Will we sin when we get to heaven?

[Nihilist Virus]

Perhaps you might want to explain what you mean by limited. If one is the origin of Logic and Logic is God's thinking, how is that limited?

Being limited by logic means being bound by the rules of logic. As I recall, you said this is the case with God.

God is logic, His thinking is logic. How is God as the origin of logic limited by it? He thinks according to His logical thought.

So... God thinks according to his logical thought. Can his thoughts be illogical? Your position appears to be no. Therefore his thoughts are limited by logic.

Explain how omniscient thought is not cohesive with origins of mathematics and logic.

I already did. Gödel proved that any non-trivial self-consistent logical system must contain propositions which are true or false but cannot be shown to be either, and consequently cannot be known to be true or false either.

 

[civilwarbuff]

I see you've stopped trying. Or is this your way of conceding that there is no historical consensus on this issue?

He still can't understand that when you discuss theological subjects you cite theiological writing to substantiate your statements. Seems to be an atheist trait as most of them take the same shallow approach.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Okay, maybe our disagreement is over the word "sinless". We've had disagreements over definitions before, but I'm just going to give this one to you because it is a theological term and that's your purview.

Now I'm not saying that God could make us eternal, like Him, as that would be impossible. Being created means you have a beginning, so we can't be eternal like God, that's fine. And we don't need to be omnipotent either. Clearly, our free will can be limited by our own physical capacities, and we don't need to be able to do everything in order to be able to never do evil. Omniscience is a bit tricky, as we need to know a good deal to make sure our actions aren't evil, but we don't need to know everything.

So, what it comes down to, is to give us just one part of God's nature, and that is to never have a desire to do evil, and to only ever have a desire to do good, just like God. Our temporal status has nothing to do with our desires. The fact that we have a beginning doesn't affect our desire to do one thing over another. So I won't use the word "sinless" as that obviously has some other meaning attached to it that I don't intend. I'll just say that God could make us so that when we are created we have never done evil, and we have no desire to do evil, just like Him. We don't need all of His other features to do that, just that one.

The fact that we can't be God is so apparent and clear that to me this seems strange to point to one aspect of God and ask why can't we be like Him in that one thing. We can't be "like" Him in any one thing. Perhaps the definition of sin is not nearly as important as the definition of God. It seems to me that by not understanding how Supreme a Supreme Being is, makes the distinction of we compared to Him a matter of arrogance and incomprehension not to mention absurd. When looking at the universe and it applicability and our minimal understanding of just it itself should give us some indication of our lack in comparison with Him. HE created the universe. Do you really think that God could create something of equal Supremacy of even one aspect of His Godness? To ask why not make us God like in even one aspect of Godness shows a deep lack of understanding of what God actually is.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Being limited by logic means being bound by the rules of logic. As I recall, you said this is the case with God.

You continue to recite the same words with no meaning. What do you mean by limited by logic or by the rules of logic. Explain your position please.

So... God thinks according to his logical thought. Can his thoughts be illogical? Your position appears to be no. Therefore his thoughts are limited by logic.

You seem to be claiming that logic is in the drivers seat here. Please explain. God is logic, logic is not God. So explain how logic can limit thinking or limit a Supreme Being?

I already did. Gödel proved that any non-trivial self-consistent logical system must contain propositions which are true or false but cannot be shown to be either, and consequently cannot be known to be true or false either.

Demonstrate how God would not know if something is true or false?

 

[Chriliman]

What would be the difference?

If God has free will to do as He pleases and it pleases Him to suffer immensely in order to create a physical reality that is free from pain and suffering where all the inhabitants are as happy as possible forever, where's the problem?

 

[Moral Orel]

Do you really think that God could create something of equal Supremacy of even one aspect of His Godness?

Yes. He's omnipotent. And since people stop doing evil forever and ever once their in Heaven, such a thing clearly exists.

Consider this, a baby dies, never having chosen to do evil. Goes to Heaven, and never chooses to do evil. Therefore God can, and does, create things that have never done, nor ever do choose to do evil. So tell me again how absurd and arrogant I am.

 

[BigDaddy4]

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’"


There will be people who think they're going to Heaven, yet won't get in. So I don't know how you think you know you're getting in... worked out a side deal with Christ?

No side deal, just the Real Deal. See John 3:16, Romans 10:9-13, and a host of other Scripture. Notice the Scripture you posted... "but he who does the will of My Father in heaven." That should clue you in.

 

[Chriliman]

Yes. He's omnipotent. And since people stop doing evil forever and ever once their in Heaven, such a thing clearly exists.

Consider this, a baby dies, never having chosen to do evil. Goes to Heaven, and never chooses to do evil. Therefore God can, and does, create things that have never done, nor ever do choose to do evil. So tell me again how absurd and arrogant I am.

Makes sense, but how do we get around being born into sin, basically being born evil? Or maybe you believe babies are born pure and become evil when they commit a first sin?

 

[Chriliman]

Yes. He's omnipotent. And since people stop doing evil forever and ever once their in Heaven, such a thing clearly exists.

Consider this, a baby dies, never having chosen to do evil. Goes to Heaven, and never chooses to do evil. Therefore God can, and does, create things that have never done, nor ever do choose to do evil. So tell me again how absurd and arrogant I am.

