Rhea

From the Paradise Lost thread,
So wait, let me get this straight. What am I missing here?

1. We all have free will on earth. This causes bad things to happen. But we deal with that because free will is better than being a Robot.

2. God can't come up with any way to restrict Free Will to choices between good things (I say to my Toddler, "do you want oatmeal, a bagel or cold cereal for breakfast?" He learns, after one or two attempts at acquiring "bubble gum!" that bubble gum is Not Good™ that his choices lie within choices deemed Good™. This does not make him a Robot®, and he retains his free will. We are both happy with this arrangement)

3. The goal, of course being to get to Heaven® where only good things happen, like watching your atheist children be tormented for eternity in a lake of fire. But since Heaven® is THE BEST PLACE TO BE, no one can help but see how wonderful it is.

4. Does Heaven have Free Will™?

5. How did God Figure out how to make Free Will_™ compatible with eternal happiness? (corollary - why doesn't he upgrade Earth to have this feature?)

6. Are all inhabitants of Heaven Robots®?

Melkor

I've contemplated that question myself, and the only conclusion I've ever been able to come to was "yes".

As the saying goes, I'd rather burn in Hell than have to serve in Heaven.

Christian

Hey Rhea,

Since you asked for Christian input, I'll take a stab. I don't at all speak for every Christian on such debatable philosophical points, but at least I'll provide sample data.

I speculate that the dichotomy of "either free will or robots" is a false one. If God is the all knowing and all powerful Creator (and He is) then all events are fixed from eternity. I don't see any way around that conclusion. Yet God is highly personal in His dealings with us, which is basically the opposite of being mechanistic (as in robots). We really do think and feel and choose, and our choices have real and eternal consequences. Yet all of those actions and choices are inevitable from God's point of view.

I try to avoid using the term "free will" since it means 12 different things to any 10 people you ask. But I'll make an exception here. With all due respect to your trademark let me explain what I mean by the term:

Free Will - The ability to act volitionally and chose between options, resulting in suffering consequences from your choice and being morally accountable for having made the choice you did.

By that definition, I think that God has determined all things and that one of the things He has determined is precisely the fact that people have free will.

On the issue Christian sometimes debate passionately about "predestination vs. free will" I take the side of predestination, although I admit I could easily be wrong. (The technical term "free will" in that debate exceeds what I have defined it as). I've never been able to see any moral difference between a God who predestines our choices and an all-powerful all-knowing Creator Who knows what we will chose but creates us anyway with exactly the tendencies and in exactly the situation which will produce those choices.

1. Having free will is definitely better than being a robot, but the reason bad things happen is because of the badness of the moral agents, not because of some inherent quality of free will (see above definition).

2. Our ability to chose includes the ability to chose between good things and bad things.

3. The goal of Christianity is a restored relationship between you and God. Heaven (a place and a situation we only know hints about, not details) is merely a side benefit.

4. Only moral agents have free will (see definition above). Heaven is not itself a moral agent.

5. Who said free will isn't combatible with eternal happiness? I don't understand the incompatibility you suggest.

6. Definitely not. (In contrast to most of this post, this is something I'm virtually certain of.)

Respectfully,

Christian

Rhea

heh, heh, heh.

Okay, now I can go back and read the rest of your post...

Rhea

I don't follow the jump to moral agents. Isn't a "moral agent" a being with "Free Will"? Therefore Free Will is a property of Moral Agents. So substitute the species "moral agent" for the species attribute "free will" and the questions remain.
Q. Bad things happen because ... WHY?
A. The free will of moral agents.
Christians claim that Bad Things is a Price of not being a Robot. Do you feel differently?


Only because God gave us the option of bad things. My toddler does not have the option of bad things. This has not made him a robot. If god is letting his toddlers choose bubble gum for breakfast, is he being a good parent? No. (IMO) My question buried in this statement is related to who has the power to eliminate the possibility of Bad Things as a choice. Apparently not god, eh?


