In my experience, not at all. Of course all the anti free will, secular intellectuals will vehemently disagree with me.
Thereâs no room for mercy in the deterministic model. If you let someone who is, letâs say terribly brain damaged(or a very small child) get away scot free after they have done something bad, I donât see that as being merciful. You simply acknowledge they are incapable of any judgement and cannot be held responsible for their actions. So as a matter of fact mercy is only possible if we acknowledge some kind of free will. But then you were just being silly, right?
1 Like
Yeah, theyâre already making good, humane, inclusive, egalitarian, equality of outcome = righteous choices. Itâs the Christians that need to catch up.
I wonder if all my sentiments are archived already within the complete collection of Calvin and Hobbs. If so I might just be redundant.
2 Likes
Absolutely. There are no Christian NGOs doing anything at all worthwhile.
1 Like
Is it bad that I can probably quote more Calvin and Hobbes strips almost word for word than I probably can scripture verses?
2 Likes
Yes, I was: Take the premise of someoneâs position, press it to its limits, demand consistency, back them into a corner, and point out that consistency makes the extreme version of their position indefensible and noxious.
1 Like
Might be interested in this: Experimental Theology: The Theology of Calvin and Hobbes: Table of Contents
2 Likes
As a less hypothetical example, why do militant atheistic determinists argue their case? Isnât someoneâs belief in free will an inevitable result of the way their brains are structured, ultimately just a bunch of chemical reactions, if their position is true?
If someone happens to be predestined to be Arminian, I donât worry about it.
4 Likes
Good one. 
I have a question extracted from yoursâŚ
1 Like
It seems to me that they see that as a strong argument for their case(atheism). In fact, only few months ago I use to think that too. Looks like they donât realise some Christians are OK with determinism. If only they knew @Terry_Sampson
A question I would have is âif there is no free will, why our brains are soo hard wired to give us such a strong impression of it? What would be the point of it? And I donât find the answerâ itâs a revolutionary blip" satisfying, you could say that about everything.
2 Likes
Many people have freedom of choice about many things. But not all people have the same freedom of choice for all the same things.
I only have recently encountered the notion that freedom of choice equals fully conscious freedom of choice, and I am not sure why anyone would insist on this. Because of such a notion some people think that if any part of the choosing process is not fully conscious then there is no freedom of choice. I think that conclusion is a bit bizarre.
Frankly I think the majority of our thinking is not conscious but under the hood in the operation of the brain or of the unconscious mind â that this is even required for conscious thought to be possible in first place.
2 Likes
Interesting questions.
No one has challenged my previous proposal regarding free will:
A mischievous Determinist might respond to your questions by saying: âIn fact, our brains arenât hardwired to give us the impression of it. Our brains are hardwired to believe, as Determinists do, that for every event thereâs a cause and, when no cause can be identified, step up to the plate and claim that you are the cause. And thatâs the point of asserting free will: it answers the innate human need to identify an eventâs cause.â 
To count coup, of course.
" Among the Plains Indians, counting coup is the warrior tradition of winning prestige against an enemy in battle. It is one of the traditional ways of showing bravery in the face of an enemy. It is a way of shaming them, and hopefully getting them to admit defeat, without having to kill them. These victories may then be remembered, recorded, and recounted as part of the communityâs oral, written, or pictorial histories.
Counting Coup
1 Like
Ah, thank you. My tongue was planted in my cheek, of course, because, fatuously, if everything is predetermined, arguing wonât change anything. 
And I am so shamed. 
1 Like
First, I have no idea what ex nihilo is supposed to mean in this context. I already said I consider free will as that which happens inside your mind and your mind is not nothing so I canât see how is it possible to be ex nihiloâŚ
But anyway, who said free will had to be perfect?
I fully acknowledge that our will is limited, some people donât seem to have any whatsoever⌠I just donât buy this argument that it has to be 100% perfect, guaranteed, unrestricted or nothing at all.
It means the same thing in any context. One second, you donât have an intention, and the next second, you do. It comes out of nowhere, ⌠in your mind.
If God puts the intention there, then itâs not free will, is it? Itâs Godâs will. If the Devil puts it there, itâs the Devilâs will. If neither God nor the Devil put the intention in your mind, then where did it come from? That the intention is in your mind is a given. Whatâs its source? Until you come up with a source for it, itâs âex nihiloâ; ⌠just like the heavens and the earth in some peopleâs version of Genesis 1:1. One instant they donât exist; the next second, they do. Whereâd they come from? Mainstream science says: from a singularity; other folks say "God created them out of nothing.
Whatâs imperfect free will? 1/2 deterministic and 1/2 free will or a free will intention that you donât like and donât want to do? Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays are your free will days; the rest of the week youâre on vacation?
Iâm a Determinist: everyday, Iâm âdeterminedâ. I donât have a âfree willâ day or a vacation day.
Then creation ex-nihilo means that the universe just popped into existence by itself without a cause, purpose, plan, or intention?
Sounds like what theists are so often claiming that atheists believe.
So you are equating free will with something being random or without cause?
Of course I donât think that is what ex-nihilo means. When we talk of God creating ex-nihilo it only means Godâs action and power is sufficient and no other pre-existent stuff was needed. As for free will choices, they always have a pre-existing context of circumstances. We human beings are not like God in this way at all never having existed apart from anything else. So I donât think the term ex-nihilo is applicable.
1 Like