How can there be free will in heaven?

[Clare73]

Doesn't that mean it's their choice?

Spiritual rebirth (John 3:5) is like physical birth, we have nothing to do with it (John 3:8).

We choose to accept Christ because the new birth has given the regenerated; i.e., those with the Holy Spirit, a new nature which is able to see, receive and believe Christ (1 Corinthians 2:14).

 

[fhansen]

What is stopping another fall? Why are Christians promised ETERNAL life if God is just going to recreate everything and give us bodies like Adam and Eve had? To me it makes no sense that you can have free will over God's sovereignty because what is stopping another human being, angel, or other created being from wanting power? If our will is free in the Arminian sense, there is NOTHING stopping another fall because Adam and Eve were created perfect as well. The only reason they were allowed to sin was because God decreed it. God decrees no sin forever, than there will be no more sin forever.

God never decreed sin/evil, as in causing it anyway, but allows it, for a time, for His purposes. The abuse of human freedom is the cause. And His ultimate purpose is to produce something, something much greater than He began with, as He guides His creation-us-into recognizing and choosing between the two: between the evil that is intrinisically opposed to His nature and will, and the good that is His nature and will. God's purpose has never been to rather arbitrarily save a bunch of otherwise worthless sinful wretches while damning the rest.

That is the proper use of our freedom, as He- knowing and loving Him with our whole heart, soul, mind and strength- is man's very purpose, his telos, the end he was created for, like a flower that has grown from seedling to full fruition. But in the case of man we can stymie and block that fruition, our created purpose, due to that same will that can and should be exercised to participate in it. To the extent that we do participate in His work, however, entering union with Him by faith and remaining in it, we'll grow nearer and nearer to that purpose as we grow nearer and nearer to Him and in His own likeness and image within ourselves.

This all begins here, in this world, and the choice can become stronger and more clear, and more desiriable as we increasingly let go of the false gods, the things of this world that can never satisfy the desire in the human heart for the true and ultimate and perfect good. The choice may be perfected in the absolute sense only in the next life but when we finally meet that Object of all human desire, "face to face", the will, with the help of grace, has already done its job, using its freedom properly and wisely, and it knows then that there's nothing more or higher that can possibly be found and desired: the will is totally captivated by the ultimate Goodness and the cause of unbounded exaltation and happiness and well-being that it now beholds "immediately", as they say.

God has and wants more for us than we can even begin to imagine. That's the nature of love.

 

[eleos1954]

The issue is that rebellion didn't start with Adam and Eve being tempted by Satan. The rebellion started when Satan (Lucifer) turned against God and took a third of the angels with him out of Heaven, and this took place sometime before the Earth was even created.
So I'm assuming the OP is wondering what would prevent another angel of high rank (Michael, Gabriel, etc.) from deciding that they should be worshipped as God, and then leave Heaven, and maybe take other angels (or even some of us) with him.

well ... as far as heaven goes ... and the angels .... satan tempted them as well .... and some chose to walk away from God ... some didn't .... so it's the same thing.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Of course, there must be free will in heaven. Either God has free will and all created beings are bound to His will or He doesn't, leaving free will for others to use.

 

[BobRyan]

OK thanks for the explanation. So it appears we have a bit of a contradiction in Scripture here. How do you reconcile it?

What is the contradiction?

A great example of what I am saying "in heaven" is the sinless angels -- all created by God without sin and obviously having free will since some of them chose sin and some did not.

But after the enter sinful age of 6000 years of earth -- all the sinless free will sentient beings of heaven (including the saints) have mountains of "evidence" showing them that "the cancer of rebellion leads to death not greater delight". It wont even be a "question" at that point.

well ... as far as heaven goes ... and the angels .... satan tempted them as well .... and some chose to walk away from God ... some didn't .... so it's the same thing.

True - it shows that there is free will in heaven.

But there is no reason to believe that sentient beings in heaven will be just as confused about sin being a good idea or not -- after having seen the 6000 years of sin on Earth, and the judgment of each case and the lake of fire ending.... as they were before all that compelling data was made available to all.

Of course, there must be free will in heaven. Either God has free will and all created beings are bound to His will or He doesn't, leaving free will for others to use.

If God were "limited like a man" then He could not find a way for all beings to have free will and yet always choose obedience.

But I don't think the Bible shows Him as having any such limit.

 

[Jamdoc]

What is the contradiction?

A great example of what I am saying "in heaven" is the sinless angels -- all created by God without sin and obviously having free will since some of them chose sin and some did not.

But after the enter sinful age of 6000 years of earth -- all the sinless free will sentient beings of heaven (including the saints) have mountains of "evidence" showing them that "the cancer of rebellion leads to death not greater delight". It wont even be a "question" at that point.