Actually after thinking about what you said a little more I've realized that a baby cannot die if it has not sinned because the punishment for sin is death, therefore all babies are born into sin and are inherently evil, otherwise they would never die, but clearly they all do at some point.

Edit: Jesus was the only baby born into this world who actually never sinned, but still died because He was God's son and served a purpose, which was to free all who believe from the penalty of sin. For a true believer in Christ, death is a lie. For those who don't know Christ, death causes the most fear imaginable.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Yes. He's omnipotent. And since people stop doing evil forever and ever once their in Heaven, such a thing clearly exists.

Consider this, a baby dies, never having chosen to do evil. Goes to Heaven, and never chooses to do evil. Therefore God can, and does, create things that have never done, nor ever do choose to do evil. So tell me again how absurd and arrogant I am.

A baby is still a created being and as such while not ever doing evil or having chosen to do evil they are not sinless, they just haven't sinned. You are arguing for a sinlessness of nature which is not what you are arguing for above.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Actually after thinking about what you said a little more I've realized that a baby cannot die if it has not sinned because the punishment for sin is death, therefore all babies are born into sin and are inherently evil, otherwise they would never die, but clearly they all do at some point.

Edit: Jesus was the only baby born into this world who actually never sinned, but still died because He was God's son and served a purpose, which was to free all who believe from the penalty of sin. For a true believer in Christ, death is a lie. For those who don't know Christ, death causes the most fear imaginable.

No human being is born without a sin nature and even if a baby doesn't sin or choose sin they still have that nature within them because a baby is not born perfect or sinless. Do you agree?

 

[Moral Orel]

Makes sense, but how do we get around being born into sin, basically being born evil? Or maybe you believe babies are born pure and become evil when they commit a first sin?

Well the idea is about creating us this way before "Original Sin" so none of that matters. Also note from post #138 that I am intentionally moving away from the word "sin" as I don't want any of the extra baggage that comes with it, and instead using phrases such as "choosing to do evil" which, if I am understanding correctly, is a subset of "sin".

Actually after thinking about what you said a little more I've realized that a baby cannot die if it has not sinned because the punishment for sin is death, therefore all babies are born into sin and are inherently evil, otherwise they would never die, but clearly they all do at some point.

Again, I don't want "sin" to be part of my statements at all. Stick to "choose to do evil" please.

 

[Chriliman]

No human being is born without a sin nature and even if a baby doesn't sin or choose sin they still have that nature within them because a baby is not born perfect or sinless. Do you agree?

Yes.

 

[Moral Orel]

A baby is still a created being and as such while not ever doing evil or having chosen to do evil

Right, so such a thing exists, we agree. God can create something that never has the desire to do evil.

So, if He created us in the same way before the Fall, then Original Sin never would have happened.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Well the idea is about creating us this way before "Original Sin" so none of that matters. Also note from post #138 that I am intentionally moving away from the word "sin" as I don't want any of the extra baggage that comes with it, and instead using phrases such as "choosing to do evil" which, if I am understanding correctly, is a subset of "sin".

Again, I don't want "sin" to be part of my statements at all. Stick to "choose to do evil" please.

The OP is about sin so why now do we want "sin" not to be part of thread?

 

[Chriliman]

Right, so such a thing exists, we agree. God can create something that never has the desire to do evil.

So, if He created us in the same way before the Fall, then Original Sin never would have happened.

But original beings were not created in the same way that babies are created now. God created man from the dust of the earth, babies are created when a man and a woman have sex.

The very first evil was caused by created angels that then caused the fall of man. God is actively restoring creation because He can and only He can.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Right, so such a thing exists, we agree. God can create something that never has the desire to do evil.

So, if He created us in the same way before the Fall, then Original Sin never would have happened.

No, you are ignoring the rest of the statement:
A baby is still a created being and as such while not ever doing evil or having chosen to do evil they are not sinless, they just haven't sinned. You are arguing for a sinlessness of nature which is not what you are arguing for above.

 

[Moral Orel]

No, you are ignoring the rest of the statement:
A baby is still a created being and as such while not ever doing evil or having chosen to do evil they are not sinless, they just haven't sinned. You are arguing for a sinlessness of nature which is not what you are arguing for above.

Just for clarity, where do you mean by "above"? Before or after I clarified that "sin" is too broad of a term?

The only reason that babies are not "sinless" is because the consequences of sin are passed on hereditarily. They never chose to sin, so they never sinned, as a verb.

The OP is about sin so why now do we want "sin" not to be part of thread?

Because if we had such a nature of never having any desire to choose to do evil, sin wouldn't exist. The OP uses it as a verb, but you're using it as a noun, so I am trying to draw the distinction.

 

[Moral Orel]

But original beings were not created in the same way that babies are created now. God created man from the dust of the earth, babies are created when a man and a woman have sex.

My fault, I phrased that wrong. I didn't mean create us with a different process, I meant create us to be a different thing than what Adam and Eve were. "Way" was the wrong term to use.

 

[Moral Orel]

The very first evil was caused by created angels that then caused the fall of man. God is actively restoring creation because He can and only He can.

But if we were made to never have a desire to do Evil (like God in just that respect) then any attempt fallen angels made to cause us to choose to do evil would have failed. Of course, God could have just made the angels with no desire to ever do evil (like God in that respect) and then there never would have been evil there either.