How can there be free will in heaven?

[Jamdoc]

We will be choosing what we prefer there as we all do here now.

Well the question wasn't to people who believe there is free will, the question was to those who believe there will be no free will.

I have a hard time even wrapping my head around the concept of not having a free will because a free will is basically needed in order to have sentience. Even animals make choices and have preferences.

To have no free will would be to have the existence of a plant or a sponge, not even aware that you were alive.

 

[Sheila Davis]

Adam didn't have ovaries or a uterus or a vagina and Eve didn't have a penis and testes, I don't think Eve being given nipples that maybe Adam lacked would be too far fetched.

anyway, I think it's not really a particular important aspect of creation. It's a little food for thought I guess in how Adam could have been slightly anatomically different as a result of never having gone through biological development. But they are minor.

But ever since Eve men have had nipples because all mammals begin as female until getting a hormonal signal that changes their development to make a male.

and that's all mammals not just humans.

The [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] - isn't it possible the penis is the same as the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] extremely smaller, just extremely smaller. They both seem to have forms of erections and are orgasmic. There are some women that have been born with rather long ones.

The ovaries - where the seed of the female are kept. Isn't it possible the testicles are the same as the ovaries - just placed on the outside of the male and inside of the female? They do hold the male seed like the ovaries hold the female seed and both have two.

I am not speaking of the processes each use but the overall design.

 

[timothyu]

The problem was not free will, but the understanding itself that came about from eating forbidden knowledge as shown by the phrase who told you you were naked. Like our fellow creatures still, we were oblivious to the fact. We became gods as scripture says and God isn't going to go about de-godifying us, but leading us to living with the knowledge appropriately as God does.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Well the question wasn't to people who believe there is free will, the question was to those who believe there will be no free will.

I have a hard time even wrapping my head around the concept of not having a free will because a free will is basically needed in order to have sentience. Even animals make choices and have preferences.

To have no free will would be to have the existence of a plant or a sponge, not even aware that you were alive.

I think the problem is not so much whether or not people will have (or even have at present) wills, but how free those wills actually are. The undeniable reality for any professing Christian is that God is sovereign. That means that His will is unlimited. If His will has no limits, but the wills of other beings come into conflict with His will, guess who wins? In that sense, there is no such thing as a will that is entirely unaffected by the will of God for any being other than God.

 

[timothyu]

Never wise to bite the hand that feeds you.

 

[Sheila Davis]

I think the problem is not so much whether or not people will have (or even have at present) wills, but how free those wills actually are. The undeniable reality for any professing Christian is that God is sovereign. That means that His will is unlimited. If His will has no limits, but the wills of other beings come into conflict with His will, guess who wins? In that sense, there is no such thing as a will that is entirely unaffected by the will of God for any being other than God.

Point well made - just like man saying there is equality and freedom, when actually there isn't - everyone on earth is affected by the decisions of someone else / laws, rules regulation, TAXES, made by governments.
but
People can still choose how to react to what someone else says or does or whether to obey those laws. Whatever they choose then they either suffer the consequences or reap the rewards.
What God did to Jonah, changed Jonah's mind. What God did to the Egyptians, changed the Egyptian's mind. What the donkey said to Balaam, changed his mind - as it is it seems it was their choice regardless of the influence.
There are some people that exist in this world and have existed, regardless of what you do to them what you say to them they are determined to do as they choose and do so.
Can God rule the minds, yes he can - has he ruled minds, yes he has - will he rule minds, probably so but those are certain people in certain incidences where God is trying to make an example / point.
"*Entirely unaffected* by the will of God" is taking it to a different level of conversation.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Point well made - just like man saying there is equality and freedom, when actually there isn't - everyone on earth is affected by the decisions of someone else / laws, rules regulation, TAXES, made by governments.
but
People can still choose how to react to what someone else says or does or whether to obey those laws. Whatever they choose then they either suffer the consequences or reap the rewards.
What God did to Jonah, changed Jonah's mind. What God did to the Egyptians, changed the Egyptian's mind. What the donkey said to Balaam, changed his mind - as it is it seems it was their choice regardless of the influence.
There are some people that exist in this world and have existed, regardless of what you do to them what you say to them they are determined to do as they choose and do so.
Can God rule the minds, yes he can - has he ruled minds, yes he has - will he rule minds, probably so but those are certain people in certain incidences where God is trying to make an example / point.
"*Entirely unaffected* by the will of God" is taking it to a different level of conversation.

Thank you. The problem, as you realized at the end of your post, comes down to the definition of "free". If free does mean (as it certainly can) entirely unaffected then there are few of us who would describe human will as being that. If, on the other hand, free simply means able (and responsible) for making decisions apart from direct coercion, then I am certain most of would agree with that.

 

[Jamdoc]

I think the problem is not so much whether or not people will have (or even have at present) wills, but how free those wills actually are. The undeniable reality for any professing Christian is that God is sovereign. That means that His will is unlimited. If His will has no limits, but the wills of other beings come into conflict with His will, guess who wins? In that sense, there is no such thing as a will that is entirely unaffected by the will of God for any being other than God.

Well the question is more along the lines of are you able to make choices and decisions, to have preferences and likes and dislikes.
Without a free will you can't do those things.

to have a free will to choose that means you have to have the possibility of choosing against God, even though there are consequences for doing so.
When Adam and Eve were in the Garden God didn't make it so that Eve couldn't choose to eat the fruit, He just informed them of the consequences of doing so.
and obviously, simply knowing consequences is not enough.

 

[timothyu]

Other animals make choices

 

[Sheila Davis]

Other animals make choices

Indeed they do - some more than others - they think and they choose. Two things that separate humans from all other animals - God breathed the breath of life into man and Man became a living soul and man is the only one of the life forms on Earth that has knowledge of what is right and what is wrong.

