Any love for this document?

[mikbone]

The Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

 

This week in my local EQ we are going over President Oaks talk, The Teachings of Jesus Christ. Wherein he essentially quotes Christ 35 times. The only other document that is linked is the above doctrinal exposition.

Edited August 27, 2023 by mikbone

[zil2]

What's not to love?  It gives clear explanation of scriptures that might otherwise be confusing.

[rcthompson88]

Love it. Jared Halverson did an episode of his show Unshaken called The Awful Arithmetic of the Atonement where he spends a portion differentiating this concept of Jesus Christ the Son and the Father, particularly as it pertains to the words of Abinadi.

I personally have not heard this question brought up recently, maybe even since my mission. Maybe this concept is just much better understood now, or maybe members and instructors just gloss over scripters that identify Christ as the Father more often.

[mikbone]

I like how in the talk President Oaks states,

“Most of the scriptures reporting Jesus’s mortal ministries are descriptions of what He did. My message today consists of a selection of the words of our Savior—what He said.”

The 2nd paragraph of the GC talk is used to present Jehovah or Jesus Christ and distinguish him from Heavenly Father.  And the 1916 Doctrinal Exposition is the reference of choice.

I also like to think about how other Christian denominations would appreciate the document. 

[scottyg]

28 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I also like to think about how other Christian denominations would appreciate the document. 

I think it's great, but a majority of other Christian denominations would unfortunately consider it heresy.

[prisonchaplain]

2 hours ago, scottyg said:

I think it's great, but a majority of other Christian denominations would unfortunately consider it heresy.

Most Christian denominations would appreciate the article's emphasis on the differences between Father and Son. Trinitarians agree that the Father and Son are distinct beings. The main area of disagreement would be the doctrine that human intelligence was eternal in the pre-existence. 

[mikbone]

57 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

The main area of disagreement would be the doctrine that human intelligence was eternal in the pre-existence

Is the problem intelligence, eternal nature, or pre-existence?

[Vort]

On 8/27/2023 at 6:32 AM, rcthompson88 said:

Jared Halverson did an episode of his show Unshaken called The Awful Arithmetic of the Atonement where he spends a portion differentiating this concept of Jesus Christ the Son and the Father, particularly as it pertains to the words of Abinadi.

Differentiation is not the answer. Integration is the answer.

PS That's not arithmetic. That's calculus.

Edited September 1, 2023 by Vort

[CV75]

17 hours ago, mikbone said:

The Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

 

This week in my local EQ we are going over President Oaks talk, The Teachings of Jesus Christ. Wherein he essentially quotes Christ 35 times. The only other document that is linked is the above doctrinal exposition.

Elder Oaks' talk: The Teachings of Jesus Christ (churchofjesuschrist.org)

I was impressed how the order of the quotes in this talk detail "the stages of eternal progression and attainment" (I took this phrase from the 1916 Doctrinal Exposition) in this world or estate, both covenantal and developmental.

[prisonchaplain]

1 hour ago, mikbone said:

Is the problem intelligence, eternal nature, or pre-existence?

YES. Most Christian groups teach that we were created when we were conceived--that our eternal nature is true moving forward, but not backward. I'm a traditionalist in that regard, though I realize that there is something of us that is eternal because we've likely always been in God's thoughts.

[JohnsonJones]

On 8/27/2023 at 1:29 PM, prisonchaplain said:

YES. Most Christian groups teach that we were created when we were conceived--that our eternal nature is true moving forward, but not backward. I'm a traditionalist in that regard, though I realize that there is something of us that is eternal because we've likely always been in God's thoughts.

Understanding where we came from I feel is important.  However, it is where we are and where we are going that is truly important.  What we are and how we worship our Lord is the important focus of our lives and it is THAT which will determine where and how we will be in the time after our deaths.

However, the explanations for the unjust and unfair positioning of our lives on this earth (why am I a US citizen who has been taught of the Lord and Christianity, had the many blessings of life and consider that fair that I am saved when an individual born to a primitive tribe in the Amazon will never hear of our Lord, nor have the niceties of life has their lot...how is that fair OR just in Christian eschatology which says those who do not accept the Lord in this life are not saved?) can be explained extremely well if there was a pre-existence.  It then may be that the position we are born into this life was predicated upon events that we chose in a time prior to this.  In fact, an eternity spent prior to this where our choices are reflected in our position in this life goes a very far way in explaining the great injustice and distinct imbalance where some are more privileged in birth than others. 

