It's such a cop-out. Such a convenient "I don't-know-the-answer-to-your-question" unthinking statement. Anyone have a good way to get around this with the theists? Everytime I see that as the answer I die a little more inside.
2007-05-07 07:39:07 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The Patrician - I tried that last night....they still gave me the same speech.
2007-05-07 07:42:33 · update #1
No, its the "free will", "god's plan", "original sin" switcheroo that really gets my goat.
2007-05-07 07:43:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
I would like to respond to this as a Christian. Usually "free will" is given as an answer for questions like, "If God is a good, loving god, then why does He allow so much evil in the world?"
While the answer, "Evil is a result of our free will," or something along those lines IS a legitimate answer, it is also a cop-out. It is only legitimate if you explain the logic behind it. Most Christians have never put the thought into it that is required of them. Whenever an answer becomes a "pat answer" that is just used to end the discussion (and often to prevent the answerer from thinking too hard about a difficult question) it certainly becomes a cop-out.
As a Christian I do get sick of atheists that attack the Bible and Christianity out of ignorance, but I get far more sick of Christians who attack other beliefs out of ignorance, and far worse, Christians who "defend" their faith out of ignorance. A pat answer is usually an ignorant answer.
Here is my non-pat answer that pertains to why God allows evil in the world:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Atz30YD6wA4ru6gZDVrNt5_ty6IX?qid=1006051929696&show=7#profile-info-AA11835827
Hopefully, even if you disagree with me, you won't find my answer to be a cop-out.
2007-05-07 08:32:25 · answer #2 · answered by Serving Jesus 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends. If someone can frame the "Free Will" argument (and very few can) so it applies specifically to the question, and can back it up with a logical argument, then it is food for thought.
If it is used as a "parrot" answer (and it usually is), there is no point in debating it with people, as they tend to not think for themselves.
There are ways to get around it - but usually the explanation is so long, most people either ignore it because it is too convoluted for them, or they just don't care.
2007-05-07 08:00:26 · answer #3 · answered by Big Super 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is tiring arguing with Christians when they use circular logic like that....and I'm not exactly an Atheist either. *grins* But I couldn't help but answer your question.
It all boils down to the omnipotence paradox. If god knows everything, he knows what he will do in the "future" (in any dimension, not necessary the time dimension). He must have known that from the very start of his own existence. Thus god's actions are predestined. God is tied by faith, he has no free will. If god has no free will god is not omnipotent. Another way to put it is that to be able to make plans and decisions one must act over time. If god stands above time (which just about every Christian claims) he can not do that and has no free will. Indeed, if god stands above all dimensions god is dimensionless - a singularity, nothing, void!
Besides there can exist no free wills at all if god is almighty. If you had a free will, god wouldn't know what you would do tomorrow and wouldn't be omnipotent.
2007-05-07 07:59:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Cornering a theist to get him to speak honestly is a real trick.. I wish I had the answer.
The christian "free will" argument is just like so much else of belief driven logic.. it's circular. No matter where on the circle you might enter the argument, the theist is always one step ahead of you or one step behind running the rim around the truth to avoid a straight path. It's basically a question of honesty rather than a question of fact. The participant who avoids logical progression while claiming to be in search of truth is choosing, (by an act expressed through his own free will,) to lie. These lies may be lies of omission, where the truth is known but withheld and not spoken of outwardly; or, the lies may be outright fabrications. Either way, arriving at a clear conclusion is avoided by one who chooses to retrace the same familiar ground in circular fashion again and again and again.... it's pointless. The clearest example of this is seen in cases where a holy book is taken for proof of its own truth - it says it's true and therefore it is. That's obviously just nonsense, isn't it....
In fact, we all do have free will over our choices, over our actions and expressions, but it has nothing to do with belief - and that's that. So... what is there to argue? Just turn and walk away - you win, they lose. No problem.
[][][] r u randy? [][][]
.
2007-05-07 07:47:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Free-will isn't "all-encompassing" or a cop-out. Just think about it, you're a human, I don't know your age or I would say an adult, you "choose" how you act. You know the difference between right and wrong, you choose to behave right or wrong, morally or immorally, legally or illegally. For Christians it's the same, just we have rewards after death (Heaven) for choosing to be good.
2007-05-07 07:50:38 · answer #6 · answered by creeklops 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Christianity and free will is like a cow and an electric fence, the cow can try to get through the fence of it's own free will but it will get a severe electric shock as punishment if it tries to exercise it's own free will, there is free will for neither the cow nor the Christian.
2007-05-07 07:45:48 · answer #7 · answered by CHEESUS GROYST 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Don't have religious conversations with people. If you are asking Christian questions about religion, it kind of looks like you aren't really an atheist... Someone who's not convinced and still has questions, and is willing to debate, is better defined as an agnostic.
Also, if you're trying to get them to believe that they're wrong, you might as well give up. What you're doing is actually making them stronger in their convictions.
2007-05-07 07:43:38 · answer #8 · answered by Gen•X•er (I love zombies!) 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The concept of Free Will when put into a religious realm is a joke.
Free...meaning without punishment...and Will...meaning the ability to do what you want.
Yet if you do something wrong, eminent punishment awaits.
That's NOT Free Will, no matter how you try to justify it.
2007-05-07 07:44:00 · answer #9 · answered by Adam G 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You could try an actual thought experiment about the contradiction of free will and an omniscient being.
Let's say I have a wine glass in your hand. I drop it and it shatters.
-Does God know that I dropped the glass?
-Of course he does. He knows everything.
-Ah, he knows everything. So that would mean that he knew I was going drop it before it did, right?
-Naturally. Time is no obstacle to him
-And God's knowledge is flawless, right?
-God's knowledge, like everything about him, is without flaw.
-So God knew that I would drop the glass before I did. And God's knowledge is flawless. So how could I have chosen to do any differently?
2007-05-07 08:24:58 · answer #10 · answered by Phil 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Uhhhh, cuz we're not robots.
I think that if we didn't have free will, ALL of the answers to this question would say the exact same thing.
Since they're all different, we all have different opinions to the same question. That, to me, constitutes free will.
2007-05-07 07:48:23 · answer #11 · answered by CHRISTINA 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