Francis Berger has, for some time, been writing on that vital but neglected (and discredited) subject of freedom; in particular how this is absolutely foundational to Christianity. I recommend exploring his blog on this matter - maybe starting here.
Freedom is vital to Christians because it is an opt-in religion, and one cannot meaningfully choose without freedom. This fact has often been suppressed and distorted through Christian history (e.g. by concepts of divine omniscience, and predestination) - which is why it is so important to get clear.
Yet the nature of freedom, what freedom is; is itself something that has been badly (and wilfully) misrepresented; such that the entire debate is typically framed in such a way as to exclude real and true answers. I mean that discussions of freedom often include built-in assumptions that exclude the possibility of freedom.
Unless we do some serious and deep thinking for ourselves, it is unlikely that we will escape these endemic and chronic confusions. And even then it will probably take a good bit of time and effort to escape the toils of misconceptions. (It certainly did in my case!)
A proper understanding of freedom opens many doors. For example, I never could understand creativity - or indeed divine creation - until after I had understood freedom.
Even more crucially; I never could understand God, or our relationship with God, until I had grasped freedom.
There is no more important subject.
9 comments:
I fully agree on the importance of this. Free will and agency is the single issue that converted me back from atheism.
Based on your linked post regarding God's 'prime mover' status as synonymous with free will, I suppose we only have free will insofar as we make room for God in our lives. Which paradoxically requires a certain submission / harnessing of our individual egos; ie in order to participate in creation/free will we must acknowledge our dependence on a larger system within which we find ourselves.
Otherwise a belief in free will will be more akin to a luciferian pride, no? (I am responsible for all the good things that have happened to me, I alone am in the driver's seat, I don't need help from anyone/anything)
@Michael - I tend to assume that we always have free will - but may not be conscious of it, and/or may choose to ignore it.
In other words, I have found it necessary to distinguish between (without completely separating) free will (which is primary, part of beingness) -- and consciousness, including awareness of our free will - which varies widely.
It is within consciousness that we make choices - albeit having made them we may suppress or forget that we have done so - this being all too common.
The offspring of each male and female flora and fauna on this earth seem endlessly unique. The ducklings on the river outside from the same drake and duck; each oak sapling of the same parent trees; my children. Unique physical and personal qualities are endlessly created new in this earthly realm from two parents.
Could it not be, as below so above, that our heavenly father and mother ‘birth’ souls in the spiritual realm that are unique, independent beings. Free, creative, of each parent but different from each. Inheriting spiritually from both parents but uniquely new. With the potential to grow and mature, becoming delightful companions and independent creative players contributing to our heavenly parents. As my children seem to here on earth.
Bruce I know this is at odds with your discussion of preexisting beings which I struggle to comprehend when you raise it, but it seems simple and resonant.
@Colin - But nobody is saying that the drake and duck are creating ducklings "ex nihilo". And that is the crucial difference.
Maybe I am missing something, but it seems coherent that: our heavenly parents ‘give birth’ (however that works exactly …) to endlessly unique beings stemming from the creative interaction of the two. No two the same. None a copy of a parent.
Some beings sometimes incarnate in earthly form and become ducklings and humans and so forth, some may remain in spirit form.
@Colin - I'm not sure if you are missing something, or not! Your point is *apparently* made in the language of natural history/ biology - at the level of heredity or genetics. Which is about the appearances of things.
But the post is at the level of metaphysics - of the ultimate nature of reality. Freedom and individuality must there be explained in terms of what-is primarily.
You *may* be saying that having two primordial deities (father and mother) solves the problem of individuality and free will as compared to having a singe original deity. But if that Is what you are saying, then I think you are mistaken.
Yes the latter. (I only mention ducks and the endless diversity of their ducklings on an as below so above illustrative basis because they are two).
I have done some word searches on your blog but can’t find anything on why you believe two primordial parents don’t enable individuality and free will. Could you point me please.
@Colin - "can’t find anything on why you believe two primordial parents don’t enable individuality and free will."
I have never said that and don't believe it. I think that statement is a non sequitur.
Post a Comment