Do we lose free will in Heaven?

[Metatron]

In innumerable threads at this forum, I've been told ad nauseum that God allows all sorts of horrible things to happen in the world because of the importance he attaches to man's free will. It is argued that man must be allowed to choose evil otherwise he is effectively God's puppet with no will of his own.

However, it is also argued that sin does not exist in Heaven. Why is this? Is it because man no longer possesses free will in Heaven? Is free will no longer important to God? Would that not make the saved into willless automatons by the same logic Christians use when discussing the problem of evil?

Do we lose free will in Heaven?

[achilles12604]

If you read REAL careful, you will notice I said 600AD, not 8000 BC.

Could the people in europe travel to the america's in 600 AD?

Eh, Yes, Thats what the article and other media is saying.


BC means Before Christ, AD stands for Anno Domini, and refers to the time After the bith of Jesus Christ.

This timeline would be 6000 BC (Before Christ). Or ~10 000 years ago.

600 AD was only 1400 Years ago. Im confused by your post, did you not understand what you where yourself saying, or whats up?

Na you got it here . . .

First you where talking about that they cant go, and now you use physical impossibility as explanation, strange.

My point was that it is just as plausible, if not more so, that a person is not able to go from heaven to hell. It would be as impossible as Europeans trying to cross the Atlantic ocean in 600AD to reach the Americas or jumping 25 feet in the air 5 times in 3 seconds.

Your conclusion that we have no free will in heaven based on the inability to get to hell from heaven by a soul was not sound because there could be other variables involved and in fact the person would have the free will to try, but the inability to complete the task.

Now we are WAY off topic.

[Metatron]

I have to say that a Heaven where my wife is not my wife, my children are not my children, and my parents are not my parents doesn't sound like much of a heaven to me. If this is Heaven, maybe extinction is preferable.

All a matter of opinion. I personally think that the orgasmic feelings of being with the one who created me and loves me even more than all those people put together sounds pretty good.

Hmmm....I think your the first Christian I've encountered who has described God's love as "orgasmic"! I'm afraid that this creates a lot of inappropriate images in my head, so I think I'll leave this one alone.

Family is important. God is infinitely more.

I find it odd that God would emphasize the importance of family in life and love in general and then sever these important emotional ties in Heaven. It makes God not the god of love but only the god of loving himself. Does God give us some sort of emotional lobotomy so that we don't feel the pain of the loss of these relationships? And what of the loved ones who didn't make it to heaven? Do we feel the grief of their passing or worse, their torment?

What is the difference between a spiritual/physical body and a physical body with a spirit? Can a s/p body interact with matter or each other?

*sigh* I was afraid you would ask me this. . .

You had to know it was coming.

I view the scriptures as saying that our bodies (our new bodies) will be sinless. They will be pure, without any sort of blemish. Disease can't touch or harm them. So a physical body, in the sense of skin cells covering muscle tissues and bone is incorrect.

Perhaps I use the word physical when I should use the word real. Bodies that really exist and are able to interact, yet not be confined by things like skin. You watch star trek? They would be something akin to energy beings. The traditional view of Ghosts would be somewhat close although not quite.

I don't know how to describe what I envision in my head. I guess we shall have to wait and see huh?

If these bodies can interact, does that not potentially put many sins back on the table again? Free will + Ability to interact = potential to sin

[Greatest I Am]

I have to say that a Heaven where my wife is not my wife, my children are not my children, and my parents are not my parents doesn't sound like much of a heaven to me. If this is Heaven, maybe extinction is preferable.

All a matter of opinion. I personally think that the orgasmic feelings of being with the one who created me and loves me even more than all those people put together sounds pretty good.

Hmmm....I think your the first Christian I've encountered who has described God's love as "orgasmic"! I'm afraid that this creates a lot of inappropriate images in my head, so I think I'll leave this one alone.

Family is important. God is infinitely more.

I find it odd that God would emphasize the importance of family in life and love in general and then sever these important emotional ties in Heaven. It makes God not the god of love but only the god of loving himself. Does God give us some sort of emotional lobotomy so that we don't feel the pain of the loss of these relationships? And what of the loved ones who didn't make it to heaven? Do we feel the grief of their passing or worse, their torment?

What is the difference between a spiritual/physical body and a physical body with a spirit? Can a s/p body interact with matter or each other?

*sigh* I was afraid you would ask me this. . .

You had to know it was coming.

I view the scriptures as saying that our bodies (our new bodies) will be sinless. They will be pure, without any sort of blemish. Disease can't touch or harm them. So a physical body, in the sense of skin cells covering muscle tissues and bone is incorrect.

Perhaps I use the word physical when I should use the word real. Bodies that really exist and are able to interact, yet not be confined by things like skin. You watch star trek? They would be something akin to energy beings. The traditional view of Ghosts would be somewhat close although not quite.

I don't know how to describe what I envision in my head. I guess we shall have to wait and see huh?

