I quoted a couple of verses showing both God and man's freedom

observe

No you are claiming mystery

I am demonstrating the defectiveness of your random - determined dichotomy as it applies to God and the bible

Showing from scripture alternative possibilities and thus a set of choices

as well as biblical evidence for choice

Why did you not address it

And you refuse to defend your determinism

And why did you not address God's freedom

Whether his nature allowed him to create or not create

you have no evidence to disprove my claim

or prove your determinism

You want to claim mystery fine

I claim your model of determinism is unbiblical and the bible supports both God's freedom and mans free will within limitation as have been defined in the op

Sketo said:
Ok but how? Is it the roll of a die? Is it the flip of a coin? This lack of explanation for the final process of the final choice leaves a HUGE......... PIVOTAL....... GAP in the model!

If it is a mystery as to how the will makes its final one choice among the “sets of choices avaliable” then the MODEL proves nothing!

Anything could b a cause in the GAP!



In this model only the “limits... are decided by his character” but not the final “choice” landed upon? Ok... what is the final “choice” decided by? ... if not “character” then what?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

There are other factors like circumstance, mood, variable conditions which go into the decision

However the fact is you cannot apply your random or determined model to account for God decision to create

you cannot deal with the fact the bible shows God is free

Psa. 115:3 —KJV
“But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.”

That the bible shows man has a free will (although limited)

Philem. 1:14 —CSB17
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

that man has alternative possibilities

1 Cor. 10:13 —ESV
“No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.”

Deut. 30:10–19 —CSB17
“when you obey the LORD your God by keeping his commands and statutes that are written in this book of the law and return to him with all your heart and all your soul.
¶ “This command that I give you today is certainly not too difficult or beyond your reach.
It is not in heaven so that you have to ask, ‘Who will go up to heaven, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
And it is not across the sea so that you have to ask, ‘Who will cross the sea, get it for us, and proclaim it to us so that we may follow it?’
But the message is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, so that you may follow it.See, today I have set before you life and prosperity, death and adversity.For I am commanding you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, statutes, and ordinances, so that you may live and multiply, and the LORD your God may bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
But if your heart turns away and you do not listen and you are led astray to bow in worship to other gods and serve them,
I tell you today that you will certainly perish and will not prolong your days in the land you are entering to possess across the Jordan.
I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live,”

That God treats man as a responsible aqent

Sketo said:

---

You claim that the will has “sets of choices” to choose from but you can’t prove in your model, or from the Bible, how it chooses among the “final set of choices”...

You were just given a set of choices above

God could create or not create

Philemon could have accepted back Onesimus

or could have refused

Those were choices

The Israelites could have obeyed God

Those are a range of choices and from scripture

so your claim is false

You ignored the scriptures in positing your philosophical reflections

 

[Sketo]

Actually I quoted a couple of verses showing both God and man's freedom

Saying that God is free because he made a choice does not prove God is “free”... nor does it prove that man is free!

How do any of those verses show that mans will is “free”!
How do any of those verses show that Gods will is “free”!

You still have not demonstrated that mans choice is the result of “freedom” anywhere!

“Man has multiple options and he chose one” does not prove the choice was the result of “freedom”!

You have not proven that mans will is free!

Your MODEL has not proven that one choice, from a “set of choices”, is the result of “freedom”! GAP remains!
You have not cleared up The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model!

 

[TomFL]

Saying that God is free because he made a choice does not prove God is “free”... nor does it prove that man is free!

How do any of those verses show that mans will is “free”!
How do any of those verses show that Gods will is “free”!

You still have not demonstrated that mans choice is the result of “freedom” anywhere!

“Man has multiple options and he chose one” does not prove the choice was the result of “freedom”!

You have not proven that mans will is free!

Your MODEL has not proven that one choice, from a “set of choices”, is the result of “freedom”! GAP remains!
You have not cleared up The Unexplained Gap In The Soft Libertarian-ism Model!

Actually I quoted scripture

Psa. 115:3 —KJV
“But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.”

why did you just ignore

and I quoted scripture regarding free will

Philem. 1:14 —CSB17
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

but you ignored that as well

I also quoted

1 Cor. 10:13 —ESV
“No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.”

and

Deut. 30:10–19 —ESV
“when you obey the voice of the LORD your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes that are written in this Book of the Law, when you turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
¶ “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.
It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.
¶ “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil.
If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.
But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them,
I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess.
I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,”

showing men with option alternate possibilities

but you ignored that as well

And still you have not responded to God's decision to create

Did he not have the option to not create ?

If so How can it therefore be stated his decision was not free

and if you claim he did not then who or what determined God

Finally your determined or random chance model

Was creation determined or just random chance according to your view ?

 

[Sketo]

Actually I quoted scripture

Psa. 115:3 —KJV
“But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.”

Saying that God is free because “he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased” does not prove God is “free”... nor does it prove that man is free!

why did you just ignore

and I quoted scripture regarding free will

Philem. 1:14 —CSB17
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

How does this verse prove that mans will is free?
You choose a version that suits your agenda?
You choose versions that render the meaning as vague as possible!
Anyone who actually reads this verse can tell it doesn’t prove that mans will is free!

Why not a different version like...

NIV
But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do would not seem forced but would be voluntary.
NLT
But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent. I wanted you to help because you were willing, not because you were forced.
ESV
but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own accord

This verse does not reveal anything about the will of those he is speaking to!

Imagine that I raised up a billboard in the middle of a city in order to draw all people to my restaurant, and this billboard said...

“Whosoever will may come and eat at my restraint for free, and if you eat my food you will live! You may freely choose to eat at another restraint but whosoever eats at any other restraint will surly die! Choose you, this day, where you will eat!

