This has got to be amoung the top 5 worst analogies I've ever read or heard. I suppose it works on children and convicts and such but wow...just wow.<quoted text>
Actually you have it backwards. Not arguing from a Christian POV here. Logically and philosophically it's been shown that if there is no God (however one defines that) and we are simply a natural collection of cells, etc. then there is no free will. Under naturalism you have no more choice in what you do than a rock has in rolling down hill or a dog does in going after a piece of meat.
If I feed my dog all day and then show him a meaty bone, he still goes after it. He has no choice. If I throw a rock in the air, it comes down. Kant went really deep with this because as he argued, when we argue that "can't" and "should" are real options, they can only be options if we have a choice. A rock doesn't have a choice to roll down hill nor does a dog have a choice to chase a bone. If man has a choice than there must be something greater than nature giving us that choice, otherwise what we perceive as choice is simply an illusion.
So, and this is was settled hundreds of years ago. If we have free will there is a God who allows us that choice. If there is no God then we truly have no free will and our belief is simply an illusion.
So. Do you have free-will or is it simply an illusion?
This would also be in line with your bouncing from one to another of the 38,000+ divisions/sects/cults of the christian religion...that is if you even recognize your former affiliations as christian.
With that in mind...which one should I go with? I was raised as CRC being taught that all others are wrong. So what's to prevent me from going back and telling you that you are wrong? I know some church of christ people that say they are the only right ones, or baptists, or jehovah witnesses, or...
You guys are funny and entertaining.