If these bodies can interact, does that not potentially put many sins back on the table again? Free will + Ability to interact = potential to sin

If man had not "sinned" in the beginning then we would have no history.
Adam and Eve would be happily playing with the animals because that is what they would be, non sentient animals. No better than dogs or sheep. Not knowing good and evil.
No conception of the good or evil of even sex and if they even used sex it would be the mindless way instinct works.

We would not know that we are better than other animals. We would be merely existing with not concept of history or any other science or art.

Regards
DL

[Metatron]

If man had not "sinned" in the beginning then we would have no history.

Agreed. Life in the Garden of Eden would have been a static existence.

Adam and Eve would be happily playing with the animals because that is what they would be, non sentient animals. No better than dogs or sheep. Not knowing good and evil.
No conception of the good or evil of even sex and if they even used sex it would be the mindless way instinct works.

We would not know that we are better than other animals. We would be merely existing with not concept of history or any other science or art.

Regards
DL

The closest to this state that I've seen in literature are the Eloi from the H.G. Wells book "The Time Machine". In the story, which takes place hundreds of thousands of years in the future, the Eloi are physically perfect humans who have grown up in an Eden like environment in which all of their food, clothing, etc. needs are mysteriously provided for. They have no need to work for anything and have lost all intellectual curiosity. They are effectively human sheep. (In this case literally, since their mysterious benefactors turn out to be a monstrous variation of man called the Morlocks who occasionally "thin" the herd for sustenance!)

[sledheavy]

If man had not "sinned" in the beginning then we would have no history.

Agreed. Life in the Garden of Eden would have been a static existence.

Adam and Eve would be happily playing with the animals because that is what they would be, non sentient animals. No better than dogs or sheep. Not knowing good and evil.
No conception of the good or evil of even sex and if they even used sex it would be the mindless way instinct works.

We would not know that we are better than other animals. We would be merely existing with not concept of history or any other science or art.

Regards
DL

The closest to this state that I've seen in literature are the Eloi from the H.G. Wells book "The Time Machine". In the story, which takes place hundreds of thousands of years in the future, the Eloi are physically perfect humans who have grown up in an Eden like environment in which all of their food, clothing, etc. needs are mysteriously provided for. They have no need to work for anything and have lost all intellectual curiosity. They are effectively human sheep. (In this case literally, since their mysterious benefactors turn out to be a monstrous variation of man called the Morlocks who occasionally "thin" the herd for sustenance!)

must be a favorite book or movie of yours. I remember you mentioning it before.

[Metatron]

If man had not "sinned" in the beginning then we would have no history.

Agreed. Life in the Garden of Eden would have been a static existence.

Adam and Eve would be happily playing with the animals because that is what they would be, non sentient animals. No better than dogs or sheep. Not knowing good and evil.
No conception of the good or evil of even sex and if they even used sex it would be the mindless way instinct works.

We would not know that we are better than other animals. We would be merely existing with not concept of history or any other science or art.

Regards
DL

The closest to this state that I've seen in literature are the Eloi from the H.G. Wells book "The Time Machine". In the story, which takes place hundreds of thousands of years in the future, the Eloi are physically perfect humans who have grown up in an Eden like environment in which all of their food, clothing, etc. needs are mysteriously provided for. They have no need to work for anything and have lost all intellectual curiosity. They are effectively human sheep. (In this case literally, since their mysterious benefactors turn out to be a monstrous variation of man called the Morlocks who occasionally "thin" the herd for sustenance!)

must be a favorite book or movie of yours. I remember you mentioning it before.

It's okay but I mainly remember it in this context. Probably brought up this same point before in another discussion of the Garden of Eden story.

[Greatest I Am]

If man had not "sinned" in the beginning then we would have no history.

Agreed. Life in the Garden of Eden would have been a static existence.

Adam and Eve would be happily playing with the animals because that is what they would be, non sentient animals. No better than dogs or sheep. Not knowing good and evil.
No conception of the good or evil of even sex and if they even used sex it would be the mindless way instinct works.

We would not know that we are better than other animals. We would be merely existing with not concept of history or any other science or art.

Regards
DL

The closest to this state that I've seen in literature are the Eloi from the H.G. Wells book "The Time Machine". In the story, which takes place hundreds of thousands of years in the future, the Eloi are physically perfect humans who have grown up in an Eden like environment in which all of their food, clothing, etc. needs are mysteriously provided for. They have no need to work for anything and have lost all intellectual curiosity. They are effectively human sheep. (In this case literally, since their mysterious benefactors turn out to be a monstrous variation of man called the Morlocks who occasionally "thin" the herd for sustenance!)

You and I recognize this fact on simple logic alone. Interesting how few can see this extremely simple logic trail.

We persevere against much ignorance and stupidity.
Thank God for the few of us or God might give up on humanity altogether.

Regards
DL

[The Nice Centurion]

In innumerable threads at this forum, I've been told ad nauseum that God allows all sorts of horrible things to happen in the world because of the importance he attaches to man's free will.

