We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded by your direct support for ReKnew and our vision. Please consider supporting this project.

The Lego Movie & Free Will

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/10/The_Lego_Movie_poster.jpg

Last week Greg tweeted about two movies that have themes related to human free-will and God’s control of the world. They were:

@greg_boyd: Does God want a permanently frozen “perfect” world or an open-ended world filled with wildly imaginative people? Watch “The Lego Movie”!

@greg_boyd: Meantime, me & some peeps are going to watch (again!) THE greatest movie about the nature of time/free will & love-“The Adjustment Bureau.”

In the book God of the Possible, Greg responds to a question that gives some theological background to what he finds insightful about these two movies.

_________________________

Question:
Why would God create a world with free wills he can’t meticulously control or foreknow, a world that allows people to oppose his will, hurt other people, and damn themselves?

Answer:
This question assumes that it would have been better to create a world in which there were no free wills, in which people could never oppose God’s will, hurt other people, or damn themselves. Such a world would on one level be “perfect,” but it would also be perfectly robotic. God would get everything he wants, except the one thing he really wants — namely, agents who freely choose to participate in his triune love. Love has to be chosen, and this means that love is inherently risky. Reason, intuition, and certainly experience tell us this is true.

Consider this example: suppose you possess the technological knowledge to program a computer chip and secretly implanted it in your spous’s brain while he or she was sleeping. This chip would cause your spouse to talk and act exactly as you would want, though your spouse would still think here she was choosing to talk and act this way. That person would, on one level, be “the perfect spouse.” The loving behavior and words would be exactly what you desire. You would, in fact, know exactly what your spouse was going to say and do before he or she did. After all, you programmed the responses.

We might enjoy such an arrangement for a while, but wouldn’t you eventually grow tired of it? Wouldn’t it be unfulfilling? For you would know that everything your spouse was saying and doing to you, as wonderful as it might be, was really you saying and doing to yourself. Your spouse may speak and act loving toward you, but he or she would not truly be loving you. It would all be a charade. There would, in fact, be no real person, no thinking, feeling, and willing agent, who would be intentionally choosing to love you on his or her own. The fact that your spouse would experience himself or herself as choosing to love doesn’t change this, for this experience also is simply due to the sophistication of your programming. Your spouse’s sense of free will is an allusion. For love to be real, it must really be possible to choose against it.

This illustration demonstrates that love must be chosen. It could not be otherwise. It’s part of its very definition. As a triangle must have three sides and all bachelors must be unmarried, so love must be chosen. This means that love is, by its very nature, risky. To create a cosmos populated with free agents (angels and humans) who are capable of choosing love requires that God created a cosmos in which beings can choose to oppose his will, hurt other people, and damn themselves. If love is the goal, this is the price. (133-135)

Related Reading

The “Heresy” of Failing to Love

In what is hands-down the most amazing prayer ever recorded, Jesus prayed to his Father that his disciples “may be one…just as you are in me and I am in you” so that “the world may believe that you sent me” (Jn.17:21). In other words, Jesus was praying that we who profess Christ as Lord…

Tags:

Why the 35W Bridge Collapsed – blog post 8/09/2007

As all of you know, I’m sure, a little over a week ago the 35W bridge in Minneapolis collapsed. This is the most traveled bridge in Minnesota. It was a tragedy, though the fact that only 13 people died and/or are presumed dead is really amazing, especially given that this happened at the peak of…

Boyd’s Bad Ass Tattoo

by: Greg Boyd In the process of working through a philosophical issue surrounding the openness of the future around twenty years ago, I and two friends (Alan Rhoda and Tom Belt) ended up creating the “Hexagon of Opposition”, or “Hexagonic Logic of Futurity,” as I’ve sometimes called it. I’ll explain what it all means in…

Repent! … From the Sin of Religion

People often think that being Christian is about “being religious,” but loving others in the way that Christ instructs us is about as far removed from religion as anything could be. Religion, as I use the term, is a system of beliefs and behaviors one embraces as a means of getting life—whether this be feeling…

The Sine Qua Non of the Kingdom

In contrast to the habit of judgment which I challenged in the previous post, God calls his people to love the way that God loves. But what exactly does this mean? People have a lot of screwy ideas about “love” today. We use the word “love” to mean a lot of different things, from sexual…

Sermon Clip: The Worst of Sinners

In this short clip, Greg Boyd discusses Paul’s definition of love. In the full sermon, Greg talks about how in this dog eat dog world, we’re programmed to judge others. But to love others with unsurpassable worth, we must ascribe worth to them at cost to ourselves. In this sermon, Greg talks about how to…