Free will in heaven?

[gaara4158]

Exactly. When God isn't considered the creator of all that is, then it's easy to subject Him to standards of judgement that only apply to creatures. A creature can never possess the information required to make a judgement against Him. One has to make God a much smaller God to do that.

It just seems very convenient that a god that clearly doesn’t hold up to moral scrutiny is of course above moral scrutiny. Might makes right?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

@SkyWriting @Eloy Craft

Can you explain how events occur without the passage of time? How does causality work?

 

[akaDaScribe]

After 100 billion years in heaven, will you prefer to visit this universe again to remind yourself of what it's like to suffer? I think not.

Religion was invented to explain why we exist, yet your religion, if true, renders our existence on earth completely meaningless.

The ratio of finite to infinite is zero. The infinitude of heaven makes this life absolutely pointless.

I don't see the connection between what we've discussed and your response. I'll try to clarify what I'm saying.

I'm saying that in the creative process, how something is made impacts the end product. Furthermore, how something is grown impacts the adult version of that organism. I then went on to say that what you perceive as incompetence or inability is your opinion about how things should have been handled. You are assuming that your logic is sufficient, but there are a significant number of unknown variables that you may not be aware of or you haven't considered.

Have you ever seen a rookie who is a strong player among other rookies play against a chess master or a far superior player? Sometimes the they assume the master made a mistake and they boast or mock in their hearts because they assume a mistake was made. Two moves later they are in mate. They assumed that because they were strong against other rookies they were strong players. They did not understand that it was possible that there are players who are leagues beyond them.

The wise rookie does not assume a mistake, but tries to understand why the move was made.

 

[Eloy Craft]

It just seems very convenient that a god that clearly doesn’t hold up to moral scrutiny is of course above moral scrutiny. Might makes right?

Really? Imagine a being that created all that is. You think of morality as something above it's creator. But I'm not sure it's God you are scrutinizing. So, do you not believe there is a God or did you once believe in God but that didn't work out?

 

[Eloy Craft]

Can you explain how events occur without the passage of time? How does causality work?

Movement can be eternal. eternal movement is changeless movement. As it applies to human nature. When someone enters eternity, they have reached their end. If the end they reach is in God then they will be eternally being what God made them to be. The philosophical proofs for God such as the immovable mover uncaused cause don't define eternity. They are proofs that things here moving have to be moved by something 'relative' to matter is not moving. There must be a necessary being who is uncaused to to be an efficient cause 'relative' to matter to cause everything that is. eternity is a 'moment' without duration. That is a mystery. But not a mystery as in unknown or on the other side of the material world. It's present everywhere. The uncaused cause is causing presently everything that is. The big barrier is death. Imagine a population of human beings who don't die and aren't dependent on any law that is about death. Survival doesn't enter their minds. What happened 100 yrs ago doesn't enter their minds. Whatever did is present. Everybody who ever was, is. No such thing as was. Everything done is good so it remains in the present just as all human life is present. They live in a moment without duration a beginning without end. Their earthly life ends but they don't. They are on earth to become their unique and never repeated self. When they have perfected their soul they are ready for the moment without duration without beginning or end. Most people can't imagine how different life without end would be. A humanity that doesn't die isn't driven by survival so their is no childhood as we think of it. they relate directly with their creator internally to become what He intends. A person enters life with a body that enjoys the immortality of it's soul. It is energized by the soul and from it flow all the necessities to live and grow until they are prepared for eternal life. Changelessness. No more becoming what God intends but changelessly being that. I know one thing for sure. That philosophical proofs do not describe what eternal life is. They only describe what was necessary for matter to exist. That there must be something eternal for things to begin.

 

[akaDaScribe]

But what then about all those who die before they're ever mature enough to learn any of this (assuming that dead children go to heaven)?

We have to be mindful of the fact that no 2 people are ever the same and so what is needed for different individuals would inherently vary for individuals as well. Remember, God took eternity in to account. What calculations would have to go into that boogle the mind.

 

[Dave-W]

That's a lot to read. Want to give us the upshot of it in the meantime?

Sorry, but describing an entirely different logic framework is not an easy thing that can be described briefly.

 

[akaDaScribe]

It could be argued that it would be more loving of God to not give us free will if the goal was for us to do good things.

Free will is what makes love so powerful. If you train a dog to greet you at the door with excitement when you get home, does it mean the same thing as when he does it because that's how he feels?

 

[akaDaScribe]

But it seems the two are at odds fairly often. God is seen commanding massacres, torturing people arbitrarily, and plaguing entire cities in the Bible. The free will that he has “allowed” is the source of countless evils in the world. How can God be just if he cares more about receiving our freely-given love than eliminating evil?

