"Free will was given to man by god."

[gaffo]

I will add - to my prior reply to you which you may have read - that Jews (some) in Christ's time, were vegetarians.

If so, they were "vegetarians" who killed and sacrificed animals, or they were not Jews at all. Temple sacrifices were an absolute requirement of ancient Judaism.

that was a once a year offering in the second temple. and as i said there were many sects if Judiasm, the Essenes were the more devout and rejected the mainline Pharasees and Saduchees and the temple sacrifices.

my statement is accurate, most devout Jews were vegetarians - due i suspect to Jubaless' theology (one i find interesting myself - jesus affirmed it when he talked about he lion lying down with the lamb upon the return of the messiah and thus the restoration of the kingdom of god on earth (eden restored)).

I will take the time to do the usual wiki search to back up my claim if you insist.

[nothing]

"Free will was given to man by god." This I often hear from theists. I searched the bible and found no support for this from the word of the supposed god.

So this is inference? Or did I miss something.

Will Guffo or somebody else please tell me where the idea of "free will" emerged in christian thinking, and what Christians use as explanation to it in the bible?
Top

It is by way of inference, but that is part of the "test" so-to-speak.

Consider the tautology:
-Admonishment of Genesis 3:12 RE: eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
-Adam is holding an apple (with a niiice big bite out of it) which came from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
-God asks Adam a simple question: did you eat from the tree I told you not to eat from?

It's a simple yes or no question.

"Free will" entails accounting for one's own actions. In the case of original sin, Adam did not.

"It's the woman that thou hast given me!"
One finger points at Eve.
One finger points at God.
Blame in both hands.
Religion of Adam: to BELIEVE one's own nature is owing to another.

This inference solves for the property of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: BELIEF.
In the same way it takes a believer to believe evil is good,
it takes a believer to believe their own nature is owing to someone else.

"Yes" was (is) the correct answer, as it would take a believer to believe otherwise.
Thus, all eaters of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil are believers.

See: Islam and their attesting to being the "original religion of Adam".
Indeed - the religion of man: blame in both hands.

"It's the Jews!
It's the Christians!
It's the atheists!
It's the unbelievers!
It's the infidels!"
etc.

...it's the religion of man: Islam.

[Sculptor]

"Free will was given to man by god." This I often hear from theists. I searched the bible and found no support for this from the word of the supposed god.

So this is inference? Or did I miss something.

Will Guffo or somebody else please tell me where the idea of "free will" emerged in christian thinking, and what Christians use as explanation to it in the bible?

Calvin specifically denies such an idea is either logical or part of Christian dogma, and Protestantism is based on the inevitable truth that an omniscient god has to have know from the beginning of time who shall be saved, and who shall not be saved.
Calvinists are then, by definition, "the chosen".

[Immanuel Can]

Calvin specifically denies such an idea is either logical or part of Christian dogma, and Protestantism is based on the inevitable truth that an omniscient god has to have know from the beginning of time who shall be saved, and who shall not be saved.
Calvinists are then, by definition, "the chosen".

You are correct: Calvin had some weird ideas. He also did not believe that free will was even possible; he thought it would have to conflict with God's foreknowledge (which, of course, it wouldn't), or with his "sovereignty," (that word being understood in a very narrow, fatalistic and controlling way).

Ironically, today's Neo-Calvinists have something in common with secular Materialists. Because Materialists do not believe free will is possible either -- not because of foreknowledge or sovereignty, but because material causality is asserted by them to be the comprehensive explanation for why people do what they do.

[Sculptor]

Calvin specifically denies such an idea is either logical or part of Christian dogma, and Protestantism is based on the inevitable truth that an omniscient god has to have know from the beginning of time who shall be saved, and who shall not be saved.
Calvinists are then, by definition, "the chosen".

You are correct: Calvin had some weird ideas. He also did not believe that free will was even possible; he thought it would have to conflict with God's foreknowledge (which, of course, it wouldn't), or with his "sovereignty," (that word being understood in a very narrow, fatalistic and controlling way).