 

[Jamdoc]

Other animals make choices

Yes, and animals sometimes make choices that from a human perspective, would be sin.
Animals don't get married, so they don't commit adultery, no they just do what would be considered by humans to be fornicating. Animals commit cannibalism sometimes, Animals will murder each other, think a male lion taking over a pride from another male, he'll kill all the previous male's cubs. Animals will steal from each other when the opportunity presents itself. I mean the name "ferret" means "little thief".

All these animal choices but.. because they do not have the moral knowledge of good and evil, God does not hold them accountable for those behaviors.

Adam and Eve only had 1 single law, prior to gaining that moral knowledge of good and evil, God wouldn't have held them accountable for things like stealing, what if they had not broken that one law, would God hold them accountable for adultery or fornication? They wouldn't know it was wrong to do.

Part of the consequences of that first sin, was not only death, not only the curse, but now we're held to a higher standard of accountability because we know some things are right and wrong.

But that cat isn't going back in the bag. Unless you believe we're going back to nudity and innocence and God isn't going to hold us accountable for our behaviors anymore.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Yes, and animals sometimes make choices that from a human perspective, would be sin.
Animals don't get married, so they don't commit adultery, no they just do what would be considered by humans to be fornicating. Animals commit cannibalism sometimes, Animals will murder each other, think a male lion taking over a pride from another male, he'll kill all the previous male's cubs. Animals will steal from each other when the opportunity presents itself. I mean the name "ferret" means "little thief".

All these animal choices but.. because they do not have the moral knowledge of good and evil, God does not hold them accountable for those behaviors.

Adam and Eve only had 1 single law, prior to gaining that moral knowledge of good and evil, God wouldn't have held them accountable for things like stealing, what if they had not broken that one law, would God hold them accountable for adultery or fornication? They wouldn't know it was wrong to do.

Part of the consequences of that first sin, was not only death, not only the curse, but now we're held to a higher standard of accountability because we know some things are right and wrong.

But that cat isn't going back in the bag. Unless you believe we're going back to nudity and innocence and God isn't going to hold us accountable for our behaviors anymore.

Thus, we can conclude that of all created earthly beings, animals most assuredly have the freest of wills. Because man is responsible for his moral decisions before God, his will is not nearly as free as that of animals.

It cannot be a question of "free" will because not even animals wills are free (they die, and, as scripture reminds use, death is the wages of sin) and completely unhindered. Nevertheless, all animate beings on earth do have individual wills.

 

[Jamdoc]

Thus, we can conclude that of all created earthly beings, animals most assuredly have the freest of wills. Because man is responsible for his moral decisions before God, his will is not nearly as free as that of animals.

It cannot be a question of "free" will because not even animals wills are free (they die, and, as scripture reminds use, death is the wages of sin) and completely unhindered. Nevertheless, all animate beings on earth do have individual wills.

So you think God is going to take away or moral conscience so that we don't know the difference between right and wrong and thus doesn't hold us accountable?
I think that ship has sailed.

 

[timothyu]

Unless you believe we're going back to nudity and innocence and God isn't going to hold us accountable for our behaviors anymore.

Actually it is man that has increased the taboo

 

[Jamdoc]

Actually it is man that has increased the taboo

Well I mean...unless you want to spiritualize the white garments in Revelation there is clothes.. and nakedness is seen as a defilement. Jesus' letter to Sardis and at the 7th vial in Revelation 16.

I think the cat's out of the bag regarding morality. We wanted to know good and evil, fine, we know good and evil and now we're accountable for it, and we shouldn't be naked.

 

[bbbbbbb]

So you think God is going to take away or moral conscience so that we don't know the difference between right and wrong and thus doesn't hold us accountable?
I think that ship has sailed.

I never said nor implied that. I have no idea as to what makes you think that about myself.

 

[Jamdoc]

I never said nor implied that. I have no idea as to what makes you think that about myself.

oh, I thought it was where you were going with animals having the most free wills because they just.. act and God doesn't even hold them accountable when a male lion kills all the cubs born by a competing male when he takes over the pride (which in human terms would be murder and adultery and theft all bundled into 1)

Animals simply don't know good and evil (dogs might be an exception, they seem to have some sort of conscience, a dog will certainly look guilty when it knows it did something you don't like and it got busted, but a cat, if you try to punish it it just thinks you're being a jerk)

 

[bbbbbbb]

oh, I thought it was where you were going with animals having the most free wills because they just.. act and God doesn't even hold them accountable when a male lion kills all the cubs born by a competing male when he takes over the pride (which in human terms would be murder and adultery and theft all bundled into 1)

Animals simply don't know good and evil (dogs might be an exception, they seem to have some sort of conscience, a dog will certainly look guilty when it knows it did something you don't like and it got busted, but a cat, if you try to punish it it just thinks you're being a jerk)

My point still stands. All animate beings on earth have wills. None of those wills are free, without any restrictions whatsoever on their use.

 

[timothyu]

but a cat, if you try to punish it it just thinks you're being a jerk)

Yes because a cat wants to please and instead of punishment, is happy to be shown what is expected of it as a rule and will continue to do so if rewarded. However cats like humans don't like to be told no and will act like humans and do it anyway lol. Cats like humans, respond better to yes.

 

[Jamdoc]

Yes because a cat wants to please and instead of punishment, is happy to be shown what is expected of it as a rule and will continue to do so if rewarded. However cats like humans don't like to be told no and will act like humans and do it anyway lol. Cats like humans, respond better to yes.

It's more just that cats don't understand that they did anything wrong.