Wouldn't it be better not to have freewil?

[OnceConvinced]

Theists tend to defend freewill as something that is just so important that it would be somehow a terrible thing if we did not have it.

However freewill for many people will result in them rejecting God and ending up in Hell, which many Christians believe will be eternal suffering.

I'm struggling to see how freewill is a good thing if it results in us going to Hell and perhaps suffering for all eternity.

I am reminded of a verse in the bible where Jesus says " For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?" Mark 8:36

It's saying that riches... and continually seeking riches is not a good thing if it results in you losing your soul... ie going to Hell. It's saying that if something is going to cause us to lose our soul then we should avoid it.

Shouldn't the same thing be said about freewill? Should there not also be a scripture that says "For what shall it profit a man to have freewill and lose his own soul?"

So question for debate:

Would it be better to live on earth with Freewill and suffer for all eternity for rejecting Christ or would it be better to give up your freewill so that you can avoid eternal suffering?

Is freewill really such a necessity for a happy life?

Wouldn't life be better if nobody had freewill so nobody could ever do evil? (Like in Heaven)

[ttruscott]

I don't understand - free will means you choose without being forced,...how can HE give us a free will without any danger of sin?

I suggested a number of ways every time you asked me:
1) Do not programme us the desire to sin - so we lack the desire to sin.

You are still programmed and so have no free will! That is the point of my question - you have no answer but to deny free will. You have accepted before that no free will means no love and marriage that we respect and then decided that that was better than a life with free will, suffering and death.

2) Failing that, give us the intelligence and wisdom so we can work it out for ourselves that it is not a good idea to sin.

Agreed! In place!! This is the point of our being painfully disciplined as training in righteousness, Heb 12:5-11 but which is only available to those who accepted HIM as their saviour from sin so it is not available to those who rejected any and all help from HIM to deal with their sin which they reject as real.

3) Failing that, remove the opportunity for us to sin.

Ah well, as you have seen here, there is no truth that cannot be argued against nor desecrated...no matter the truth any believe, someone can deny and denigrate it. This is the nature of sin. To end this the person must quit thinking and choosing...ie, die.

4) Failing that, programme us the desire to not sin, without limiting our free will for non-sinful stuff.

Then the person chooses the right thing to do because they must, not because they want to whether it is to love or to marry. This is no better than a meat robot for important things only, but not for inconsequentials.

Or if you still insist as you did before, that none of the above is possible, then there is always the option of not creating any free will beings at all and go without his wedding, given his emphasis on free will, a decision to create freewill beings that results in many said beings going to hell, isn't his choice to make.

Bin there. Changed my mind...

Only by limiting our free will can HE limit sin. The angels do not sin because they WILL not, not because of anything GOD does or how HE created them.

Then you need to explain why some choose one thing while others choose something else, given that we were supposed to be created equal. Where did our desire to sin come from, if it is not part of our created nature?

I think our baby-hoods mimic our pce life so we can think of them as hints of our development....we slowly grow in understanding what and who we like and dislike. I can know the sun is a giant ball of flame without knowing how that flame is produced in space with no oxygen. In other words, your rejection hangs on one tittle of ignorance of deep childhood psychology I'm not sure even Freud or Piaget came clear on.

Having said all that, the underlying point is still this: even if I cannot come up with a way of achieving freewill beings that will not sin - God can, because he is omnipotent and can do anything that is not a logical contradiction, and angels are not logical contradictions, given they exist.

A free will that cannot choose evil is a logical contradiction... Cannot because they will never, is not.

What I said here should be familiar to you, I keep pushing you with this same old challenge, and eventually you will get bored because it is old ground. Granted, it is old ground, I keep coming back to this because I have not got a satisfying answer to my challenge.

May I suggest you are not satisfied because the answer is not to your taste, not because it is not an answer.

[Bust Nak]

1) Do not programme us the desire to sin - so we lack the desire to sin.

You are still programmed and so have no free will...

I think you might have misread my suggestion. I said do not programme us.

2) Failing that, give us the intelligence and wisdom so we can work it out for ourselves that it is not a good idea to sin.

