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)

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 69 by Monta]

That doesn't answer the question posed. You were asked:

Which is better?

a) No freewill for 80-90 years.

Or

b) Suffer for all eternity in Hell.

Telling us that having freewill plus going to heaven is better than either of the above, does not tell us whether you think a) is better than b) or not.

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 66 by OnceConvinced]


"nope, no complaint was made at all. Simply a question. Wouldn't it be better to have no freewill for 80-90 years than suffer for all eternity in Hell?"

Would it be better without free will?
Certainly not:

REASON is the capacity for consciously making sense of things, applying logic, establishing and verifying facts, and changing or justifying practices, institutions, and beliefs based on new or existing information.

If one has their freewill manipulated so they can never do evil, one can still have all those things.

But seriously what are those things worth if billions of people are sent to Hell for all eternity for simply rejecting Jesus?

I have no plans for hell.

Nobody has plans for hell, but many are going to end up there aren't they? And I bet many who believe they aren't going there will end up there. Even you yourself really have no guarantees you won't end up there.

I am not going to commit murder, steal, sexualy abuse girls and boys.

Same with millions of humans that are doomed to Hell. I have no desire to do those things, but apparently I'm doomed to Hell simply for not believing in Jesus.

I forgive others and myself and I believe God forgives me.

the more concerning thing is the rejection of Jesus isn't it? All those things can be forgiven, but not rejection of Jesus.

You are thinking only of yourself here. What about all those billions of other human beings who are going to burn in Hell all because they rejected Jesus? Some of those humans may be your loved ones.

Wouldn't you rather your children have no free will for 80-90 years than to risk them rejecting Jesus Christ?

I wonder whether people want it both ways - do anything they want even though it may be hurtful to others, at the same time look for some insurance just in case God exists and they don't want eternity in hell?

I myself have no desire to do evil, but apparently because I no longer believe in Jesus Christ, I'm doomed to Hell.

If freewill is going to cause millions to end up suffering in Hell for all eternity, how can it be a good thing?

Surely it's about more than just you and I, Monta? I myself am thinking of the billions of people who will end up suffering in Hell for all eternity. I'm not just thinking about what's preferable for me.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 71 by OnceConvinced]


"the more concerning thing is the rejection of Jesus isn't it? All those things can be forgiven, but not rejection of Jesus. "

To reject Jesus is to reject everything He said:
I am the Way the Truth and the Life'

From sermon on the mount to loving the neighbor, forgiveness, compassion...what parts aren't worthy our consideration? Wouldn't you say there's 'life' in these his words?

[Left Site]

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)

What I find the problem often is with this subject is mostly a matter of differing perspectives. Not that the different ideas are always wrong but that what is said applies to a different aspect of the subject compared to the aspect the person they are replying to is addressing.

At it's simplest, free will is the ability to make free choices. And qualities such as love would be impossible for us except that we have the freedom to choose to do what we believe is in the best interest of others for their up-building or betterment.

When we are coerced or antagonized by sins weight upon us that does tend to cramp our ability to make free choices but, on the other hand, having the ability to make free choices also gives us a means to free ourselves from sin's grip when we finally come to see the impropriety of what we have been doing. We can be grateful for that.

Coming up an out of the bad caused when we abused our free will choices and ended up doing hurtful things, once we are up and out and free of those undesirable consequences we will be better motivated never to make the same mistake again.

Indeed, but for our capacity of free will we would be disposable the first time we malfunctioned, like a through away piece of machinery that was too troubled to fix.

[ttruscott]

Wouldn't you rather your children have no free will for 80-90 years than to risk them rejecting Jesus Christ?

I don't think this situation can ever happen. Sure, no free will means no rejection of Christ but it also means no acceptance either...no faith, no trust, therefore no heavenly communion. Sooner or later the person must choose to accept GOD and HIS plan for them whether it is pre-earthly life, during earthly life or after earthly death.

How does 100 years of not being able to choose suddenly make it ok to force someone to enter the heavenly state? If it was not ok to force anyone earlier, what is there about doing it after they die that makes it ok?

