So determining your will so you cannot chose in any way other than you were determined to is not coercion?
Understanding........
- Thread starter praise_yeshua
- Start date
Nope. If your claiming coercion is necessary, another Provisionist false premise, you will have to prove it.
Yes I did determine it. Read my apology again.
Another Provisionist false premise debunked.
I think most will intuitively reject your claim
It takes a belief in Calvinism to hold these mutually contradictory beliefs
The proof of that is compatibilism was never how anyone defined free will
Intuitively? You mean you presuppose. I thought Provisionist were presupposition free?
No it don't. Another false premise.
And libertarian free will is never how anyone defined free will.
You can, you simply won't. You don't have to look down when I yell your shoes are on fire. But you will. And freely do so.
The only thing laughable is that you see the actual result and you change what you claimed would be determined. Sounds like a slick snake-oil salesman technique to me.
Sounds like you won't answer tge question. Did he freely look down at his shoes??
There you go again changing your determination to fit the result.
You changed your determination from having him take his shoes off to having him just look at his shoes because your first determination did not occur.
I did not change it, one of your fellow Provisionist did trying to avoid answering the question. You know, like your doing.
Lol, who said it occurred? It's a analogy.
So did he freely look down or take his shoes off in either scenario?
Yes you did and I provided proof. Here is your original determination which you subsequently changed:
Snake oil salesmen techniques might work around your circles but they don't work around here.
Whoope. Either way did he freely take his shoes off or in the second, look down. It's painfully obvious you do not wish to answer.
... or a million other determinations until you find one determination that actually occurs.
It's painfully obvious that your snake oil salesman technique has crashed and burned here. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Still trying to move the goal posts I see. You had determined to make me take my shoes off and you failed
Talking to a Calvinist is oftentimes like talking to a brick wall. Their minds are so much flooded with their false presuppositions that they are blind to objective reality.
They go as far as thinking they are Oracles because they think they're onto special truths that explains human behavior and its future acts, like Pres is attempting to demonstrate here. That's Gnosticism.
Last edited:
Sorry but that is exactly how they defined free will substantively.
External compulsion was ruled out
The terms libertarian was coined only because of the invention of compatibilist freewill
It was from Manichean Gnosticism certain ideas of Augustine were first seen.
So I take that as a yes?... or a million other determinations until you find one determination that actually occurs.
It's painfully obvious that your snake oil salesman technique has crashed and burned here. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Correct. @civic has uploaded a ton of information about that for those in the audience who are interested.
It is? Show me one that mentioned libertarian free will. Do some cherry picking as you and yours love to do.
Good thing no one teaches that God has to compell anyone to do what He has determined to occur.