We  may all be born naked and small, but we are NOT all born into equal position.  We are not all granted the same things in life, and some will have a much harder time in life than others. 

But, some may say, there is nothing to support the idea of a pre-existence in the Bible.

Ecclesiastes 12:1-7

Quote

12 Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them;

² While the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not darkened, nor the clouds return after the rain:

³ In the day when the keepers of the house shall tremble, and the strong men shall bow themselves, and the grinders cease because they are few, and those that look out of the windows be darkened,

⁴ And the doors shall be shut in the streets, when the sound of the grinding is low, and he shall rise up at the voice of the bird, and all the daughters of musick shall be brought low;

⁵ Also when they shall be afraid of that which is high, and fears shall be in the way, and the almond tree shall flourish, and the grasshopper shall be a burden, and desire shall fail: because man goeth to his long home, and the mourners go about the streets:

⁶ Or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern.

⁷ Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

How can a spirit return unless it came from whence.  Now the non-lds explanation is that this is the breath of life, but then that explanation supports the Jehovah Witnesses' take on life and death, because if your life or breath of life departs you and that is the spirit, then you go back to eternal slumber as most do under the JW explanation (meaning, they would be correct).  However, if it truly means the spirit or soul rather than the breath of life, than it is you that continues in existence, and returns to the Lord who gave the soul to this life. 

However, that is still not explicit enough perhaps...so we turn to Jeremiah 1:4-5

Quote

⁴ Then the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

⁵ Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

The explanation by some who are not LDS say this is because of the omniscience which our Lord possess, but I do not think that really explains it well.  For, a fan of John Wayne may know all about him, his life, his birth, and maybe even things John Wayne didn't even remember!  However...do they truly know John Wayne?

Knowing is a two way street...and in this...the LORD KNEW him (not in the carnal sense). 

It may be that we will disagree upon whether pre-existence is a thing or not, but for me it makes more sense in regards to how some things occur in this life than any explanation I ever heard in the Catholic Church.

Though, to bring it to full circle again of what I said at the start, the most important thing right now and today isn't what our station in life is or a pre-existence, but what we choose to do today and who we choose to follow.  In that we can be brothers in Christ, and agree that it is through his sacrifice and atonement that we are saved.

[prisonchaplain]

@JohnsonJonesis much more diligent than I am. Thank you for your thoughtful and informative post above. Mine shall be much shorter, though hopefully of some use.

1. Concerning eternal human pre-existence. I've come partway to the LDS understanding. We are eternal in the sense--as mentioned--that God is omniscient and has always known who he would create and how our lives play out. That we were in God's thoughts from eternity is something deeper than I can imagine. It's not what LDS mean by pre-existence, but it's probably more than what most non-LDS have meditated on. While the passages you cite may not, in themselves, convince me of eternal human intelligence they do demonstrate the possibility of it. I imagine that if I came to believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God then this doctrine would not be difficult for me to embrace.

2. As for the fairness of human existence--I actually addressed this in my sermon today--at the prison. I spoke of the contrast between prison chaplains in the U.S. and clergy in China. Here we are employed by our governments and given full access to the prison. I'm invited in, trained, badged, and welcomed. In contrast, my Chinese clergy brothers are arrested and incarcerated for preaching the Good News. Often they are beaten. Then there are the brothers/sisters in N. Korea. If a Bible portion is found in their home they, their parents, and the children are imprisoned. The law is to the third generation. Why the disparity? Is God unjust? My take is that they will be honored by me in glory. God trusts them more than he trusts me with that burden.

Thank you again. I hope my explanations offer some insight and perspective from a non-LDS POV. 

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

On 8/26/2023 at 7:43 PM, mikbone said:

The Father and the Son A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

 

This week in my local EQ we are going over President Oaks talk, The Teachings of Jesus Christ. Wherein he essentially quotes Christ 35 times. The only other document that is linked is the above doctrinal exposition.