That's how much He values our love.
Kind of hard to process being that valued, isn't it?

 

[akaDaScribe]

It just seems very convenient that a god that clearly doesn’t hold up to moral scrutiny is of course above moral scrutiny. Might makes right?

Might makes right?

Honestly? Yes.
God makes the rules and He is above His creation.
That's the reality.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I don't see the connection between what we've discussed and your response. I'll try to clarify what I'm saying.

I'm saying that in the creative process, how something is made impacts the end product.

Suppose I take three grams of helium from a lab on earth, another three from Jupiter, another three from the sun, and another three from a star in a distant galaxy. I then normalize their temperatures and pressures to room temperature and one atmosphere of pressure. Then I inflate four different balloons. Will there be any difference between these balloons? Will it even matter if I mix all the helium into one tank or if I keep them separate?

Furthermore, how something is grown impacts the adult version of that organism. I then went on to say that what you perceive as incompetence or inability is your opinion about how things should have been handled. You are assuming that your logic is sufficient, but there are a significant number of unknown variables that you may not be aware of or you haven't considered.

I don't see how this is relevant to the population in heaven considering that Christians will be given not only a new body but also a new nature.

Have you ever seen a rookie who is a strong player among other rookies play against a chess master or a far superior player? Sometimes the they assume the master made a mistake and they boast or mock in their hearts because they assume a mistake was made. Two moves later they are in mate. They assumed that because they were strong against other rookies they were strong players. They did not understand that it was possible that there are players who are leagues beyond them.

The wise rookie does not assume a mistake, but tries to understand why the move was made.

So how do you know that the god of Islam isn't the one true god? That deity could be much smarter than you or me, right?

I'm going to use my own reasoning because it's all I have. Win or lose, I will use what I have. Most Christians forego this and use the reasoning that was brainwashed into them from childhood.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Movement can be eternal. eternal movement is changeless movement.

Sorry, nevermind. I can't make it past this part. I'm unable to make sense of anything you say.

 

[akaDaScribe]

Suppose I take three grams of helium from a lab on earth, another three from Jupiter, another three from the sun, and another three from a star in a distant galaxy. I then normalize their temperatures and pressures to room temperature and one atmosphere of pressure. Then I inflate four different balloons. Will there be any difference between these balloons? Will it even matter if I mix all the helium into one tank or if I keep them separate?

Again, you assume that gasses mixed with the helium wouldn't vary in the different locations.

I don't see how this is relevant to the population in heaven considering that Christians will be given not only a new body but also a new nature.

This is like saying that the soil and seed don't matter if it's just going to become a plant.

So how do you know that the god of Islam isn't the one true god? That deity could be much smarter than you or me, right?

I'm going to use my own reasoning because it's all I have. Win or lose, I will use what I have. Most Christians forego this and use the reasoning that was brainwashed into them from childhood.

Did I say that the rookie shouldn't ask questions? I said the rookie should not so quick to make assumptions. There is nothing wrong with wanting to understand. Maybe you can tell and maybe you can't, but my natural inclination is to question everything. The thing is, when you get lost in the game of just responding and not listening, you're not giving consideration to what is being said. I'm not just giving you answers to defend my position, I'm responding to questions that I've had to wrestle with myself and seek clarity on. I don't claim supreme knowledge, but i am trying to share with you some incites I've seen along the way.

 

[gaara4158]

Really? Imagine a being that created all that is. You think of morality as something above it's creator. But I'm not sure it's God you are scrutinizing. So, do you not believe there is a God or did you once believe in God but that didn't work out?

I do not believe there is a god. I did once, but not anymore. I don’t think the problem of free will and evil is good proof that God doesn’t exist, but it demonstrates the inconsistency in claiming that God is the basis for morality when God is credited with acts we all recognize as evil. Morality isn’t something that’s created. It’s something that develops within groups of sufficiently sentient and intelligent beings that wish to coexist and cooperate toward a mutually desired end. To say God is above morality just because he created everything is might makes right. The one with all the cards makes the rules. That’s not a moral system, that’s tyranny.

 

[gaara4158]

Might makes right?

Honestly? Yes.
God makes the rules and He is above His creation.
That's the reality.

Well then God is a tyrant. Why worship a tyrant?

 

[gaara4158]

That's how much He values our love.
Kind of hard to process being that valued, isn't it?

He doesn’t value us, he values our love. That’s not a healthy relationship. If he loved us, he would want us to lead happy and fulfilling lives with or without him. Instead, he condemns those who do not love him to unspeakable punishments in an afterlife they never asked for. We don’t treat our loved ones that way. That’s not what love looks like. That’s evil.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Morality isn’t something that’s created. It’s something that develops within groups of sufficiently sentient and intelligent beings that wish to coexist and cooperate toward a mutually desired end.

