Questions about Free Will

Most Christians (unless you teach at Fuller) will hold some sort of mind/body dualism. That is, the mind is not a physical object. If this is so, can one speak of the mind using physical-causal language? Is it right to think of the relations of ideas as one thinks of the relations of two objects interacting causally? Does a non-materialist view of the mind eliminate objections to free will (i.e., classical combatibalism expressed in similar ways by Christians such as Augustine, Calvin, and Edwards)?

2 thoughts on “Questions about Free Will

  1. God broke human language up at Babel into many tongues.

    That by itself proves –HUMAN– language is not physical but spiritual as well. We know that all human beings have identical body parts no matter ethnicity. So God didn’t take certain body parts out of the physical brain or anywhere else of certain ethnicities to make one set of people speak French and another Indonesian. The language of men was confounded –not men. As well, men can learn the other guy’s tongue: multi-lingualism. One can forget one’s native tongue if forced to stay in a foreign land long enough. The tongue one has changes as time goes forward and that same phenomenon is observed in historical figures as well as for people living in the present: conditions have not changed. The same overall human mind remains with the same expectations of speech and human ability and such based on the characteristics of overall human speech. It is one speech that was broken up at Babel, not many independent languages with fundamentally different characteristics.

    Being spiritual, that makes human language a living creature, a spirit ..that was divided. Your questions idealize human language as if:
    1. a language with the characteristics of human language were the only language in total reality
    ( as if God as Word/Christ was not distinct from human speech )
    2. that idealized meta-language was automatically non-spiritual and was a will-neutral widget people use with free will as a tool.

    You’ve idealized human language in such a way ( a false way ) as to mandate a logical conclusion that the will is free. People who have not heard the Word of God are inside human language and automatically think their language is the only language in total reality –and– that they are not then, ‘inside’ of anything. That is the natural result of the Fall of Man.

    To be outside of human language is to be in Christ. To be born again in Jesus Christ is to receive a new mind –to receive Christ Himself ( Incarnate Word of God ) and be forced to exit human speech. A change of mind is a change of speech. Literally.

    That change came about because of the creating character of the Word of God. Human speech cannot create anything. Human beings have no expectation of new creation because they unwittingly rely on the mind they have and its limitations. New creatures in Jesus Christ have the mind of God, the Word of God. God is, in the end, the fundamental physics of total reality. Beware of metaphorizing what God Says and is in order to make a widget of human speech/mind make sense.

    The objections against free will exist because free will does not exist. It is an objection to the moral evil of a lie and an objection to an evil spirit and the works of that spirit, not some preferential outlook on reality for emotional reasons.

    I Corinthians 2: 12-16 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.


    In the Name of Jesus Christ, Amen

    • Timothy,

      Thanks for your comment. Although, I’m having troubling seeing what the majority of it has to do with what I actually wrote. Your comments about the nature of human language versus God’s language are important, but that isn’t my point. My question is simple: are ideas causally related? If not, then causal language shouldn’t be used. I mentioned free will because in the past I’ve often thought of arguing against free will on causal terms. If you have any insights into that question, I would be glad to hear it. Or, at least show how your comments are related to the question I asked.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s