This billboard has the word “free”, and the word “will”, an even the word “choose” in it... BUT... this billboard says absolutely nothing about the “will” of the people who are reading it!

You can not discern anything about the reader of this billboard, from the words on the billboard!

but you ignored that as well

Because it does not prove that mans will is free!
Your assumption is not proof!

I also quoted

1 Cor. 10:13 —ESV
“No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.”

Ok so God allows you to be tempted... just not beyond your ability!
God determines the allowed amount of temptation!
Gods in control!
This simply proves that each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. - James 1:14

Which also proves that God does not have to tempt man to sin because they are naturally tempted on their own without any outside force!
They are not neutral.

among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. - Ephesians 2:3

This is what we are by nature!

You have not proven anything yet!

and

Deut. 30:10–19 —ESV
“when you obey the voice of the LORD your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes that are written in this Book of the Law, when you turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
¶ “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.
It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.
¶ “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil.
If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.
But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them,
I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess.
I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,”

This does not prove that mans will is free at all!
You can bring the Gospel to an Atheist and repeat it over and over and over again until he knows it by heart and can recite it back to you verbatim and this does not prove his “will is free”! This does not prove that a positive response is not brought about by the Grace of God and it does not prove that a negative response is not caused by sin nature!

It proves nothing!

Again...

Imagine that I raised up a billboard in the middle of a city in order to draw all people to my restaurant, and this billboard said...

“Whosoever will may come and eat at my restraint for free, and if you eat my food you will live! You may freely choose to eat at another restraint but whosoever eats at any other restraint will surly die! Choose you, this day, where you will eat!

This billboard has the word “free”, and the word “will”, an even the word “choose” in it... BUT... this billboard says absolutely nothing about the “will” of the people who are reading it!

You can not discern anything about the reader of this billboard, from the words on the billboard!

showing men with option alternate possibilities

Showing that multiple options are available does not prove that mans will is free when choosing the final one option landed upon!

This does not prove that the final choice is a result of freedom!

And still you have not responded to God's decision to create

Gods decision to create does not prove his freedom!

Did he not have the option to not create ?

Multiple options available does not prove freedom!
It is an assumption!

If so How can it therefore be stated his decision was not free

Again how does it prove that it was free?
It does not equate! True or not it does not equate!

and if you claim he did not then who or what determined God

It’s a false assumption! You assume that if God is self sufficient and is not dependent on anything outside of himself then man must be self sufficient and not dependent on God!
This is a false assumption!
God did not create God when he created man!
Man is not designed to function adequately apart from God!

among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. - Ephesians 2:3

---

So we reach the end and there is still no explanation as to how the one final option is landed upon... so, in this model, Total Depravity has not been ruled out as a factor that totally “slants the choice”, to sin, 100% of the time!

Also this model does not rule out that God is the reason for any slant towards the righteous choice every time a righteous choice is made!

 

[TomFL]

Saying that God is free because “he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased” does not prove God is “free”... nor does it prove that man is free!

You must have a different definition of free then

Psa. 115:3 —KJV
“But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.”

Free

: enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another

doing what you please is acting without any outside control

and I quoted scripture regarding free will

Philem. 1:14 —CSB17
“But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.”

How does this verse prove that mans will is free?

You mean by other that the fact it reads free will

Philemon had the option to accept or reject Onesimus

Those are choices

You choose a version that suits your agenda?
You choose versions that render the meaning as vague as possible!
Anyone who actually reads this verse can tell it doesn’t prove that mans will is free!

Supposed I told you I present 20 or more version that read free will

and I also told you the version that do not read all use terms by which free will is defined

1: voluntary choice or decision

synonyms

• uncoerced,
• unforced,
• volitional,
• voluntary,
• volunteer,
• willing

the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.

voluntary decision

Free will, in humans, the power or capacity to choose among alternatives or to act in certain situations independently of natural, social, or divine restraints. Free will

Why not a different version like...

NIV
But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do would not seem forced but would be voluntary.
NLT
But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent. I wanted you to help because you were willing, not because you were forced.
ESV
but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own accord

And those are all terms used to define free will

I also quoted

1 Cor. 10:13 —ESV
“No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.”

and

Deut. 30:10–19 —ESV
“when you obey the voice of the LORD your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes that are written in this Book of the Law, when you turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
¶ “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.
It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’
But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.
¶ “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil.
If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.
But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them,
I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess.
I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live,”

showing men with options - alternate possibilities

but you ignored that as well

Ok so God allows you to be tempted... just not beyond your ability!
God determines the allowed amount of temptation!
Gods in control!
This simply proves that each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. - James 1:14

You missed the point

If man did not have to sin but did anyway and God was not the cause of it then the man himself was - free will

Deut 30:10

God said they could do it

He was not preventing them but most did not why - free will

Which also proves that God does not have to tempt man to sin because they are naturally tempted on their own without any outside force!
They are not neutral.

So they sin of their own will -freely

among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. - Ephesians 2:3

This is what we are by nature!

You have not proven anything yet!

Actually your claim is false

I have shown man is stated to have free will according to the bible

and I gave examples where man used his free will to sin

Man is free if he does what he wants apart from external compulsion

I have also shown God is able to do whatever he pleases - also free will

This does not prove that mans will is free at all!
You can bring the Gospel to an Atheist and repeat it over and over and over again until he knows it by heart and can recite it back to you verbatim and this does not prove his “will is free”!

And he freely does what he wants. Acting according to your own wants is acting freely

The atheist freely rejects the gospel,

 

[Sketo]

You must have a different definition of free then

So according to your MODEL even Satan has this “freewill”... correct?

Why or why not?