Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that God can effectively guarantee the salvation of all sinners without ever interfering with anyone's libertarian freedom.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Libertarian free will requires the genuine possibility of final, irrevocable refusal; infinite retry structures effectively eliminate this possibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A will that cannot permanently settle against God is not libertarian but merely a will whose resistance is treated as a temporary computational error to be iterated away.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Alvin Plantinga's own free will defense presupposes that creatures can be so constituted that no sequence of circumstances guarantees their cooperation, which directly undermines the probabilistic convergence argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The coin-toss analogy fails because coin tosses are causally independent across trials, whereas a persistent refuser's character may become increasingly entrenched with each successive rejection.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Jonathan Kvanvig and others in the hell literature note that repeated exposure to divine invitation without acceptance can, on plausible psychological grounds, harden rather than soften the will.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If character formation is path-dependent and cumulative, the probability of acceptance need not remain constant at .5 but may approach zero asymptotically, defeating the infinite-opportunity convergence argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A sinner could have, if necessary, infinitely many opportunities over an unending stretch of time to repent and to submit to God freely.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.God could presumably bring a sinner to a point, just short of actually determining the sinner's choice, where the sinner would see the choice between horror and bliss with such clarity that the probability of repenting and submitting to God would be extremely high.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if the probability of repenting on any single occasion is as low as .5, over an indefinitely long period of time, the sinner would still have an indefinitely large number of opportunities to repent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.