I love the first presidency under President Joseph F. Smith. They dove deeply into the doctrines of Christ. I wish we had the patience for this kind of letters from the First Presidency. Maybe someday, but we have become intellectually lazy in this world of constant distraction. Reminds me of this scene from Mr. Robot where his "dad" tells him this. LANGUAGE WARNING: 

 

 

[mikbone]

28 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

I love the first presidency under President Joseph F. Smith. They dove deeply into the doctrines of Christ. I wish we had the patience for this kind of letters from the First Presidency. Maybe someday, but we have become intellectually lazy in this world of constant distraction. Reminds me of this scene from Mr. Robot where his "dad" tells him this. LANGUAGE WARNING: 

 

 

Loved the first episode of Mr. Robot

 

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

3 hours ago, mikbone said:

Loved the first episode of Mr. Robot

 

It took me until the middle of the second season to figure out what was going on. 

[mikbone]

2 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

It took me until the middle of the second season to figure out what was going on. 

You do not talk about Fight Club!

[Traveler]

I have a great deal of respect for our Traditional Christians but that does not mean agreement.  As much as I revere @prisonchaplain – I have strong reservations in the logic of what is labeled “Trinitarian Doctrine”.   There are a number of problems for me – among which is the necessity of “Agency” and with agency a “Pre-existence”.   Though there is some similarities between agency and free will there is at least one stark difference in my understanding.  Free will is something internal to an intelligent being that cannot be externally gifted or externally created – because if gifted or created externally it is not an internal will but an external will from which the gift is granted or created.  If G-d created our will it is not ours but rather the will that was created for us.  If there was no pre-existence but something created at birth – we have no pre-existing will but only the will that G-d created uniquely for us.  Who then is ultimately responsible for that will? – the obvious answer is the creator and giftor of that will.   If there is no pre-existence, then G-d alone is responsible for what he alone creates – definitely not to be transfered that which is created by him alone.

But there is another doctrine that is somewhat unique to LDS doctrine – which is the doctrine of “Agency”.  We LDS are taught by our doctrine (we believe is doctrine from G-d) that agency is a gift from G-d.  This differentiates agency from free will.  I have logically concluded that free will is our internal choice.  Agency is the power to make our will reality.  It is the making of reality that I believe is the gift from G-d.  But there is a caveat – Because agency is a gift from G-d – G-d is in part responsible for the resulting reality.  Not completely responsible because the free will part is not of his making, doing or creation.  Free will is ours alone to create and to have – not G-d’s creation forced upon us.

There is one more consideration.  There are in essence two extensions to the meaning of “Father”.  One is the sire – which in the physical sense is the genetic male creator of our physical being.  Also known as our biological father.  The other is the proctor of what we become or develop.  Anciently the proctor was the controller of our covenant and the giver or our provider and overseer of our destiny or possibilities.

Jesus clearly taught that we have a Father in Heaven that is the father of our spirits.  Jesus also clearly taught that – that Father is and was his father as well as ours.  Our LDS doctrine clearly teaches that Jesus (Jehovah) was from the beginning (in the pre-existence when The Father established his covenant with his spirit children and mankind) was the Son of G-d (son or heir of the Kingdom Suzerain and proctor to the plan of salvation) and as such became the Messiah or proctor of the plan of salvation.  Being the proctor of the plan of salvation he rightfully also became the Father of our covenant (plan of salvation) in order for us participate in the plan of salvation.  As the father, proctor of the covenant or Messiah, Jehovah also participated in the responsibility for our sins because he is the one through whom our gift of agency was granted – which allowed him and only him to justly pay for and redeem our sins – that our spiritual sire and immortal physical being could not redeem through death.

Without a pre-existence and agency granted in that pre-existence there can be no account for justice nor mercy in the variant conditions to which each individual is born.  Likewise, without an existence after death there cannot be an account of justice nor mercy to account for our choices between when we are born and until we die.  For all the logic that demands something after we die – there also must be something for before we were born.

