How can there be free will in heaven?

[timothyu]

It would be like saying that a person who is enslaved for life to another person has the freedom to do anything he desires.

Isn't it more like think anyway they want? We are all enslaved in some way, be it physically or financially. The adversary's system today is even demanding we not think freely anymore but only listen to our so called leaders. That is true enslavement.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Isn't it more like think anyway they want? We are all enslaved in some way, be it physically or financially. The adversary's system today is even demanding we not think freely anymore but only listen to our so called leaders. That is true enslavement.

Precisely. Thus, even as we might understand the limitations on our wills, we still deeply desire to perceive them as being free.

 

[timothyu]

we still deeply desire to perceive them as being free.

Well we all still have the option to put God's will ahead of theirs, even if it leads to martyrdom (for God, not a religion) from bucking the system of man and the Adversary as the end of days indicates.(although not as big as when Eve and Adam bucked God's system but significant in gesture) We win in the end.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Well we all have the option to put God's will ahead of theirs, even if it leads to martyrdom from bucking the system. We win in the end.

I rather think that God wins in the end.

 

[timothyu]

I rather think that God wins in the end.

Yes He does, but is happy to reward the team.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Yes He does, but is happy to reward the team.

 

[Jamdoc]

Having a will is what I think we agree on. How freely that will can be exercised is open to question. If one's will is, indeed, free, but one is constrained from exercising it entirely, then it is really useless to consider it to be free. It would be like saying that a person who is enslaved for life to another person has the freedom to do anything he desires.

Free will at its core is just the ability to form thoughts and make decisions, being conscious of your existence and circumstances and able to have an opinion and make decisions based on it, consciously, not just obeying instincts/drives.

Having a natural/instinctive drive to eat, you eat, but having a will, will be able to make other decisions. You may decide you're not that hungry and skip eating, such as dieting or fasting, or maybe you plan to do an activity where eating right before it is a bad idea, like swimming. You also make a decision on what to eat, or at the bare minimum, what you would like to eat, if you do not have the circumstances to eat what you wish.

Being in circumstances where you can't have what you want doesn't mean your will isn't free.
Being in circumstances where there will be penalty for doing what you want doesn't mean your will isn't free. You still formed the idea and decision independently.
Therefore a free will

Free will person gets offered fruit, and thinks internally "I'd prefer a steak", they may still take the fruit and eat it, but they have thoughts regarding it.
No free will doesn't even think about it, and just eats the fruit offered, because of the natural drive to eat. They don't even have thoughts about what they'd rather have, or whether they should eat it or not.
Just natural drive, hunger, offered food, eat.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Free will at its core is just the ability to form thoughts and make decisions, being conscious of your existence and circumstances and able to have an opinion and make decisions based on it, consciously, not just obeying instincts/drives.

Having a natural/instinctive drive to eat, you eat, but having a will, will be able to make other decisions. You may decide you're not that hungry and skip eating, such as dieting or fasting, or maybe you plan to do an activity where eating right before it is a bad idea, like swimming. You also make a decision on what to eat, or at the bare minimum, what you would like to eat, if you do not have the circumstances to eat what you wish.

Being in circumstances where you can't have what you want doesn't mean your will isn't free.
Being in circumstances where there will be penalty for doing what you want doesn't mean your will isn't free. You still formed the idea and decision independently.
Therefore a free will

Free will person gets offered fruit, and thinks internally "I'd prefer a steak", they may still take the fruit and eat it, but they have thoughts regarding it.
No free will doesn't even think about it, and just eats the fruit offered, because of the natural drive to eat. They don't even have thoughts about what they'd rather have, or whether they should eat it or not.
Just natural drive, hunger, offered food, eat.

We have obviously different definitions of "free will".

 

[Jamdoc]

We have obviously different definitions of "free will".

Well that'd be important to nail out.
do you think you'll be able to have your own thoughts and make your own choices? It matters less if you can apply said choices, just that you are capable of making them in your head. Afterall, that's what matters to God anyway, less the outward action, and more what goes on in your head. It's not enough to not commit the act of adultery, if you're thinking about committing adultery that's sin in itself.

and I think that at the core, is the question.

if you can have your own thoughts but just not act on them, that could just be a thing of the consequences are too severe, and you'd probably be bitter and repressed feeling, if your thoughts are that you'd like to do things that you aren't allowed to do.

and if you can't have your own thoughts, in essence what I consider to be "no free will" I guess you'd be "blissfully" unaware.. but you might as well be a robot, or a sponge or plant for what level of consciousness you'd have.

really it sounds like some sort of possession, that you'd be "possessed" by God basically forever and at best be a semi-conscious observer

 

[timothyu]

Did Jesus not have a choice to obey only the will of the Father? Where would be the test if not so?