Agreed! In place!! This is the point of our being painfully disciplined as training in righteousness, Heb 12:5-11. so it is not available to those who rejected any and all help from HIM to deal with their sin which they reject as real.

I am talking about pre-Earth. There would be no need for any training if people were smart enough to not sin in the first place, correct? What good is intelligence and wisdom after creation is corrupted with sin and many people are destined for hell?

3) Failing that, remove the opportunity for us to sin.

Ah well, as you have seen here, there is no truth that cannot be argued against nor desecrated...no matter the truth any believe, someone can deny and denigrate it. This is the nature of sin. To end this the person must quit thinking and choosing...ie, die.

That does not address my point at all. Why is it that God could not create a scenario that have no opportunities to sin, without programming us to obey him? You are just going hand wave that away as me being in denial of obvious truths?

4) Failing that, programme us the desire to not sin, without limiting our free will for non-sinful stuff.

Then the person chooses the right thing to do because they must, not because they want to whether it is to love or to marry. This is no better than a meat robot for important things only, but not for inconsequentials.

Then it is better than a meat robot, because I can still choose which inconsequential like football team to support (or the heavenly equivalent.) Besides, one of the consequential in question here, is an eternity in hell, I would the alternative is definitely better.

Or if you still insist as you did before, that none of the above is possible, then there is always the option of not creating any free will beings at all and go without his wedding, given his emphasis on free will, a decision to create freewill beings that results in many said beings going to hell, isn't his choice to make.

Bin there. Changed my mind...

Changed your mind in what sense? What is it acceptable for God to put into motion something that results in many beings in hell, just because he wants some brides?

Then you need to explain why some choose one thing while others choose something else, given that we were supposed to be created equal. Where did our desire to sin come from, if it is not part of our created nature?

I think our baby-hoods mimic our pce life so we can think of them as hints of our development....we slowly grow in understanding what and who we like and dislike.

"Understanding what and who we like and dislike" that's exactly what I would refer to as it being part of our nature. Our nature isn't chosen by us, is it?

Besides, didn't you suggest that our Earthly self do not have free will and are bounded by our nature? Do you still think that is true? If so then how can our babyhood possibly reflect anything of our pre creation self in terms of free will?

I can know the sun is a giant ball of flame without knowing how that flame is produced in space with no oxygen. In other words, your rejection hangs on one tittle of ignorance of deep childhood psychology I'm not sure even Freud or Piaget came clear on.

Don't know what you are getting at here. What deep childhood psychology are you referring to that could tell us anything about the origin of our pre-Earth nature.

Having said all that, the underlying point is still this: even if I cannot come up with a way of achieving freewill beings that will not sin - God can, because he is omnipotent and can do anything that is not a logical contradiction, and angels are not logical contradictions, given they exist.

A free will that cannot choose evil is a logical contradiction... Cannot because they will never, is not.

Well there you go, an affirmation of one of my premise: A free will that can choose evil but will never is not a logical contradiction (unless I am misreading you.) My contention still holds, logical contradictions is not covered by omnipotence, everything else is not beyond God's power.

May I suggest you are not satisfied because the answer is not to your taste, not because it is not an answer.

Granted, and may I suggest that the answers you gave are not to my taste because they do not address my challenge.

[OnceConvinced]

You have accepted before that no free will means no love and marriage that we respect and then decided that that was better than a life with free will, suffering and death.

Would it not be better to forgo all that stuff to avoid Hell? It's only 80-90 years. Not even a blink in the eye of all eternity. Why would it be a problem for anyone? Gotta be better than going to Hell, right?

3) Failing that, remove the opportunity for us to sin.

Ah well, as you have seen here, there is no truth that cannot be argued against nor desecrated...

Speaking for myself I have never seen any truth desecrated on this website. I've seen a lot of claims being challenged and argued against, but nothing that I can see is necessarily truth.

Then the person chooses the right thing to do because they must, not because they want to whether it is to love or to marry. This is no better than a meat robot for important things only, but not for inconsequentials.