 

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Let me start by noting @Traveler's joining of the doctrine of agency (contrasted with free will) and that of pre-existence. He appears to say that without pre-existence agency could not be understood as the church teaches it. I'd like to hear more if others have thoughts on how closely these two teachings mingle.

[prisonchaplain]

5 hours ago, Traveler said:

Without a pre-existence and agency granted in that pre-existence there can be no account for justice nor mercy in the variant conditions to which each individual is born.  Likewise, without an existence after death there cannot be an account of justice nor mercy to account for our choices between when we are born and until we die.  For all the logic that demands something after we die – there also must be something for before we were born.

Perhaps Trinitarians should grapple more with God's justice. It would help us engage nonbelievers better. However, most, including myself, simply start with the belief that God is just. That's why I could discount the philosophy professor who argued that if God knows what will happen there can be no free will. If God is just then he made us with free will and even though He knows what we will do we still had the authority to make our choices. I suspect that @Traveler is suggesting that the doctrine of preexistence solves this dilemma. Most Trinitarians don't believe there is a dilemma. God is just, we have free will, and we were created at conception. We do not see the problem--though I understand why a skeptic might struggle with God knowing vs. free will. 

[Vort]

14 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Let me start by noting @Traveler's joining of the doctrine of agency (contrasted with free will) and that of pre-existence. He appears to say that without pre-existence agency could not be understood as the church teaches it. I'd like to hear more if others have thoughts on how closely these two teachings mingle.

Please remember that Latter-day Saints do not have a theology in the Catholic sense of the word. We believe in reading and studying the word of God to receive revelation through the Spirit. We do not believe that God manifests his will to his people through the careful linguistic, literary, and historical dissection of scripture and tradition. That doesn't stop us from engaging in such dissection, which occasionally may even prove useful. But God speaks from his heaven to us through the Holy Ghost and through living prophets, from the president of the Restored Church of Christ right down to the ministering brother and sister. I believe that formal theologies are not a part of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

That said, here are my thoughts:

Agency means the ability to choose whom you will represent. This is a separate question from how long you have existed and from whether you are eternal, backwards as well as forwards. That is, the answers to those questions don't actually depend on each other. But if you posit a case where the answers are inextricably linked, then of course things get a whole lot more interesting. Unsurprisingly, I believe that the questions are very closely linked, and as a result, I have a model in my mind about how these things sort of work together in explaining our origin and destiny. Please remember that my beliefs alone are worth what you paid to read them. But it's fun to think about.

Rather than bury the lede by discussing relationships and therefores before getting to the meat of things, let me just blurt out that we as individuals are uncreated. Our parents created our bodies through sacred means ordained by God himself, and God created our spirit in some manner perhaps not far removed from that which our parents used (though of course such things are not publicly revealed). But even before our creation by God as spiritual sons and daughters, we existed in a form that the Prophet Joseph Smith referred to as "intelligences". Such wording is found in the Pearl of Great Price and in the Doctrine and Covenants. What our nature was as "intelligences" has long been debated, and to my knowledge no general revelation has been granted to clear up that particular issue.

I take this to mean that our fundamental ability and will to choose Option A over Option B is innate in our very existence, and not created by anyone, even God. We are independent in that sphere, to act and choose as we will. I'm speaking in generalities because I don't understand what I'm talking about. But the general idea is: A computer programmer is 100% responsible for his creation. It's not the program's "fault" that it's faulty. If God "created" our decision-making capacity, then clearly God himself is responsible for our choices. This is inescapable, especially when we attribute to God characteristics such as omniscience, where before God ever created us, he knew what choices we would make, and such as omnipotence, where God might have willed to create us other than as he did (e.g. not sinful). To believe otherwise is to engage in nothing more than word games, which I find utterly useless and uninteresting.

So our independent, uncreated existence as intelligence (or intelligences) puts the ultimate onus of our decisions squarely on our own shoulders. Of course, we can be deceived and misled. But God's plan for his children accounts for such deception and ultimately allows us to choose God, if that is our will, and in the end reach his throne. Our premortal life (or lives) is an unknown quantity. We do not understand what that life consisted of, its duration, its nature. Did we live in families, as we do here? I rather suspect we did, but I have no proof of that idea. Did we know all things? Clearly, we did not. Did we have access to God, and speak to him face to face? I think that idea is sort of implicit in the belief itself. But despite our knowing almost nothing about the nature of our premortal existence(s), the mere fact of its existence implies spiritual change and growth during that time.

