Free Will & the Afterlife in Christianity and Islam

[gsa]

Free will is often cited as the justification for reward and punishment in these twin Abrahamic religions. But how does this work?

Supposedly, slaves-submitters ("believers") and rebellious hellions ("sinners") both have free will in this life. In fact free will is very important, particularly in most forms of Christianity, for explaining the fall. Sophisticated theologians also explain that free will is retained in heaven, which causes people to sin, which results in their perpetual punishment being "just" because it is the sin that they choose that justifies their torture forever and ever.

Conversely, free will does not appear to exist in heaven. Believers are happy slaves-submitters who spend eternity praising God. In fact they do not have free will, per said sophisticated theologians, because they cannot rebel against God and choose evil.

What is the logic here? How can free will be so necessary and wonderful in this life, but be the "gift" of the damned in the next life? Why not just create people without free will initially, and lose this whole problem of free will and punishment altogether?

 

[Deidre]

I’ve never really liked the idea of ‘free will,’ because it tends to cheapen the way people view God. (if they are believers)

What I mean by that is … if God is an almighty, powerful Creator…why does he need his creation always making excuses for him? For example, I remember hearing the terminology ‘free will’ come up a lot after the 9/11 attacks. In many Christian circles, there were utterances of…’’well, God gives everyone free will.’’ Okay, that’s true, but really it’s just that we are human, and have the ability to make choices.

But, if things turn out well, many religious people will give God all of the credit. It seems like free will only swings one way, and that is if mankind screws up, and makes bad choices. I’ve never really liked the terminology.

 

[rusra02]

Free will is often cited as the justification for reward and punishment in these twin Abrahamic religions. But how does this work?

Supposedly, slaves-submitters ("believers") and rebellious hellions ("sinners") both have free will in this life. In fact free will is very important, particularly in most forms of Christianity, for explaining the fall. Sophisticated theologians also explain that free will is retained in heaven, which causes people to sin, which results in their perpetual punishment being "just" because it is the sin that they choose that justifies their torture forever and ever.

Conversely, free will does not appear to exist in heaven. Believers are happy slaves-submitters who spend eternity praising God. In fact they do not have free will, per said sophisticated theologians, because they cannot rebel against God and choose evil.

What is the logic here? How can free will be so necessary and wonderful in this life, but be the "gift" of the damned in the next life? Why not just create people without free will initially, and lose this whole problem of free will and punishment altogether?

I believe no one is literally tortured for eternity. Consider the opposite of free will. We would be robots, unable to do anything we haven't been "programmed" to do. I believe the ability to choose the course we take is a gift from a loving Creator. What father would want his children to be forced to be obedient and forced to love and respect their father, even if they didn't want to?
Thus, I believe our Creator has allowed all his intelligent creations to choose whether they will serve him or not, while clearly stating the consequences.(Deuteronomy 30:19) As our Lifegiver, the true God has every right to decide who will continue to benefit from that gift. (Psalm 36:9)
Free will will always exist, IMO.

 

[Kolibri]

Free will means we have a choice. We are not robots but free moral agents. And yet for every choice there is a consequence, to the good or to the bad. As a symbol that God has the right to dictate protective family rules as needed, he placed a tree in the garden that symbolized that choice. If they ate of it they would in effect say, "I will make my own choices now. I don't need you to care for my well-being."

We all see how that choice worked out. Angels too are free moral agents or else there would not be disobedient ones reserved in dense spiritual darkness awaiting destruction.(Jude 6)

Isaiah indicates that in the "new earth" soon to come, people will still have free will. There it says that "anyone that dies at a hundred will be considered a mere boy, And the one who falls short of a hundred will be considered cursed." (Isaiah 65:17,20) People will still have the choice to make bad choices. That does not mean that they will be allowed to soil the rest of the planet with their bad choice as is done today. The earth will be kept in a state of peace.

