My question about heaven....

[iago]

I was thinking, and I thought of a problem.  If a human has free will, and a human is allowed to interact with other humans, then that human can cause others to be upset or to suffer.  Therefore, in heaven, either:
a) People no longer have free will
b) People are not allowed to interact with each other
c) People do not live in eternal bliss

I don't see how all of those can possibly co-exist. 

Any idea what we will give up?

[rabbit]

Our humanity.

[Joe]

We give up sinful nature. We'll still have free will but benevolent intentions. Sure, we could make someone mad, but we won't want to.

[Sidoh]

Joe almost said it, but he left room for there to be the possibility of an outbreak of evil in heaven, which won't be possible.

You become benevolent.  You don't have "benevolent intentions."  Your decisions would reflect this belevolence.

I don't believe in free will anyway, though, so it doesn't really matter.

[d&q]

I think we'll give up free will. If we had it to begin with, that is.

[Rule]

I think we'll give up free will. If we had it to begin with, that is.

But that would be horrible for so many people... and isn't heaven supposed to be bliss for anyone?

[Kaleeko]

While it's quite probable that there really is no such thing as free will, I choose to believe in it because I'd like to believe that the choices I make don't already have a set outcome. It also leads to the idea of predestination, a theory that really angers me.

That brings me to the fact that I really don't like the idea of heaven. I think pain is part of living. Call me strange, but I enjoy the fact that there is a dark and a light side to life. That may be the "sinful being" in me talking. Haha.

[Sidoh]

But that would be horrible for so many people... and isn't heaven supposed to be bliss for anyone?

Yes, but look how simple it is to please the human mind without anything metaphysical.  *points at gamesnake* >_>

I don't understand how free will and an omniscient being can exist concurrently.  If the omniscient being knows everything that was, is and will be, he understands the fate of the universe and every concievable action that will lead to it.  Because of this, there is destiny.  Since everything is predetermined, free will is but an illusion.

[Joe]

I don't understand how free will and an omniscient being can exist concurrently.  If the omniscient being knows everything that was, is and will be, he understands the fate of the universe and every concievable action that will lead to it.  Because of this, there is destiny.  Since everything is predetermined, free will is but an illusion.

"God isn't logical", quoth you. :)

The way I see it, we do have free will (don't ask me to explain, it's just the way I like looking at things), and God can still be omniscient. He knows every single thing we've ever done or learned in the past, and how we would make a decision in any circumstance, because He knows every single thing about us there possibly is to know. In a way, I'd say He can't exactly see the future as if it's already occured, but He has no trouble whatsoever figuring out how we'd react and create our own futures. Er.. does that make sense to you? It's 3:54AM and I'm trying to explain my view of divinity.. hehe.

[AntiVirus]

I'm going to go with "B". Haha.

[Sidoh]

x86] link=topic=7277.msg90527#msg90527 date=1157532842]
"God isn't logical", quoth you. :)

True, but meh.  Is there a place in the bible that says that free will exists?  I believe it's little more than illusion.  We're easy to fool. :P

x86] link=topic=7277.msg90527#msg90527 date=1157532842]
The way I see it, we do have free will (don't ask me to explain, it's just the way I like looking at things), and God can still be omniscient. He knows every single thing we've ever done or learned in the past, and how we would make a decision in any circumstance, because He knows every single thing about us there possibly is to know. In a way, I'd say He can't exactly see the future as if it's already occured, but He has no trouble whatsoever figuring out how we'd react and create our own futures. Er.. does that make sense to you? It's 3:54AM and I'm trying to explain my view of divinity.. hehe.

He's present at every point of time by the definition of omniscient... he isn't just able to "intuitively" predict a situation, he already knows the outcome and every detail leading to it.

[iago]

You become benevolent.  You don't have "benevolent intentions."  Your decisions would reflect this belevolence.

That doesn't sound like a good thing, to me.