True - it shows that there is free will in heaven.

But there is no reason to believe that sentient beings in heaven will be just as confused about sin being a good idea or not -- after having seen the 6000 years of sin on Earth, and the judgment of each case and the lake of fire ending.... as they were before all that compelling data was made available to all.



If God were "limited like a man" then He could not find a way for all beings to have free will and yet always choose obedience.

But I don't think the Bible shows Him as having any such limit.

Some things I wonder if God will make no longer sin, after all, Adam and Eve didn't have 600+ laws to follow they only had 1.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Some things I wonder if God will make no longer sin, after all, Adam and Eve didn't have 600+ laws to follow they only had 1.

Good point. Paul made it clear that where there is no law there is no sin. He further made the point that Jews are under condemnation because they have fallen short in their observance of Torah and Gentiles are condemned because of their rejection of the general revelation of God in nature (a form of law). It seems that the primary function of law, which God created, is for the condemnation of mankind.

 

[levnishbar]

What is the contradiction?

Ezekiel 18:20 A son will not suffer the punishment for the father’s guilt, nor will a father suffer the punishment for the son’s guilt; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

Deuteronomy 23:2 No one born of a forbidden marriage nor any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, not even in the tenth generation.

It seems the child is being punished for the sins of the parents. Also see David's firstborn with Bath-sheba

 

[bbbbbbb]

Ezekiel 18:20 A son will not suffer the punishment for the father’s guilt, nor will a father suffer the punishment for the son’s guilt; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

Deuteronomy 23:2 No one born of a forbidden marriage nor any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, not even in the tenth generation.

It seems the child is being punished for the sins of the parents. Also see David's firstborn with Bath-sheba

Quite so. That is why Ezekiel made such a sharp distinction in the change. Likewise, there are many differences between the Old and New Testaments, not the least being the abandonment of the Temple and the sacrificial system commanded in detail by God.

 

[levnishbar]

Quite so. That is why Ezekiel made such a sharp distinction in the change. Likewise, there are many differences between the Old and New Testaments, not the least being the abandonment of the Temple and the sacrificial system commanded in detail by God.

Here's a theory. Perhaps on this Earth, which God put Man as stewards over with free will, we have room to exercise our own judgments on matters, to show mercy or justice and to even disagree with God's judgments.

The latter may sound like heresy, but recall the conversation between Abraham and God over the the fate of Sodom (Genesis 18:16-33). If done with the right attitude of respect to God, Abraham and us too, may debate the appropriate judgment on a matter with God.

It seems though, that as imperfect, sinful human beings, our role in trying to persuade God to change his judgment should err on the side of mercy. Because of we ask God to be merciful to others, perhaps He may be merciful to us as well.

Therefore referring to punishments in the Old Testament we do not agree with or think are too harsh, as humans we would be able to commute the sentence. However we must be careful because some commandments of God are not supposed to be commuted, e.g. 1 Samuel 15 with Saul sparing Agag and the best of the plunder (one could argue this was at least partly for reasons of greed rather than mercy).

 

[timothyu]

we have room to exercise our own judgments on matters,

That is where the problem of the tree of Knowledge comes in. Man most often takes that knowledge and uses it for man's personal benefit, making judgements that benefit man's self serving will, not the will of God. The very attitude that got man banished from the Garden.

 

[BobRyan]

Some things I wonder if God will make no longer sin, after all, Adam and Eve didn't have 600+ laws to follow they only had 1.

Some argue that Adam did not have the 1040+_commands of the NT or the 600+ commands
yet we know he was "sinless" which means there is not one single moral imperative in either OT or NT that he was living in violation of.

He did not take God's name in vain
He did not lie
He did not worship false gods
He did not kill or steal
He had perfect love for God and for all other humans (in this case - only Eve was on the planet)

Until the day he sinned.

The same is true for angels in heaven - until the day that some of them sinned.

Even so - the majority still chose not to sin.

And now after 6000 years of "evidence upon evidence" they have even more reasons not to sin.

 

[BobRyan]

Ezekiel 18:20 A son will not suffer the punishment for the father’s guilt, nor will a father suffer the punishment for the son’s guilt; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

Deuteronomy 23:2 No one born of a forbidden marriage nor any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, not even in the tenth generation.

It seems the child is being punished for the sins of the parents. Also see David's firstborn with Bath-sheba

In the first example we are talking about the lake of fire vs heaven - eternal life vs the second death. And clearly it is "individual".

In the second example you are talking about the gentiles entering the earthly temple for OT ceremony where it is a marriage with a pagan group specifically condemned by God - such as the marriage of Boaz with Ruth. Yet we see that the lineage of David was allowed to enter.

One is eternal and salvific - the other is not.