Just a little while longer, and the wicked will be no more;
You will look at where they were,
And they will not be there.
But the meek will posses the earth,
And they will find exquisite delight in the abundance of peace.
....
The righteous will possess the earth,
And they will live forever on it.
- Psalm 37:10,11,29

 

[Baladas]

I’ve never really liked the idea of ‘free will,’ because it tends to cheapen the way people view God. (if they are believers)

What I mean by that is … if God is an almighty, powerful Creator…why does he need his creation always making excuses for him? For example, I remember hearing the terminology ‘free will’ come up a lot after the 9/11 attacks. In many Christian circles, there were utterances of…’’well, God gives everyone free will.’’ Okay, that’s true, but really it’s just that we are human, and have the ability to make choices.

But, if things turn out well, many religious people will give God all of the credit. It seems like free will only swings one way, and that is if mankind screws up, and makes bad choices. I’ve never really liked the terminology.

I agree with you on every point.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Why not just create people without free will initially, and lose this whole problem of free will and punishment altogether?

Why not just straightforwardly accept free will is real, as it is in common discourse, and build up knowledge on those terms to sophistication?

Your questions appear ignorant, to anybody who knows how choosing works.

 

[gsa]

I believe no one is literally tortured for eternity. Consider the opposite of free will. We would be robots, unable to do anything we haven't been "programmed" to do. I believe the ability to choose the course we take is a gift from a loving Creator. What father would want his children to be forced to be obedient and forced to love and respect their father, even if they didn't want to?
Thus, I believe our Creator has allowed all his intelligent creations to choose whether they will serve him or not, while clearly stating the consequences.(Deuteronomy 30:19) As our Lifegiver, the true God has every right to decide who will continue to benefit from that gift. (Psalm 36:9)
Free will will always exist, IMO.

So you have free will in heaven to reject God?

Also are you denying that there is a hell?

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Free will is often cited as the justification for reward and punishment in these twin Abrahamic religions. But how does this work?

Supposedly, slaves-submitters ("believers") and rebellious hellions ("sinners") both have free will in this life. In fact free will is very important, particularly in most forms of Christianity, for explaining the fall. Sophisticated theologians also explain that free will is retained in heaven, which causes people to sin, which results in their perpetual punishment being "just" because it is the sin that they choose that justifies their torture forever and ever.

We all choose our own ways, no one seeks for God, no one does what is right. It is only by God's grace that we are turned towards Him and to choose to serve Him, otherwise we all deserve Hell.

God is holy and just, before His presence we will all be confronted by our sin and unrighteousness. I'm not sure what you mean by the free will being retained in heaven and the sin then justifying their torture, but there will be punishment for God is holy, His ways are above our ways and only those whom He has sanctified can enter into His Kingdom.

Conversely, free will does not appear to exist in heaven. Believers are happy slaves-submitters who spend eternity praising God. In fact they do not have free will, per said sophisticated theologians, because they cannot rebel against God and choose evil.

To enjoy a relationship with God, to see His face and glorify Him is not being a "slave-submitter" but a child of God to be united with Him forever. The true slave is the one who is a slave to his sin and desires. No eye has seen no ear has heard no mind has conceived the things God has prepared for those that love Him.

In heaven, or the world to come when Christ returns, we are not turned into robots, we still have a will but our sanctification is complete, we are no longer slaves to sin but truly free to worship God, and when we behold His glory we will always choose to serve Him.

What is the logic here? How can free will be so necessary and wonderful in this life, but be the "gift" of the damned in the next life? Why not just create people without free will initially, and lose this whole problem of free will and punishment altogether?

Our will has been turned to God, simply because we do not turn away from God in eternity does not mean the will is never there to begin with. I disagree with your notion that free will is the gift of the damned, really all of us deserve to be damned but it is only by God's grace that some are saved.

 

[gsa]

Why not just straightforwardly accept free will is real, as it is in common discourse, and build up knowledge on those terms to sophistication?

Your questions appear ignorant, to anybody who knows how choosing works.

I imagine that my questions do appear "ignorant" to someone who accepts this, but I am trying to figure out how believers process this, and justify it.

 

[gsa]

To enjoy a relationship with God, to see His face and glorify Him is not being a "slave-submitter" but a child of God to be united with Him forever. The true slave is the one who is a slave to his sin and desires. No eye has seen no ear has heard no mind has conceived the things God has prepared for those that love Him.

"But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life." Romans 6:22.

Not to mention the very definition of Islam and Muslim.