Wouldn't' you rather be a meat robot for 80-90 years than burn in Hell? Wouldn't it be worth being a meat robot for 80-90 years to guarantee yourself a place in Heaven?

A free will that cannot choose evil is a logical contradiction... Cannot because they will never, is not.

Why would you even want the option to choose evil? Is that what you yourself desire to have? An option to choose evil if you wish? I'd be happy to forgo that option if it means I can avoid Hell and get a free pass to Heaven.

Why value freewill if it means one can choose to do evil? I wish guys like Hitler and Joseph Stalin had no freewill. Imagine how better off the world would be if they were unable to chose to do evil? Imagine how wonderful this world would be if nobody could ever choose to do evil. It would be like Heaven!

[ttruscott]

2) Failing that, give us the intelligence and wisdom so we can work it out for ourselves that it is not a good idea to sin.
...
I am talking about pre-Earth. There would be no need for any training if people were smart enough to not sin in the first place, correct? What good is intelligence and wisdom after creation is corrupted with sin and many people are destined for hell?

Ok... I contend that a perfect creation is smart enough with enough wisdom to avoid sin. No one sinned because of any deficiency at all.

All had a equal ability and opportunity to choose by their free will to accept YHWH's claims or to reject them. I think that it was wise that so many rejected the rebellion and so few went with it.

[ttruscott]

3) Failing that, remove the opportunity for us to sin.

Ah well, as you have seen here, there is no truth that cannot be argued against nor desecrated...no matter the truth any believe, someone can deny and denigrate it. This is the nature of sin. To end this the person must quit thinking and choosing...ie, die.

That does not address my point at all. Why is it that God could not create a scenario that have no opportunities to sin, without programming us to obey him? You are just going hand wave that away as me being in denial of obvious truths?[/quote] My answer was and still is that in any and every situation in any reality there is always an opportunity to sin, to go some other way that inaccord with GOD. Everything GOD sets up has two ways - HIS way or sin...The way that is not HIS way is just as REAL as the way that is HIS way. They cannot be separated any more than you can not have a left once you have designated a right. You claim I am being superficial but I contend your superficial thinking about my answer has led you astray. So all opportunities to do right contain within them the opportunity to not do it or to do the opposite. All of them!

[ttruscott]

4) Failing that, programme us the desire to not sin, without limiting our free will for non-sinful stuff.

Then the person chooses the right thing to do because they must, not because they want to whether it is to love or to marry. This is no better than a meat robot for important things only, but not for inconsequentials.

Then it is better than a meat robot, because I can still choose which inconsequential like football team to support (or the heavenly equivalent.) Besides, one of the consequential in question here, is an eternity in hell, I would the alternative is definitely better.

I know...

"Or if you still insist as you did before, that none of the above is possible, then there is always the option of not creating any free will beings at all and go without his wedding, given his emphasis on free will, a decision to create freewill beings that results in many said beings going to hell, isn't his choice to make.

Bin there. Changed my mind...

Changed your mind in what sense? What is it acceptable for God to put into motion something that results in many beings in hell, just because he wants some brides?

Want brides? The bride experience / marriage / loving communion is for us, not HIM! HIS love is fulfilled within the Trinity.

Putting the opportunity for the true love HE already shares within the Trinity to be real for billions of billions above the discomfort of the self chosen rebellious selfishness of those who would/might confound rebellion with independance is a good thing, not a bad thing.

[ttruscott]

1) Do not programme us the desire to sin - so we lack the desire to sin.

You are still programmed and so have no free will...

I think you might have misread my suggestion. I said do not programme us.

Which I suggested was impossible because the meaning of free is to be NOT programmed - that is the point of my answer! Not programmed but created with no desire to sin is like a cold fire or a dry water...to be created to want or not want something is a program!

Then you need to explain why some choose one thing while others choose something else, given that we were supposed to be created equal. Where did our desire to sin come from, if it is not part of our created nature?

I think our baby-hoods mimic our pce life so we can think of them as hints of our development....we slowly grow in understanding what and who we like and dislike.