You are simply wrong.
There is no logical place for free will with god as Christianity conceives of it.

Ironically, today's Neo-Calvinists have something in common with secular Materialists. Because Materialists do not believe free will is possible either -- not because of foreknowledge or sovereignty, but because material causality is asserted by them to be the comprehensive explanation for why people do what they do.

Its easy to gainsay, however, you have failed to rebut or refute.

[Immanuel Can]

Calvin specifically denies such an idea is either logical or part of Christian dogma, and Protestantism is based on the inevitable truth that an omniscient god has to have know from the beginning of time who shall be saved, and who shall not be saved.
Calvinists are then, by definition, "the chosen".

You are correct: Calvin had some weird ideas. He also did not believe that free will was even possible; he thought it would have to conflict with God's foreknowledge (which, of course, it wouldn't), or with his "sovereignty," (that word being understood in a very narrow, fatalistic and controlling way).

You are simply wrong.

I'm wrong, when I said "You are correct"?

There is no logical place for free will with god as Christianity conceives of it.

Patently untrue, and sociologically disprovable. Most groups and denominations are not Calvinists, nor are they fatalists of any kind.

The only kind of Christianity about which you must know, then, would be Calvinism. And that's a minority view.

Its easy to gainsay, however, you have failed to rebut or refute.

I did not try. I was attempting to point out that your first observation about Calvin was correct. If I "failed" anything, it would only be to make you realize that that is what I had said.

[Sculptor]

You are correct: Calvin had some weird ideas. He also did not believe that free will was even possible; he thought it would have to conflict with God's foreknowledge (which, of course, it wouldn't), or with his "sovereignty," (that word being understood in a very narrow, fatalistic and controlling way).

You are simply wrong.

I'm wrong, when I said "You are correct"?

There is no logical place for free will with god as Christianity conceives of it.

Patently untrue, and sociologically disprovable. Most groups and denominations are not Calvinists, nor are they fatalists of any kind.

The only kind of Christianity about which you must know, then, would be Calvinism. And that's a minority view.

Its easy to gainsay, however, you have failed to rebut or refute.

I did not try. I was attempting to point out that your first observation about Calvin was correct.

Yet you spoiled it by saying he was wrong, which he is not.

If I "failed" anything, it would only be to make you realize that that is what I had said.

A millions of Christians can be wrong. Calvin's logic is impeccable.

[Immanuel Can]

A millions of Christians can be wrong. Calvin's logic is impeccable.

Well, I'm taking to somebody who obviously has no knowledge of theology, and I don't attack an unarmed man. So...have fun.

[Sculptor]

A millions of Christians can be wrong. Calvin's logic is impeccable.

Well, I'm taking to somebody who obviously has no knowledge of theology, and I don't attack an unarmed man. So...have fun.

I'm way ahead of you.

[henry quirk]

A millions of Christians can be wrong. Calvin's logic is impeccable.

Well, I'm taking to somebody who obviously has no knowledge of theology, and I don't attack an unarmed man. So...have fun.

I'm way ahead of you.

Behind her, you mean.

[Immanuel Can]

I'm way ahead of you.

Nice! I love it when arrogance meets ignorance. It's always so funny.

[uwot]

I'm way ahead of you.

Nice! I love it when arrogance meets ignorance. It's always so funny.

Help me out here, Mr Can; I can't work out which of you two is which.

[Walker]

Free will denies destiny.

[Immanuel Can]

Free will denies destiny.

? Not sure what that means, W. What's "destiny," for one thing?

[Walker]

Free will denies destiny.

? Not sure what that means, W. What's "destiny," for one thing?

Destiny is the inevitability of karma. As Steppenwolf reminds us, some folks are born to be wild.

Lose the ego, lose free will. What then determines action? The Supreme Ordering Principle of the Universe.

Transcending the individuality of free will destroys ego, transcends karma, transcends samsara, and voila, wu wei.