 

[BobRyan]

Good point. Paul made it clear that where there is no law there is no sin. He further made the point that Jews are under condemnation because they have fallen short in their observance of Torah and Gentiles are condemned because of their rejection of the general revelation of God in nature (a form of law). .

In Romans 1 and 2 - gentiles are under condemnation for what they know... which means those with no access to scripture at all are limited to what they know from nature. But other gentiles such as you and me and those in 1 Cor 6 are under condemnation for what they know about scripture as well (as we also see in James 2).

 

[timothyu]

Until the day he sinned.

Even Moses sinned the day he put his will ahead of the will of God in striking that rock.

 

[BobRyan]

Even Moses sinned the day he put his will ahead of the will of God in striking that rock.

Rom 3:23 "ALL have sinned and fall short" -- Moses is included - and Moses stand with Christ in glory in Matt 17 along with Elijah - fully forgiven, fully saved - before the cross even happens... under the "ONE Gospel" of Gal 1:6-9 - that was "preached to Abraham" Gal 3:8

 

[timothyu]

fully forgiven, full saved

No doubt because while still alive he accepted his punishment of remaining behind and understood why. He was repentant of his self serving mistake and knew a price must be paid here in order to benefit there.

 

[BobRyan]

No doubt because while still alive he accepted his punishment of remaining behind and understood why. He was repentant of his self serving mistake and knew a price must be paid here in order to benefit there.

Nothing that Moses suffered paid his debt of sin -- only Christ could do that. Heb 10:4 says not even one animal sacrifice in the OT -- actually paid the debt of even one sin.

 

[timothyu]

Nothing that Moses suffered paid his debt of sin -- only Christ could do that.

Moses accepted his physical punishment and knew why he was punished. Jesus was a different story as He opened the door to the Kingdom as that was his job. Yet both Moses and Jesus exemplified what the entire Bible teaches about putting God's will first. Moses was the example of not doing so, Jesus was the example of doing just that.

 

[Jamdoc]

Good point. Paul made it clear that where there is no law there is no sin. He further made the point that Jews are under condemnation because they have fallen short in their observance of Torah and Gentiles are condemned because of their rejection of the general revelation of God in nature (a form of law). It seems that the primary function of law, which God created, is for the condemnation of mankind.

There's also precedent for God changing some of the laws. He has changed the dietary laws a few times.

first He gave only plants. Then He gave all animals after the flood, then with Moses, He restricted some animals, and restricted wine from priests and nazarites, nazarites couldn't even eat grapes.

Then after the new testament He lifted the dietary laws and pronounced all 4 footed beasts clean, and Paul said not to burden the gentiles with the dietary laws and circumcision.

some laws I think will be impossible to break, like Murder will be impossible to do.

some laws I think won't come into mind to break, like stealing and coveting if God is freely providing and you're not left with unmet needs and desires.

Adultery will be impossible to do because there's no marriage

I don't think idolatry would be an issue when you can see God face to face and know He's the only God.

and many ritual/dietary laws could change


So that leaves things like lying, fornication, drunkenness/intoxication, dishonoring your mother and father, and taking the Lord's name in vain.

Taking the Lord's name in vain is.. to claim the name of God, IE claim you believe in and worship God, and then do something that makes Him look bad, like do some other sin. (as given in Proverbs 30:9, being known as a follower of the Lord and then stealing because you're poor, takes the Lord's name in vain).. or using His name irreverently. I think in the first case since we're no longer having to be an ambassador for an invisible God it'll be impossible to make Him look bad because people will see for themselves His character and not have to judge it by the actions of His people.

Lying.. people do that for self gain, and the chances of being caught.
If the chance of being caught is 100%, nobody would risk it.

Drunkenness might just be solved by making us no longer susceptible to mind altering effects of drugs and alcohol, the biology would just be different. If you can drink as much wine and beer as you want and never get drunk.. well.. I don't think there'd be a law against drinking alcohol (as it is there's not, there's just a law against getting drunk)

Fornication.. there's 2 ways this can pan out. Either we have the anatomy of barbie and ken dolls, making it physically impossible to do, and I don't know if that'd be frustrating or not for some, I mean I think I wouldn't like my resurrected body to be LESS than it currently is but who knows. But.. that doesn't necessarily mean people wouldn't think about it in their thoughts..
Or since we are all technically in the same marriage, it's no longer considered fornication.

Point being.. if you have it all as just being willpower, then it's not free will, free will involves being able to make your own choices freely.

So to have free will but not sin, that means none of the choices you can make, are sinful.

and that can be accomplished some ways, namely, the sinful choices become impossible to do, and secondarily, some laws may change so that the choices are no longer sin.

I don't think we'll be actively observing 600+ laws.