But wouldn't that cause paradoxes?  First of all, what one considers belevolent, others might consider malicious.  In the terrestrial realm, things like abortion and stem-cell research fall into that category.  I'm sure there are other problems like that, too, that don't come to mind.  But the point is, what happens when one person considers an action good, while another considers it bad?  Do they hold a vote, or does one person suffer?   

Additionally, you can offend somebody by accident while talking to somebody.  Like, you can mention that they appear to have gained weight, with the intention of saving their health, but it may offend the person.  Again, there are tons of examples, look at pretty much any conversation with women. 

What about humor?  The most common (and often considered 'best') jokes are ones that make fun of a person or a group of people.  That's why comedians do 'roasts' and why a lot of people avoid sitting at the front of a comedy club.


If it is indeed true that we are changed in this way, then I suspect we're living our lives wrong.  I mean, why do we spend all our time in this world working and trying to better ourselves?  I mean, the more logical thing to do would be to find some drug that makes you happy and benevolant, and make sure that everybody in the world takes it.  I mean, that's pretty much what happens in heaven, so why not simulate it on Earth?  (I'm sort of referring to Brave New World here). 

[d&q]

I think we'll give up free will. If we had it to begin with, that is.

But that would be horrible for so many people... and isn't heaven supposed to be bliss for anyone?

Like Sidoh said, if we did lack free will, we wouldn't even know the difference. So basically, we would all be eternally blissful, but still maintain what we would perceive as free will.

[Sidoh]

But wouldn't that cause paradoxes?  First of all, what one considers belevolent, others might consider malicious.  In the terrestrial realm, things like abortion and stem-cell research fall into that category.  I'm sure there are other problems like that, too, that don't come to mind.  But the point is, what happens when one person considers an action good, while another considers it bad?  Do they hold a vote, or does one person suffer?   

Additionally, you can offend somebody by accident while talking to somebody.  Like, you can mention that they appear to have gained weight, with the intention of saving their health, but it may offend the person.  Again, there are tons of examples, look at pretty much any conversation with women. 

What about humor?  The most common (and often considered 'best') jokes are ones that make fun of a person or a group of people.  That's why comedians do 'roasts' and why a lot of people avoid sitting at the front of a comedy club.


If it is indeed true that we are changed in this way, then I suspect we're living our lives wrong.  I mean, why do we spend all our time in this world working and trying to better ourselves?  I mean, the more logical thing to do would be to find some drug that makes you happy and benevolant, and make sure that everybody in the world takes it.  I mean, that's pretty much what happens in heaven, so why not simulate it on Earth?  (I'm sort of referring to Brave New World here). 

I thought of most of that as well, but it still makes sense to say it because you're ascending to heaven, which is controlled by an omniscient, benevolent being.  He will define what is right and wrong.  While I do recognize the validity on the example of cloning and stem cell research, I don't think that specific issue will cause any controversy because there will be no need for it.  In heaven, you're perfectly content.  There's no need for something like cloning.  You don't need to use stem cell research because it cures physical ailments which won't be present in heaven.

Remember that ascending to heaven entails the separation of the metaphysical (soul) from the physical.  I think that alone answers several questions, since you're no longer bound to the laws of physics.

[MyndFyre]

First of all, what one considers belevolent, others might consider malicious.

There aren't relativisms in God.  God is absolute, so some things are beneficial, and others are not.  Period.

He's present at every point of time by the definition of omniscient... he isn't just able to "intuitively" predict a situation, he already knows the outcome and every detail leading to it.

I tend to think of that as being a characteristic of being eternal, not necessarily omniscient, but meh.

It's like in Minority Report, when John Anderton rolls the ball towards Witmer, and they have an exchange along something like the following:

A: "Why'd you catch that?"
W: "It was going to fall."
A: "But it didn't fall.  How do you know it was going to?"
W: "It would have fallen when it went off the table."
A: "The fact that you knew it was going to fall and prevented it from falling didn't change the fact that it was going to fall."

Similarly, I think that just because God knows what decisions we're going to make doesn't mean that we don't make the decisions.