Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Believe what you want.
Biblical free will seems to be the ability to disobey God.
You should look the definitions of "subjective" & "objective".Yeah, for the word objective as per: (of a person or their judgement) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts, I see that you are subjective and so am I. But you see that subjectively differently, because you think you are not using personal feelings or opinions. I do get that. So much for definitions, right?
Well, evil is as far as I can tell the evaluation of an act and not the act itself. But never mind that.
Ergo, heaven must contain evil, too. Otherwise, how would anyone be able to tell what goodness in heaven really is?
You should use "subjective" to describe subjective things.
The evil and righteousness are separated..
What makes you think that sincere repentance will not be forgotten, say, a billion years later in heaven? I mean, if those souls have free will, then all bets are really off.
Applying probability to many things in life is objective
People don't complain about good in the world!
Evil is a word I avoid. There's human malice and bad luck, and I don't need the word to describe evil. The reason is because of all of the baggage involved in the religious version of evil, which includes cosmological battles among disembodied spirits or cosmic forces. I leave all such words including sin and soul to the faithful for the same reason. It's also why I don't call the mysteries of the cosmos or the laws of nature "God," because the word has too much baggage. Look at what became of Einstein for his injudicious use of the word God to mean nature and its ways.
I don't believe that the Abrahamic god exists - I don't believe in any gods, but that one can be ruled out empirically - nor that we have more than an illusion of free will. The self is a passive observer of the output of neural circuits delivering imperatives to consciousness, which are dutifully executed by the body as the self looks on as an observer of what the brain shows it.
Is starvation evil to you? It's undesirable and unpleasant, but not a consequence of malice - just greed and indifference. Is there a god who could intervene but doesn't?
More loving would be to give people the will to protect one another. More loving would be to prevent people from making choices that result in damnation. The Abrahamic god is said to have made a hell and staffed it with demons for the purpose of gratuitously torturing unwilling souls kept conscious eternally just so that they can suffer to the benefit of nobody but sadists. Where do you see love in that?
Why not? If God "forced" everybody to obey the two cardinal commandments about loving God and one another, everybody wins. But you describe a god that gives people not just the ability to harm one another but the free will to do as they desire, and then punishes them in the extreme for it. People have told you that and you believed them. And they called it love, and I doubt that you disagreed.
I don't believe that the word soul has any literal referent that survives death. Life is a game with rules, although one could also call it a test. We awaken in the world and its ways in a body containing a mind that experiences pleasure and suffering, and usually has a preference for the former. You job is to discover and implement the rules that optimize that experience. But as best we can tell, it ends with death.
You seem to believe that God created good behavior in man but also gave him the ability to harm one another. The addition of a god adds nothing to what is what we would expect to find living in a godless universe.
Do you know who else speaks like that? Abused people defending their abuser, who will harm you and then gaslight you about it being done for your own good rather than to satisfy their sadistic desires. How many mothers have stood by watching their babies being harmed by a man who says that he is teaching them for their own good using tough love?
Sure you are, as are we all. You obey your will like everybody else, and are not the source of it - just like an unconscious robot that necessarily obeys electrical instructions. Maybe you mean that you are conscious or organic rather than metallic. Doesn't change the calculus. If you are a passive recipient of your will and obedience to it is imposed, you meet the qualifications for robothood. Here's hoping that your neural circuits direct you to find happiness.