Therefore, what we experience today and how we choose to react to such experiences is inarguably influenced by our premortal actions and choices. We are an extension of what we were, and we will be an extension of what we are right now. Thus our agency that we exercise today is always and at every moment determined ("influenced" is probably a better word here) by our premortal actions, activities, and choices.

[Vort]

14 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

However, most, including myself, simply start with the belief that God is just.

I think this idea is at the foundation of pretty much any robust religious idea or theology. If God is unjust, then we are mere puppets that do not even pull our own strings. At absolute best, unjust gods are like the Roman pantheon, and perhaps we can flatter a god by pleading to it and receive some blessing or other as a result. But what is eternal existence with a fundamentally unjust god? Most Christian traditions refer to such an arrangement as "hell".

[Vort]

14 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

If God is just then he made us with free will and even though He knows what we will do we still had the authority to make our choices. I suspect that @Traveler is suggesting that the doctrine of preexistence solves this dilemma. Most Trinitarians don't believe there is a dilemma. God is just, we have free will, and we were created at conception. We do not see the problem--though I understand why a skeptic might struggle with God knowing vs. free will.

This gets to be largely definitional—and therefore not very interesting, IMO. Let me illustrate:

God is "just", whatever that means. But God created us as flawed creatures, when he might have willed to do otherwise. God created our ability to choose. That ability leads some of us to hell for all eternity. God, being omniscient, knew this (of course) before he ever created us. God, being omnipotent, also might have created our decision-making ability differently from how he did. But God didn't. Therefore, everything we choose ultimately comes from God in his omniscience and omnipotence. In a literal sense, we were created to be damned, when God might have done otherwise had he chosen to.

BUT—God is just.

Okay, then. God is just. That means that God's perfect justice obviously means that God can intentionally and knowingly create ex nihilo a being who will ultimately suffer damnation for all eternity. And that's A-OK, because God is just.

In this sense, the idea of justice has absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to our mortal idea of justice. It's a completely different thing. You might as well say that God is blurm, where blurm means "justice" or "loving" or "green" or "reptilian" or any other characteristic you care to put there. Because, you see, God's version of [insert characteristic here] isn't the same as our mortal version of that characteristic.

That is to say, our linguistic tokens (words) don't actually mean anything when applied to God. Or rather, they mean something, but not anything we understand in this state. Therefore, saying that God is great, or God is good, or God is just, or God is loving, tells us absolutely nothing about the nature of God, because none of those words mean what we think they mean.

This is why we reject such an approach. I do not doubt your sincerity, but perhaps with this explanation you can see why many don't find it convincing.

[scottyg]

If I bake a fresh batch of warm, sweet, moist, gooey, and scrumdiddlyumptious pumpkin chocolate chip cookies, place them in front of my 5 year old, and say "don't eat them", and then go out to mow the lawn leaving said child unsupervised with a tray of cookies, I know full well what will happen...my kid will eat some cookies. They have the ability and freedom to choose, and my knowing exactly what they will choose ahead of time in no way causes them to do so.

So, that's not what I do. I also tell my child that she can have a cookie later when I come in, and I leave my child in the care of her older siblings who have more experience. They set an example, encourage, and help guide her into making right choices. Then when I come in later, everyone gets a cookie without anyone having a time-out. (or getting burnt from hot melted chocolate)

We cannot become as God without the ability to exercise agency; choosing God and His Christ over the things of this world.

