Freewill vs. Hell

[anontheist]

Freewill verses Hell,

I think this point is very interesting. If you have a Biblical perspective what do you think of this?

Consider this question for the moment, what is of more value, having freewill or the majority of humanity going to hell?

If it is having free will, then it seems that the majority of humanity will be going to hell. So, why is freewill important?

But what if all of humanity did not have a choice and were robotic servants of God? Because there would be no such thing as sin, we (all of humanity) would spend eternity in heaven, right?

Is it not true that sin is a product of freewill?

So, what is of more value and why?

Would it be of more value that all of humanity, every man, woman and child throughout history and all cultures should go to heaven for eternity?

Or...

Would it be of more value that most of humanity would be going to hell to suffer forever?

It seems reasonable and obvious to suggest that it is of more value that all of humanity spends eternity in heaven rather then most of humanity going to hell and suffering for an eternity.

If it is suggested that God wanted us to "freely" love him, then one can ask; why is that the case? Does God need us to love him? I would think that many believers would say no. But if God does not need us to love him, then whether we love him freely or not should not matter to God, since he does not need our love to begin with.

If God does not need our love, then whether I have freewill or not should not matter to God.

So, either God needs us to love him freely, which would mean God has a need. Therefore God is not perfect. (The assumption being; perfect beings do not have needs.)

Or…

God does not need us to love him freely, but has chosen to allow most of humanity to go to hell, which again, would suggest a lack of moral perfection.

So, which is it?

anon

[ST88]

This topic has been moved to the Philosophy subforum.

[stevencarrwork]

God is quite capable of creating beings with free will that he infallibly knows will never commit evil.

According to Christians, he has already done so, and they are with him in Heaven.

So why create beings with free will that you know will commit evil?

Where does the Bible say that God wants us to love him freely? I can't find that bit.

He has *commanded* us to love him. It is the greatest commandment.

[anontheist]

stevencarrwork,

Thank you for your comments, but I must admit, I am a bit confused by some of your comments.

God is quite capable of creating beings with free will that he infallibly knows will never commit evil.

I am not sure I know what your point is here. The issue is not whether God knows someone will commit evil or not, the issue is, why (if God exists) does he allow freewill, knowing that most humans will do evil and end up in hell?

According to Christians, he has already done so, and they are with him in Heaven.

What is it that you think God has done; allowed people in heaven? Why not have all of humanity go to heaven?

So why create beings with free will that you know will commit evil?

Correct! That is the question. So, what is your answer?

Where does the Bible say that God wants us to love him freely? I can't find that bit.

If you believe the Bible, you are correct, it does not say we are to love Him freely it is a command. But one can ask the question, why does God command us to love him? Does he need our love? If not, what is the point of loving God?

He has *commanded* us to love him. It is the greatest commandment.

Why is it the greatest command? Why does the command exist in the first place?

As an aside let me clarify this issue with a question; why does God command us to love him?

If it is for our good, what good do we get from loving God? Loving God does not lead to salvation. It is only accepting Jesus as our Lord and savior that leads to salvation. So, what is the point of loving God?

To make the point more clear; Jews, Muslims, Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses all claim to love God, but most conservative fundamental or evangelical Christians would suggest they are not saved. So love, as such, is of little value.

So God must need us to love him. But why would God need our love? God is perfect and being perfect would suggest that God would not have a need. A need would suggest a lack of something and lacking something would suggest something less then perfect.

So, if God needs us to love him, then He is not perfect.

If God wants us to love Him for our sake, what is the point for us?

anon

[anontheist]

I thought that it was interesting that some Christians (on other boards) have suggested that we do not have freewill. That in fact freewill is an illusion. As supporting text from the New Testament, some have used the following references:

Rom. 9:6-26; Ephesians 1:4-5; Acts 17:26;

I believe this is John Calvin’s doctrine of predestination. Of course if this is the case, then the problem is; why did God not choose all humans to be with him in heaven?

Some would suggest that God’s actions to condemn those that do not accept his gift is justified. But how is this justified if we are not acting out of freewill?

I tend to think that this idea supports my point. If we are doing what we are programmed to do (because of our ”sin” nature), then why not reprogram us (all humans) without this nature? Or, why not program us with no sin nature to begin with?

Some have suggested that we cannot come to God unless God first comes to us. But why would God put Himself in a position to have to make a choice? Why not simply do away with the whole process and create all in such a way that we all simply go to heaven?

Here is a quote from another board:

Because if there were no condemned than there would be no way for him to show his mercy by Jesus' sacrifice. He also shows his wrath through condemnation.

So, here it is suggest that God needs to show his mercy. Of course the obvious question is, why does God need to show his mercy?

And why would God need to show His ”wrath”? Considering that we are simply doing what we were made to do by God, according to Romans? Does this make sense?

There is also something backwards about the above quote. It is as if Jesus’ sacrifice was of more value then simply having all of humanity go to heaven.