 

[Jamdoc]

Did Jesus not have a choice to obey only the will of the Father? Where would be the test if not so?

That is a good question. Jesus said it was the same as murdering someone to be angry at someone, and the same as adultery to look on a woman with lust. Therefore if Jesus was praying for God to not make Him go to the cross, how was it not the same as disobeying the will to go to the cross since His own human will wanted to not obey?

 

[timothyu]

That is a good question. Jesus said it was the same as murdering someone to be angry at someone, and the same as adultery to look on a woman with lust. Therefore if Jesus was praying for God to not make Him go to the cross, how was it not the same as disobeying the will to go to the cross since His own human will wanted to not obey?

The option was there, and like with the examples you gave, human instinct is directed to self, and Jesus acknowledged it but did not act on it. He first asked if God's will would allow the option but He was open to accepting whatever God's will was. Man as a rule doesn't wait for God's answer but bails of our own accord to fulfil self interest.

 

[renniks]

There won't be any evil, either from our own bodies, or from the world, to steer us wrong. The snake is in hell.

We don't sin because our soul wants to here on earth, we do it because our hsuman brains are dysfunctional.

I think this is basically accurate. If we were in a place where there was no satanic activity, and no curse, what would be prompting us to sin?
I also think because we will see with perfect clarity, instead of through a glass darkly, like we do now we will not desire rebellion.

 

[timothyu]

I think this is basically accurate. If we were in a place where there was no satanic activity, and no curse, what would be prompting us to sin?

Yet even God said they know good and evil. That is why they said we became gods like them, but we have the burden of fleshy animal instinct thrown into the mix to complicate things.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Yet even God said they know good and evil. That is why they said we became gods like them, but we have the burden of fleshy animal instinct thrown into the mix to complicate things.

I like the concept of "fleshly animal instinct". Do dogs sin because they have "fleshly animal instinct"?

 

[Jamdoc]

The option was there, and like with the examples you gave, human instinct is directed to self, and Jesus acknowledged it but did not act on it. He first asked if God's will would allow the option but He was open to accepting whatever God's will was. Man as a rule doesn't wait for God's answer but bails of our own accord to fulfil self interest.

Right but in the sermon on the Mount, Jesus was elevating the standard at which we are held accountable to our own thoughts, even if we don't act on them.
So the thought to disobey and not go to the cross was there, I am wondering how this is different then. We know Jesus did not sin, but Gethsemane was .. close if we extend the standards to which we're held accountable for our thoughts even if we don't act out on them.
I suppose there is a distinction, where we know temptation itself is not sin, and that would be having thoughts of doing a sin and then rejecting them... and now I wonder.. when we come to the "looking on a woman in lust = adultery" thing.. where's the boundary between simply being tempted, and when does it become sin?
I mean me, I have a quick temper, so I never feel like I go a day without sinning because of the equation of being angry with someone being the same as murdering them according to Jesus. I forgive quickly and I don't harbor grudges, but I do snap to anger very quickly. It's like impulse, I can't even consciously stop it. It's just, instant anger and then the restraint to deescalate that, but it's already too late, I already got angry with them, and probably thought about something bad happening to them in the blink of an eye before I even realized it.

It's one of the reasons I think it's impossible for me to just "stop sinning" because these impulses are so fast I can't even stop them, and the standard we're held accountable for makes it condemnable.

 

[timothyu]

Do dogs sin because they have "fleshly animal instinct"?

They do but unlike only us they have no concept of it. No one told them.

 

[timothyu]

Right but in the sermon on the Mount, Jesus was elevating the standard at which we are held accountable to our own thoughts, even if we don't act on them.

I am saying once we think it we have done it simply means thinking it shows we have the capability thus the will to do so whether we carry through or not. Jesus was explaining our dual nature, flesh instinct and will of God.

 

[bbbbbbb]

They do but unlike only us they have no concept of it. No one told them.

Does sin exist apart from faith?

Romans 14:23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.

 

[timothyu]

Does sin exist apart from faith?

He was referring to humans