I am not so sure I agree with this premise. It doesn't make sense to me. Evil happens to emphasize mans free will?

The argument that I've always been given on this forum is that man must have the option to choose evil otherwise free will is negated. If God prevents all evil from happening, man is incapable of moral choices and his will is thwarted.

However, it is also argued that sin does not exist in Heaven. Why is this? Is it because man no longer possesses free will in Heaven? Is free will no longer important to God? Would that not make the saved into willless automatons by the same logic Christians use when discussing the problem of evil?

Do we lose free will in Heaven?

I was trying to find some place that said there would be no sin in heaven. Is there a reference for that? I see where it says "fomer things are pased away," and the "fearful, unbelieivng, abominable, murderers, whoremongers, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars" will not be there. or "anything that defileth or worketh abomination." hence, I believe the opportunity will be there, so free will will still exist. God never took away "Satans" free will as an archangel and he was in heaven.

Interesting. I've seen numerous references to the lack of sin in Heaven in posts on this forum and elsewhere but do not know if it is explicitly mentioned as such by a Bible passage. Have to do some poking around and see if I can come up with something.

In the meantime, if you are correct, this brings up some other interesting speculation. I don't think that when Christians envision Heaven that they imagine that people would continue to sin even after what is supposed to be final judgement. In truth, since all men are sinners, there is no reason to think they wouldn't go right on sinning in Heaven. The range of sins might contract considerably since they would presumably no longer have material needs, etc. but as the aforementioned example of Satan shows, sins like pride would still be possible. I wonder if there would be any penalty for sinning in Heaven?

Perhaps no material needs in the literary sense, but it seems that tradition implies that there is the enjoiment of food and other things still there in heaven.

Since no one dies in heaven, the sin of taking a life is impossible to commit.

Sim is subkective and relative to gods will.
Perhaps he just allows everything in heaven and so there is no sin.

[TRANSPONDER]

In innumerable threads at this forum, I've been told ad nauseum that God allows all sorts of horrible things to happen in the world because of the importance he attaches to man's free will.

I am not so sure I agree with this premise. It doesn't make sense to me. Evil happens to emphasize mans free will?

The argument that I've always been given on this forum is that man must have the option to choose evil otherwise free will is negated. If God prevents all evil from happening, man is incapable of moral choices and his will is thwarted.

However, it is also argued that sin does not exist in Heaven. Why is this? Is it because man no longer possesses free will in Heaven? Is free will no longer important to God? Would that not make the saved into willless automatons by the same logic Christians use when discussing the problem of evil?

Do we lose free will in Heaven?

I was trying to find some place that said there would be no sin in heaven. Is there a reference for that? I see where it says "fomer things are pased away," and the "fearful, unbelieivng, abominable, murderers, whoremongers, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars" will not be there. or "anything that defileth or worketh abomination." hence, I believe the opportunity will be there, so free will will still exist. God never took away "Satans" free will as an archangel and he was in heaven.

Interesting. I've seen numerous references to the lack of sin in Heaven in posts on this forum and elsewhere but do not know if it is explicitly mentioned as such by a Bible passage. Have to do some poking around and see if I can come up with something.

In the meantime, if you are correct, this brings up some other interesting speculation. I don't think that when Christians envision Heaven that they imagine that people would continue to sin even after what is supposed to be final judgement. In truth, since all men are sinners, there is no reason to think they wouldn't go right on sinning in Heaven. The range of sins might contract considerably since they would presumably no longer have material needs, etc. but as the aforementioned example of Satan shows, sins like pride would still be possible. I wonder if there would be any penalty for sinning in Heaven?

Perhaps no material needs in the literary sense, but it seems that tradition implies that there is the enjoiment of food and other things still there in heaven.

Since no one dies in heaven, the sin of taking a life is impossible to commit.

Sim is subkective and relative to gods will.
Perhaps he just allows everything in heaven and so there is no sin.

But Christian doctrine recognises thought -crime, never mind sinful speech. Just thinking or saying the wrong thing is a sin, even if one doesn't do it.

What does one do about sinning in heaven? If there is free will, the potential is there. What does God do about it? I guess the idea is that it's like being 'Saved'. One can no longer sin. But Paul found out that wasn't the case, just as Christians find with the 'saved'. They were never 'Real Christians'. So someone with Free will in heaven could 'get angry with his brother' during the endless years of eternity. Unless they take your Self away entirely and your free will with it arguably, sinning by thought or speech or action, "If you shove your butt in my face once more during eternal worship, I'll sock you one!" has to be a possibility.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #99]
And the other great heavenly open question is;

How does a person feel in and enjoy heaven, knowing that his loving ones are eternally tortured in hell, 'cause they forget to accept Jesus Christ as a their personal saviour

Somewhere I read that one important christian theory goes that god wil make the hearts dumb and feelless in paradise, so no one will care about loved ones eternal suffering