"Understanding what and who we like and dislike" that's exactly what I would refer to as it being part of our nature. Our nature isn't chosen by us, is it?[/quote] IF GOd can make us with desires, HE can also create us free of all desire and let us choose what we like from experience.

Besides, didn't you suggest that our Earthly self do not have free will and are bounded by our nature? Do you still think that is true? If so then how can our babyhood possibly reflect anything of our pre creation self in terms of free will?

I will not argue the analogy as if it was the real thing...

[Bust Nak]

Which I suggested was impossible because the meaning of free is to be NOT programmed - that is the point of my answer! Not programmed but created with no desire to sin is like a cold fire or a dry water...to be created to want or not want something is a program!

Right, that's why I said not programmed. You do see the NOT in that statement, right?

Ok... I contend that a perfect creation is smart enough with enough wisdom to avoid sin. No one sinned because of any deficiency at all.

Well there you go. Therefore God is either not omnipotent or he doesn't exist at all.

All had a equal ability and opportunity to choose by their free will to accept YHWH's claims or to reject them. I think that it was wise that so many rejected the rebellion and so few went with it.

That logically cannot happen given that a perfect creation is smart enough with enough wisdom to avoid sin.

My answer was and still is that in any and every situation in any reality there is always an opportunity to sin, to go some other way that inaccord with GOD. Everything GOD sets up has two ways - HIS way or sin...

Big mistake, God should have set it up so there is only one way. From this we can logically conclude that God is either not omnipotent or he doesn't exist at all.

Want brides? The bride experience / marriage / loving communion is for us, not HIM! HIS love is fulfilled within the Trinity.

So he set something in motion that results in most of his creation ending up in hell, for something that he didn't even want. Does that sound like omnipotence to you?

Putting the opportunity for the true love HE already shares within the Trinity to be real for billions of billions above the discomfort of the self chosen rebellious selfishness of those who would/might confound rebellion with independance is a good thing, not a bad thing.

Listen to yourself - you are saying that the billions of billions of souls suffering in hell, is a worth price for the joy of the billions of billions of souls in heaven. That sounded very much like a "forget you, I've got mine."

IF GOd can make us with desires, HE can also create us free of all desire and let us choose what we like from experience.

That's the point - choose what we like from experience implies out nature is the result of our surroundings, God could control our surroundings without messing with our freewill one bit. That's one way for God to make 100% sure that no one would rebel without limiting our freewill. God failed to do this, therefore we can conclude that God is either not omnipotent, or non existent.

I will not argue the analogy as if it was the real thing...

Then don't. I was not asking you to argue the analogy as if it was the real thing. I was asking you what we can learn from babies that could possibly help understand pre-creation given that you said we don't have freewill on Earth.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 47 by Bust Nak]


"That's the point - choose what we like from experience implies out nature is the result of our surroundings, God could control our surroundings without messing with our freewill one bit. That's one way for God to make 100% sure that no one would rebel without limiting our freewill. God failed to do this, therefore we can conclude that God is either not omnipotent, or non existent. "

Isn't that how things are?
God controls our surrounding we have babies born every minute who become boys and girls. From these surroundings men use them for sexual pleasure.

Should God change the environment and stop procreation because some have animal urges and can't control themselves?

Some might prefer being rabbits to humans, they don't have freewill

Actually that's brilliant thought; why create humans, more goates and apple trees and monkeys...

[Bust Nak]

That's the point - choose what we like from experience implies out nature is the result of our surroundings, God could control our surroundings without messing with our freewill one bit. That's one way for God to make 100% sure that no one would rebel without limiting our freewill. God failed to do this, therefore we can conclude that God is either not omnipotent, or non existent. "

Isn't that how things are?
God controls our surrounding we have babies born every minute who become boys and girls. From these surroundings men use them for sexual pleasure.

No where near controlled enough, there is far too many opportunities to sin.

Should God change the environment and stop procreation because some have animal urges and can't control themselves?

YES!!! And change everything else that are opportunities to sin.

Some might prefer being rabbits to humans, they don't have freewill

Actually that's brilliant thought; why create humans, more goates and apple trees and monkeys...

Good to see someone gets what I am saying: A world without human is a world without sin.