Quote:
|
Originally Posted by smooth
The problem I see with that is twofold:
2) "all beings with free will" do not have two inclinations. To argue that would be to argue that the deity, also a being with free will, has two inclinations--one to do its own will and one to go against its own will.
|
Not true. God is the good in itself, so the good for him is identical to the good in itself. This is ultimately true for all of us, but we can get easily confused.
Quote:
|
I'd have to go back to some church history books to see the lineage, but I'm wagering off-hand that the notion humans have free will, in the sense that they have two sets of inclinations to choose from, crept into some doctrines around the same time rationalism took hold.
|
This idea is something I'm getting from Scotus, in which he is deeply influenced by Anselm. I might mention that the 'being' I was referring to is proximately the devil. Traditional theology (by which I mean primarily Thomistic) holds that our only impulse is towards the good in itself. Scotus's objection is that this fails to explain how the devil fell, because he knew the good in itself. He argues that what must have happened is that the devil came to love himself more than God (the good in itself), and in this way fell.
Special Note: If you happen to not believe in a literal devil, think of this as a thought experiment...