[Jersey Boy]

22 hours ago, Traveler said:

I have a great deal of respect for our Traditional Christians but that does not mean agreement.  As much as I revere @prisonchaplain – I have strong reservations in the logic of what is labeled “Trinitarian Doctrine”.   There are a number of problems for me – among which is the necessity of “Agency” and with agency a “Pre-existence”.   Though there is some similarities between agency and free will there is at least one stark difference in my understanding.  Free will is something internal to an intelligent being that cannot be externally gifted or externally created – because if gifted or created externally it is not an internal will but an external will from which the gift is granted or created.  If G-d created our will it is not ours but rather the will that was created for us.  If there was no pre-existence but something created at birth – we have no pre-existing will but only the will that G-d created uniquely for us.  Who then is ultimately responsible for that will? – the obvious answer is the creator and giftor of that will.   If there is no pre-existence, then G-d alone is responsible for what he alone creates – definitely not to be transfered that which is created by him alone.

But there is another doctrine that is somewhat unique to LDS doctrine – which is the doctrine of “Agency”.  We LDS are taught by our doctrine (we believe is doctrine from G-d) that agency is a gift from G-d.  This differentiates agency from free will.  I have logically concluded that free will is our internal choice.  Agency is the power to make our will reality.  It is the making of reality that I believe is the gift from G-d.  But there is a caveat – Because agency is a gift from G-d – G-d is in part responsible for the resulting reality.  Not completely responsible because the free will part is not of his making, doing or creation.  Free will is ours alone to create and to have – not G-d’s creation forced upon us.

There is one more consideration.  There are in essence two extensions to the meaning of “Father”.  One is the sire – which in the physical sense is the genetic male creator of our physical being.  Also known as our biological father.  The other is the proctor of what we become or develop.  Anciently the proctor was the controller of our covenant and the giver or our provider and overseer of our destiny or possibilities.

Jesus clearly taught that we have a Father in Heaven that is the father of our spirits.  Jesus also clearly taught that – that Father is and was his father as well as ours.  Our LDS doctrine clearly teaches that Jesus (Jehovah) was from the beginning (in the pre-existence when The Father established his covenant with his spirit children and mankind) was the Son of G-d (son or heir of the Kingdom Suzerain and proctor to the plan of salvation) and as such became the Messiah or proctor of the plan of salvation.  Being the proctor of the plan of salvation he rightfully also became the Father of our covenant (plan of salvation) in order for us participate in the plan of salvation.  As the father, proctor of the covenant or Messiah, Jehovah also participated in the responsibility for our sins because he is the one through whom our gift of agency was granted – which allowed him and only him to justly pay for and redeem our sins – that our spiritual sire and immortal physical being could not redeem through death.

Without a pre-existence and agency granted in that pre-existence there can be no account for justice nor mercy in the variant conditions to which each individual is born.  Likewise, without an existence after death there cannot be an account of justice nor mercy to account for our choices between when we are born and until we die.  For all the logic that demands something after we die – there also must be something for before we were born.

 

The Traveler

You seem to fail to take into consideration the fact that the atonement of Christ is infinite and eternal, extending forever backward and forever forward in one eternal round. If it weren’t for the fact that the atonement is infinite and eternal nothing could exist, including the elemental intelligences (the free agents Doctrine and Covenants 93 calls the “light of truth”) that existed prior to being organized in heaven as the spirit sons and daughters of God.

In point of fact, if it weren’t for the infinite and eternal atonement of Christ nothing would or could exist.  The only reason why agency and free will exist in any of the realms of existence is because of the foundational reality of the infinite and eternal atonement that replaces nonexistence (chaos) with existence. The atonement of Christ is the very glue or binding agent that allows all things to exist and consist, and without it agency cannot exist. Why? Because without the infinite and eternal atonement of Christ all things would be a compound in one, without sense or sensibility; in other words, nothing would exist.

Until it’s firmly understood that the atonement of Christ is the very foundational matrix upon which all reality, element, intelligence, thought and action exist, the erroneous idea that intelligences and things can exist outside of the atonement of Christ will begin to sap the mind of light and truth. The Book of Mormon even goes so far as to say that if there were no atoning Christ even God the Father himself could not exist!

7 For if there be no Christ there be no God; and if there be no God we are not, for there could have been no creation. (2 Nephi 11)

 

[zil2]

56 minutes ago, scottyg said:

They have the ability and freedom to choose, and my knowing exactly what they will choose ahead of time in no way causes them to do so.

Yeah, but I'm pretty sure the 5 year old has a good argument for entrapment - what do you say, @Just_A_Guy?