I decided that without our free will then we could not be guilty of anything nor could GOD be loving since if we were not the source of evil then HE had to be as so many claim, but which I had to reject.

I decided I should accept hell IF we become evil by our own free will and not by our creation as sinners in Adam and IF I could find a methodology by which GOD would not save them from their sin. I found it and I'm happy with it, that is, yes, free will and a true heaven is worth the price paid by those who rejected Him and heaven.

I also decided that the phrase "many are called but few find it" refers only to sinners on earth, not to everyone who chose. I think those who chose heaven vastly outnumber those who didn't who in turn outnumber those elect who chose to follow them into sin. I'm also very close to deciding that the non-elect have recycled lives as so many non-Christian people, Hindus, Tibetan Buddhism (the Bardo Thodol), Spiritualists etc, claim in their explanation of life, death and reincarnation. This would greatly skew the number of those who are non-elect because if they are reincarnated the billions we see to have lived might be far far less and only seem more since they have been counted as separate people many times.

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 71 by OnceConvinced]


"the more concerning thing is the rejection of Jesus isn't it? All those things can be forgiven, but not rejection of Jesus. "

To reject Jesus is to reject everything He said:
I am the Way the Truth and the Life'

From sermon on the mount to loving the neighbor, forgiveness, compassion...what parts aren't worthy our consideration? Wouldn't you say there's 'life' in these his words?

Indeed, so wouldn't it not be better to forgo freewill for 80-90 years so as to avoid rejection of him? I would gladly have God control my freewill if it means avoiding Hell.

[OnceConvinced]

Indeed, but for our capacity of free will we would be disposable the first time we malfunctioned, like a through away piece of machinery that was too troubled to fix.

But wouldn't it be better to have no freewill than risk burning in Hell for all eternity?

[OnceConvinced]

Wouldn't you rather your children have no free will for 80-90 years than to risk them rejecting Jesus Christ?

I don't think this situation can ever happen. Sure, no free will means no rejection of Christ but it also means no acceptance either...no faith, no trust, therefore no heavenly communion.

I disagree with this. I don't see how you can logically conclude that. But I have already explained why I disagreed with this earlier.

Sooner or later the person must choose to accept GOD and HIS plan for them whether it is pre-earthly life, during earthly life or after earthly death.

I just can't see how this would be a problem if the only thing we were prevented from doing was evil.

But regardless, I would have no problem being a robot who automatically chose to accept God and his plan. It would be a much better option than suffering in Hell for all eternity.

How does 100 years of not being able to choose suddenly make it ok to force someone to enter the heavenly state?

Better than being forced into Hell

If it was not ok to force anyone earlier,

I don't have a problem with being forced into something if it can avoid a way worse scenario, eg Hell.

what is there about doing it after they die that makes it ok?

It makes no difference. Just better to be in Heaven than in Hell.

If it's ok for God to force us into Hell it's ok to force us into a heavenly state.

I decided that without our free will then we could not be guilty of anything

How wonderful would that be?

nor could GOD be loving since if we were not the source of evil then HE had to be as so many claim, but which I had to reject.

It would be even less loving if God through us into Hell where we have to suffer for all eternity.

I decided I should accept hell

I would never accept hell as an option. I would be willing to give up my freewill to avoid it.

IF we become evil by our own free will and not by our creation as sinners in Adam and IF I could find a methodology by which GOD would not save them from their sin. I found it and I'm happy with it, that is, yes, free will and a true heaven is worth the price paid by those who rejected Him and heaven.

You may be happy with it but what about all those who will suffer for all eternity?

I also decided that the phrase "many are called but few find it" refers only to sinners on earth, not to everyone who chose. I think those who chose heaven vastly outnumber those who didn't

I choose Heaven.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 77 by OnceConvinced]



"Better than being forced into Hell"

I don't recallect it said that anyone is forced into hell - or heaven.

[Bust Nak]

"Better than being forced into Hell"

I don't recallect it said that anyone is forced into hell - or heaven.

Oh? According to Christianity, if my name is not found in the "book of life," do I have the option to choose to go elsewhere other than hell, on "Judgement day?"