In heaven, or the world to come when Christ returns, we are not turned into robots, we still have a will but our sanctification is complete, we are no longer slaves to sin but truly free to worship God, and when we behold His glory we will always choose to serve Him.

This is no different from "always choosing to do right" on Earth. There's no doubt that God could have created you with "an ability to choose, yet always choosing good" provided your God is omnipotent. Your distinction here is irrelevant, it seems.

Our will has been turned to God, simply because we do not turn away from God in eternity does not mean the will is never there to begin with. I disagree with your notion that free will is the gift of the damned, really all of us deserve to be damned but it is only by God's grace that some are saved.

So in hell no one retains free will? Seems unjust to allow them to be punished eternally if they are not continuing to sin. I guess every sin merits eternal punishment?

 

[Nietzsche]

I’ve never really liked the idea of ‘free will,’ because it tends to cheapen the way people view God. (if they are believers)

What I mean by that is … if God is an almighty, powerful Creator…why does he need his creation always making excuses for him? For example, I remember hearing the terminology ‘free will’ come up a lot after the 9/11 attacks. In many Christian circles, there were utterances of…’’well, God gives everyone free will.’’ Okay, that’s true, but really it’s just that we are human, and have the ability to make choices.

But, if things turn out well, many religious people will give God all of the credit. It seems like free will only swings one way, and that is if mankind screws up, and makes bad choices. I’ve never really liked the terminology.

In short; if it's good, Goddidit. If it's bad, well, Free Will.

No.

No.

WE are responsible for the Good and the Bad. Either it's all God's Will or it's all Free Will. Pick one.

 

[gsa]

In short; if it's good, Goddidit. If it's bad, well, Free Will.

No.

No.

WE are responsible for the Good and the Bad. Either it's all God's Will or it's all Free Will. Pick one.

Well it could be no god, no free will.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

"But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life." Romans 6:22.

Not to mention the very definition of Islam and Muslim.

I would point out the "you have been set free from sin" part in the verse, we truly become free of our sinful desires, which is then contrasted with being slaves to God. Paul actually clarifies in verse 19 that he is speaking "in human terms", the word "slave" is not going to adequately describe our relationship with God. Jesus said that He no longer calls us slaves but friends, so there are different aspects of the word here which have to be taken into account. God rescued His people who by His grace can now serve Him, they were indeed once slaves of sin like the rest of the world. To give a definitive answer of course I agree with Paul though it needs to be understood properly in the light of what Paul himself is saying with regards to freedom, Jesus' words and certainly detached from the more detestable practices associated with slavery in the centuries gone by. We choose what we want to do, and man will always choose to rebel against God, if not for God intervening in His grace and turning the will of His people to Him.

This is no different from "always choosing to do right" on Earth. There's no doubt that God could have created you with "an ability to choose, yet always choosing good" provided your God is omnipotent. Your distinction here is irrelevant, it seems.

We choose according to who we are, and when we are transformed by God and sanctified our motives and desires to glorify God will naturally manifest themselves as choices in serving Him.

So in hell no one retains free will? Seems unjust to allow them to be punished eternally if they are not continuing to sin. I guess every sin merits eternal punishment?

I am not sure if they will continue to sin, what specific action they could actually carry out etc.

Sins, the actions, are at the core representative of a heart and mind turned against God, it isn't simply about a specific action. I am not sure of exactly what remains of the will in Hell, the Bible doesn't really say, though our actions and hearts on this earth are more than deserving.

Since our wills are shaped by our motives and desires I am also not sure to what degree I can call our will "free", it is not a Biblical term and is more popular in the Christian community for easy-solution apologetics purposes rather than a worldview found in the Scriptures.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

In short; if it's good, Goddidit. If it's bad, well, Free Will.

No.

No.

WE are responsible for the Good and the Bad. Either it's all God's Will or it's all Free Will. Pick one.

Why not both?

Ultimately all is God's will, but this does not exclude the existence of man's intentions to the extent that man is still held accountable.

 

[Deidre]

In short; if it's good, Goddidit. If it's bad, well, Free Will.

No.

No.

