I never got the idea that God being in charge meant that we had no free will.
My understanding is that God does not have free will because God is Good, and thus cannot do anything but the greatest good in any circumstance and, being omniscient and omnipotent, is fully aware of what that good action is and has the power to fulfill it.
Humans, on the other hand, are imperfect but still have the knowledge of good and evil. Man can do good or evil, or even be fooled, and thus Man, and not God, has free will.
If God doesn't have free will then it means he isn't omnipotent because he would be incapable of doing approximately one half of all possible actions. Couldn't you say he has the capacity to do evil but always chooses to do good?
I'm not sure if God does anything any more. It seems more passive like allowing for evil to exist and operate under certain conditions and within certain hierarchies.
Within all perceivable; each one perceiving must be compatible; yet the responding choice for adaptation of the perceiving (need) also implies the choice to ignore it for suggestions (want).
Consider...compatible (perceivable) and compatibilism (suggested). If it's compatible; then why would consent to a suggested -ism be required?
If natural law determines (to give direction); then free will (of choice) can only exist at the center of balance (momentum of directing motion). That contradicts free will to be random (course without direction); since it represents the response to being directed.
Also; the natural order doesn't place life together; it self differentiates from flow (inception towards death) into form (life); hence from ongoing into temporary aka from loss into growth...both in coexistence with each other.
Study Theosophy
I recommend that anybody whose not already done so, read The Screwtape Letters as a handy guide.
I never got the idea that God being in charge meant that we had no free will.
My understanding is that God does not have free will because God is Good, and thus cannot do anything but the greatest good in any circumstance and, being omniscient and omnipotent, is fully aware of what that good action is and has the power to fulfill it.
Humans, on the other hand, are imperfect but still have the knowledge of good and evil. Man can do good or evil, or even be fooled, and thus Man, and not God, has free will.
If God doesn't have free will then it means he isn't omnipotent because he would be incapable of doing approximately one half of all possible actions. Couldn't you say he has the capacity to do evil but always chooses to do good?
I'm not sure if God does anything any more. It seems more passive like allowing for evil to exist and operate under certain conditions and within certain hierarchies.
Within all perceivable; each one perceiving must be compatible; yet the responding choice for adaptation of the perceiving (need) also implies the choice to ignore it for suggestions (want).
Consider...compatible (perceivable) and compatibilism (suggested). If it's compatible; then why would consent to a suggested -ism be required?
With either side existence is meaningless. Yep.
If natural law determines (to give direction); then free will (of choice) can only exist at the center of balance (momentum of directing motion). That contradicts free will to be random (course without direction); since it represents the response to being directed.
Also; the natural order doesn't place life together; it self differentiates from flow (inception towards death) into form (life); hence from ongoing into temporary aka from loss into growth...both in coexistence with each other.