Jesus’ sacrifice would not have been necessary if we did not have freewill. And according to Calvin, we don’t. Yet what is being suggested is:

1. We either have freewill or we don’t.

2. If we do not have freewill, then God could create us in such a way that we do what God wants. All of humanity would go to heaven.

3. If we do have freewill, most of humanity will go to hell.

4. If most of humanity will go to hell, then most of humanity will suffer for eternity.

5. Either most of humanity will suffer for eternity or all of humanity could go to heaven.

6. If humanity did not have freewill, all of humanity could go to heaven.

7. Calvin’s predestination doctrine suggests we do not have freewill.

8. Most of humanity is going to hell.

So, how is this just?

The Problem of Evil also becomes an issue here as well. But that is for another post.

anon

[Bonnie]

Some would suggest that God’s actions to condemn those that do not accept his gift is justified. But how is this justified if we are not acting out of freewill?

Perhaps this means that people have free will, but lose it when they accept God's "gift." Maybe this means that the only free will people have is to either accept or not accept God. Maybe there is some truth to that...

I tend to think that this idea supports my point. If we are doing what we are programmed to do (because of our ”sin” nature), then why not reprogram us (all humans) without this nature? Or, why not program us with no sin nature to begin with?

Darn Eve had to ruin everything.

But then again... Doesn't the whole Adam and Eve thing point to the free will side of the argument? After all she FREELY ate the forbidden fruit...

8. Most of humanity is going to hell.

I wouldn't lose any sleep over it...

So, how is this just?

Well, it's not, is it? That would be why I highly doubt the truth to any of this.

A big invisible guy in the sky decides who he likes (who therefore get into heaven) and dislikes (who suffer merciless torture for eternity) based on if they like him or not... even if they had no way of knowing about him? Sorry if I express a little bit of doubt...

[samuelbb7]

First not all Christians belive those who by their freewill choose to follow evil will suffer for all eternity. They will in mine and many others opinion die and cease to exist.

Second angels have sinned so they do have freewill also which is where Satan and the fallen angels came from. So you would have to think more of ants or animals to get those without freewill.

Third is by your freewill you choose to die for loving sin and because you are opposed to GOD. Is that your fault or GOD'S?

[The Happy Humanist]

Third is by your freewill you choose to die for loving sin and because you are opposed to GOD. Is that your fault or GOD'S?

God's. He created people with the capacity for sin, knowing they would use it. As the original post suggests, he could have created us all in heaven in the first place, making everyone happy - He gets his love and worship, we get heaven. No need for evil or sin. No need for hell - or non-existence, or separation from God, or whatever your particular flavor of Christianity espouses. Unless, as you say, some jackass goes and blows it all by sinning in heaven. Me, I wouldn't risk it. I think most people in that scenario would opt to stay in heaven...vs. the current scenario where most people go to hell - such a waste.

If God couldn't figure that one out, he's hardly worthy of worship.

[harvey1]

God's. He created people with the capacity for sin, knowing they would use it. As the original post suggests, he could have created us all in heaven in the first place, making everyone happy - He gets his love and worship, we get heaven.

I put in italics the key phrase, "he could have...." Please note, a time-traveller could go back into history and prevent the invention of the time-machine that allowed them to travel into the past, but doing so would prevent them from having the time machine to go back into the past and stop the event!

"Could have's" should be re-worded into "wouldn't it be nice if a time-traveller could go back and stop the time machine from being invented and saved the world from all the trouble of people going into the past and screwing up the future...." If you said that, then I would agree, it would indeed be nice. Absurd, but "nice."

[anontheist]

I am not trying to prove God does not exist, though I do not think any such concept exists in reality that is not my point. It is just to consider the problem of freewill, given the belief in a God.

Either we were created with freewill or we were not.

If we were created with freewill, most of humanity will go to hell.

If we were not created with freewill (as some Christian have suggested), then God simply chooses some to go to heaven.

In either case one can ask, if we have freewill, what is the point of it? Since most of humanity will suffer for having it. And if we do not have it, why not create us in such a way that all of us can go to heaven?

If God exists and if God, by definition, is good, then if God is not good he does not exist, by definition or he is not just and therefore not good and therefore not God. I think.

Here is the problem as I see it. God could have created Adam and Eve and therefore all of humanity in such a way that we simply would choose and desire to do what God asks or commands us to do without much effort. We would not know any difference. We would simply be doing what God expects of us, out of what we would think is, our ”freewill”. But he didn’t. So, then the question is, why not?

Some have suggested that God wanted us to ”love” him freely. But again, the question is why? Does God need us to love him? But to suggest that God ”needs” something is to suggest that God lacks in something. If that is the case, then can we say God is perfect. Since, to be perfect would suggest that God lacks nothing. Otherwise, we cannot call God perfect. And why would a perfect being need our love, freely or otherwise?

anon