WE are responsible for the Good and the Bad. Either it's all God's Will or it's all Free Will. Pick one.

lol ^_^

Well...in Christianity, it's often taught that one should be always busy about doing 'God's will.' Making your 'free will' align with 'his will.' Which sounds innocent enough...I guess. Having said that, stepping out and away from Christianity, I happen to think differently about God, now. Why is it out of the question that God just ...let's it all roll on, and doesn't intervene? Let's us make decisions, and we must accept the outcomes? To me, that is my idea of a loving God, actually...more so than one favoring this group or that group, etc...and striking down those who 'don't obey,' and for those who do obey, they are rewarded somehow. The reason many religious people have hang ups, is that suppose one follows God's laws to the letter, and bad stuff STILL happens? I've known many people fall away from faith, because they believed that if only they aligned their will with God's...life would be grand. Hmmm....

Even in Islam, it's not difficult for me to view God as I suggest above, despite the fact that similar to the Bible, there is a lot of chastisement and scolding from God in the Qur'an, for not following His will. (whatever it is depending on the passage)

 

[lovemuffin]

I think the importance of "free will" to theodicy is very closely tied to the classical description of God as an omnipotent supreme being. And also omniscient and omnibenevolent but it's omnipotence that is the most crucial to the problem. I think this sort of theology is fundamentally flawed and needs almost to be abandoned in favor of a more apophatic and mystical approach. Metaphysical omnipotence is philosophically a non-starter. In a similar way, libertarian free will is as well. And besides that, "omnipotent" in the logical, metaphysical sense isn't actually a very good translation of the titles given to God in the Hebrew or Greek scriptures.

Also, I think "afterlife" is a bit of a misnomer. "Eternal life" is Life, it's not deferred until later. It's not life "after" death, even if death is not an end. Even if that life is the "life of the age to come", which I'm not sure is an entirely satisfactory translation of zoe aionios either, that life has to be lived now. "Whoever does not experience eternal life here should not aspire to it, because it does not exist afterwards", St Symeon the New Theologian wrote.

 

[Nietzsche]

Why not both?

Ultimately all is God's will, but this does not exclude the existence of man's intentions to the extent that man is still held accountable.

Then why doesn't he change his Will so that it's not so ****ing horrifying for 99% of the world?

 

[gsa]

I think the importance of "free will" to theodicy is very closely tied to the classical description of God as an omnipotent supreme being. And also omniscient and omnibenevolent but it's omnipotence that is the most crucial to the problem. I think this sort of theology is fundamentally flawed and needs almost to be abandoned in favor of a more apophatic and mystical approach. Metaphysical omnipotence is philosophically a non-starter. In a similar way, libertarian free will is as well. And besides that, "omnipotent" in the logical, metaphysical sense isn't actually a very good translation of the titles given to God in the Hebrew or Greek scriptures.

Also, I think "afterlife" is a bit of a misnomer. "Eternal life" is Life, it's not deferred until later. It's not life "after" death, even if death is not an end. Even if that life is the "life of the age to come", which I'm not sure is an entirely satisfactory translation of zoe aionios either, that life has to be lived now. "Whoever does not experience eternal life here should not aspire to it, because it does not exist afterwards", St Symeon the New Theologian wrote.

That's fine, but I can't be expected to address the relatively unorthodox theological positions that you are addressing here. Clearly, I am aiming my questions at the more or less orthodox schools within Christian Protestantism, Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Then why doesn't he change his Will so that it's not so ****ing horrifying for 99% of the world?

Because it is a fallen world. God's will is that the world will be made new, there will be a new heaven and a new earth. All is going according to God's plan, we know what a world turned against God is like because we're living in it, though God came to earth and died for us so we can live for Him and have faith in His promise that all will be made new. It is by this divine narrative of the universe that His people will come into a fuller understanding of the character of God, the God that wills to live as a human being among a people that hate Him, to be beaten and die on a cross so that we may have forgiveness and fellowship with Him. God hands us over to the consequences of our actions, yet also is full of mercy to save though we deserve Hell.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

That's fine, but I can't be expected to address the relatively unorthodox theological positions that you are addressing here. Clearly, I am aiming my questions at the more or less orthodox schools within Christian Protestantism, Catholicism and Orthodoxy.

well named can speak for himself but ehh I'm pretty sure his views are well within the orthodox school of Orthodoxy.