The point of this statement is: in the afterlife, things are perfect. Eternal Life (with God) is desireable and better than earthly life. Do you dispute this? I thought it was the major argument of Christians as to why Atheists should become Christians - the Promise of Eternal Life® with God. Which, presumably(?) is a desirable existence. Known as "Heaven". The relevence of which is the comparison of how humans can life _without_ the Bad Things that happen on earth.

Perhaps my whole understanding of the doctrine is completely wrong - and Heaven is exactly like earth complete with rapes, child abuse, theft and suateed liver. If that's the case then pity the poor depressed person who is now condemned to suffer (in heaven) for eternity.

Is that where I'm wrong? Is Heaven (life with God) NOT better than earth?


I meant the people/souls in heaven. I would not define heaven as an entity. Do human souls in heaven have the ability to make bad choices? Do, in other words, bad choices happen in heaven?


This is the basis of the christian conversionist's argument as I know it:
A. eternal life with God is eternal happiness. (please let me know if I have misunderstood them!) and
B. the reason we're not perfectly happy on earth is this free-will-of-moral-agents business while
C. free will is required to keep us from being robots and
D. robots would be a bad thing.
THEREFORE, I thought it was fair to conclude that EITHER C is wrong in order to have A or D is wrong and is required for A.

Who said it is required? Darth Dane in the OP quote for one. "I would rather have free will than be a robot." That is a phrase that is repeated so often from christians that I thought it was practically universal! And you and I agree completely, it IS a false dichotomy as the argument is not internally consistent. From what I can see free will which includes the ability to make criminal choices is NOT required in order to not be a robot.

Then what conditions are present to make them so happy & content? And why can God not upgrade earth to have this feature so that suffering is eliminated forever?

Radorth

That is precisely what he will do, although not on your schedule.

But then some here would "rather burn in hell than serve in heaven." What a telling statement if true! Perhaps the end is nigh, when our lone hope, the return of Christ, is realized.

But let me summarize God's plan, and then skeptics can tell us what THEY would have done.

God creates the earth (NOT the world)

Some turn against them and decide they don't like his rules. He probably knew this would happen, but there was no alternative except to force people to obey, or create them with no will of their own

He let's them thrash around and almost self-destruct because he wants people to follow his rules willingly.

To get all he can into a "new earth" he will create, he even offers to IMPUTE righteousness to them, even to those who merely "will to do his will." (They don't have to do it, just say they are willing) Through Christ he is empowered to ave EVERY person if he so chooses although those who would "rather burn in hell" will be permitted to do so of course.

He waits a long time (to us anyway) to make the new earth and see justice and righteousness prevail because he is not willing that any should perish. By letting us create a long and sorry history, he insures we will not again choose to decide for our selves what is good and what is evil.

At the point where we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world (or at least Israel) and begin doing so, Jesus steps in and takes over. Those who are not Christians or willing to repent and be reborn are judged by their own rules, being effectively self-condemned.

I believe and can show that all children are saved until they can freely choose "with knowledge" not to be, and those who never heard an unpolluted Gospel get to hear it. Please don't derail the thread with your contrary scripture interpretaions, for the sake of argument. I can show this is true in another thread.

What's wrong with it? Free will is preserved. Everybody who wants to serve God and obey his rules is empowered to do so. Justice and peace prevail by free choice. The meek inherit and rule the earth, no police required. Nobody can claim they were coerced or fault God or weren't given every possible chance.

Good luck coming up with a better plan, and if you dare to try, please address all the issues.

Rad

Rhea

God makes a prototype. A pair of humans. They reveal a major-league design defect - they are prone to making bad decisions. God scraps the prototypes (Why wait until Noah to drown everything - why not just drown Adam and Eve?) and makes a new design with either the wisdom to not choose badly, or he child-proofs the room so the toddlers can have fun without killing themselves.

Or, God makes the creation and then actually shows himself to everyone instead of just a few.


Wow, that was easy!

Rhea

And before you ask the inevitable "What proof do you need?" I'll just answer in advance...

"I suppose God would know."

Rhea

Or, here's a tricky one...

God conquers Satan.

Rhea

Oh and...
Thanks for getting around to the OP.

Will you address it, please?