1).
Suicide - If one had choice and freewill, one should be able to commit suicide without any restrictions whatsoever; one should be able to end one's journey. Is it not one that "chose" to come to Earth? Can not one go to school and drop out of school if entering and exiting really is freewill and choice? How does a contract exist if physician-assisted suicide is permitted (see p 108 of
http://www.afterlife101.com/Afterlife101.pdf)? Consider the following scenario - if one can't drive (analogously, this is like having no legs), if one can't find a job, if one lost all his/her money (say to gambling or just used it up in the process of finding a job and having to pay bills without a job), if one is forced to be homeless, why should one suffer like this??? Dr. Doreen Virtue states that ["they"] want us to be happy. But what if one is NOT happy? This is like saying you should go to law school even if you are miserable. How is this freewill? One cannot be forced to live a life that one does not want to live - not only is it a waste of time but also not much output and contribution to society can be given.
2).
The Forcefield That Captures Souls - Doesn't the law of freewill permit one to not cross over? Does it not permit one to remain earthbound? Why does such a forcefield exist? Is it not a hypocritical enactment by the spiritual realm, the very same forces that talk about freewill and choice? See page 36 of
http://www.afterlife101.com/Afterlife101.pdf to find out more of the forcefield.
3).
The [spirits] that Captures Souls After Centuries of Dark Entity Incarnations (Medium Browne says this in her book "Phenomenon: Everything You Need to Know About the Paranormal"- This problem is similar to problem #2 - the act of "capturing" souls and take them back Home. Is this not coercion/force? Doesn't the law of freewill permit one to have eternal incarnations as a dark one?
4).
The Creation of the Illusion of Choice and Freewill - to make it simple, let's say one has just been discharged from prison and is give the choice of "two hundred dollars" or a "one year discharge program giving them three meals a day, help with job search, and shelter for sleep." How is this even a choice? Is it not logical for one to choose the second option versus the first one? Point is - it appears like it is choice and freewill but it isn't because does it really look like you have an option? This is not different than telling someone "You have to do the one year program." Isn't the outcome or end-result still the same? The person (quotes) chooses (unquote) the one year program. How can one live or survive if one "chose" the first option? Two hundred US dollars won't even last one month's rent. This is similar to someone pointing a gun to your head and saying "give me your money or take this bullet into your head." Does it look like you have much of a choice?
5).
The Reality of Limited Options/Opportunities - How can one take charge and/or make the necessary dramatic changes in one's life if such options are limited or opportunities doesn't exist? How can one see the glass half full when one can only see the glass half empty? Such a schemata may have no relation to though patterns at all but rather is due to repeated disappointing events and other circumstances that is outside the control of one. How can one truly fulfill what one wants then? Does this not set limitations and/or poke holes thought the law of freewill? Contrary to the common conventional thinking that one "can do anything if one puts his/her mind to it," that one should "engage in numerous trials even with repeated failures," that one "can make the impossible possible" - there is simply no substantial evidence to support these what my former AP English teacher calls "white lies" and my former developmental psychology professor would say "the DARE program does NOT work." It is true that every now and then, there are a few who "can beat the odds" and they even go on national television like the Montel Williams Show hoping to get across "If I can do it, then you can too" (which is essentially a white lie). But the reality is that most cannot beat the odds - It's like Larry Elder making it sound like everyone can be a lawyer - this is simply illogical and not rational as well as NOT statistically significant from a statistical perspective.
6).
Mentalist and/or Other Entities Who Have The Power To `Manipulate' the Thoughts of Others - Is it not against freewill for one to possess a gift with the ability to manipulate the thoughts of others? Funny, such "entities" [humans] who are given such a gift with ability and act to "manipulate" - an identical act in which white entities accuse dark entities for doing "manipulation." If one had complete choice and freewill, then one should be free from the manipulation of these mentalists and/or other entities who can "manipulate" thoughts (aka thought process modification). Such entities like to use words like "inspire" or "encourage" but perhaps I was right all these years of talking to myself - that "inspiration" and "manipulation" really are synonymous. Therefore, it is perfectly a legal move for dark entities to "encourage" ungodly behavior and the means they go about doing it (through the use of manipulation or not) is indeed a legal move, a move that is the exact duplicate of white entities except they have different goals - one is for the purpose of the Light and the other is to deviate from the Light.
7).
Power Differentials in Individuals - Such power differentials can lead to a deficiency in one's ability to totally utilize the law of choice and freewill. There is a fear of retaliation from position powered individuals if one were to take a certain course of action and hence, "chooses or don't chooses" the course of action. Simply put it, if someone has power over you (like the government) you do not possess 100% choice and freewill now do you???
Home
Pages: 1 