But there is only one being that has developed morality. No other animal leaves evidence of intellect on the earth. There is a chasm between humans and other animals.

it demonstrates the inconsistency in claiming that God is the basis for morality when God is credited with acts we all recognize as evil.

So it's the God as revealed to the Judeo-Christian tradition you object to. Something can't come from nothing. A creator of all that is stands to reason.

To say God is above morality just because he created everything is might makes right. The one with all the cards makes the rules. That’s not a moral system, that’s tyranny.

I can't look up at Jesus on the cross and say that. The one with all the cards is the reason there are rules. He made the universe intelligible. He didn't have to.

 

[gaara4158]

But there is only one being that has developed morality. No other animal leaves evidence of intellect on the earth. There is a chasm between humans and other animals.

How can you be so sure? Morality in animals is the subject of a lot of debate in relevant scientific fields. Research suggests that animals ranging from mice to apes live by certain codes of conduct. There is a chasm in intelligence between humans and other animals, but there are other animals, like elephants and orcas, that are far more emotionally complex than humans.

So it's the God as revealed to the Judeo-Christian tradition you object to. Something can't come from nothing. A creator of all that is stands to reason.

I'm not sure "something from nothing" is the only alternative to the Judeo-Christian creation myth, but that has no bearing on whether that creator is worthy of my affection, or is an appropriate moral arbiter.

I can't look up at Jesus on the cross and say that. The one with all the cards is the reason there are rules. He made the universe intelligible. He didn't have to.

Ah, so we just need to be thankful he hasn't created an even more chaotic universe?

 

[Ana the Ist]

We all have free will to choose not free will to do anything .
If I had free will to do anything I'd create pizza from nothing at least once a week , and maybe some trees giving diamonds in thier fruits instead of seeds .

In practice we only have free will to choose , we were put in such situations which are not controlled by us like place when we were born , status symbol of our family and our parents were not decided by us aswell .

Likewise in heaven , after we get born again from God and changed to be incorruptible we simply can't sin because there is no ability to sin .
There is no sex in heaven so no sexual urges , there are streets of Gold and everybody has mansion so no motive to steal , there is plenty of food but we don't need to eat or feel hunger , likewise we don't feel thirst .

Adam and Eve could do everything but eat of tree of Good or Evil , if that tree would not be there they would never sin .

If this is how God wanted man to exist....then why not create such a world for us while we are alive?

 

[Eloy Craft]

How can you be so sure? Morality in animals is the subject of a lot of debate in relevant scientific fields. Research suggests that animals ranging from mice to apes live by certain codes of conduct. There is a chasm in intelligence between humans and other animals, but there are other animals, like elephants and orcas, that are far more emotionally complex than humans.

The foundation of animal morality is the sensitive powers of the soul. That is the sum of their power. That being so their morality is similar to some humans who seek the good of their flesh instead of their spirit. The good that the sensitive powers seek is limited to the senses. "If it feels good do it". Will, reason and conscience reside in the intellect. The good that is the natural object of the will is the good of God. "Do what ought to be done". There are no intellectual powers evident in the life of other animals. For example an animal experiencing a blow that causes pain experiences that suffering without interpreting with self awareness. So if it feels a blow continuously one after another it doesn't experience it as an accumulated experience of suffering like a human. For us we would be thinking "when will this end?" The animal would have to be self aware for that. Without it the animal experiences the pain of the blow that is current and is unable to connect it to the preceding blows. There isn't an awareness of how long it's been happening. That requires an "I am" kind of awareness This is an added dimension to suffering that requires intellect and only humans experience. The Elephants visit graveyards because they are very developed social animals. It's attachment that draws them to the smell of their dead family members.

I'm not sure "something from nothing" is the only alternative to the Judeo-Christian creation myth, but that has no bearing on whether that creator is worthy of my affection, or is an appropriate moral arbiter.

Everything we observe has a beginning , a middle and an end. Something that begins can't be the beginner. What is an alternative? A universe that is an infinite regress. That kind of infinity isn't the infinity conceptualized by physicists. Can the pot tell the potter what he made it for? What is right for it to be used for and what would be a wrong use?

Ah, so we just need to be thankful he hasn't created an even more chaotic universe?

That science assumes that the universe is intelligible is an act of faith in an immutable underlying structure. Governed by laws that we can use to predict outcomes and by laws that scientists rely on to do science is evidence that the universe is not chaotic at all.