Has God given up the right to punish through giving free will? If so, there is no hell.

[Greatest I am]

Has God given up the right to punish through giving free will? If so, there is no hell.

It is said that God gave man free will.
This to me, means that God gave man dominion over himself and over the earth. Without any restrictions or coercion from Him.
The idea then that He would mean that we must do as He says or go to hell cannot be a true concept if the term free will is to mean anything.
If we as parents give or allow our children to have freedom when they leave our homes, then that means that we give up any right or responsibility to punish them.
To keep things simple, let us say that the rules of my home includes making the bed.
I notice when visiting my children in their home, that they have chosen not to make their beds.
I then would be out of line to reprimand or punish them for not making their beds. They are free to do so or not if they have free will.
This seems right. It is no longer my place as a father to punish them. They are free and have dominion over themselves.
God then should not and would not hold a hell over our heads to demand compliance to His rules.
Is free will with consequences from God, hell for non compliance, free will at all?
Is being free to only follow His rules free will?
Has God given up the right to punish free men?
Do we truly have dominion on earth?

Regards
DL

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Looking for logical consistency in religion is like looking for a gold bar in an elephant's butt.

 

[Falvlun]

Good thought! I never thought of this aspect of the free-will argument. The concept seems pretty solid: We can not truly have free-will if we are not truly free to choose whatever we want without consequences.

Though, I do think the defense will be just to leave off the "without consequences" in my last sentence, ie, free-will is just the ability to freely choose whatever we want.

 

[Karl R]

If we as parents give or allow our children to have freedom when they leave our homes, then that means that we give up any right or responsibility to punish them.

As an adult, I have complete freedom from my parents. I have complete responsibility for my life. They have no right or responsibility to punish me.

I've been estranged from my parents for about 15 years. They stopped sending me gifts at Christmas. When I continued to send them gifts, they sent me a note asking me to stop. They've said a few unflattering things about me to relatives and mutual acquaintances. And there is a high probability that they've written me out of their will.

God then should not and would not hold a hell over our heads to demand compliance to His rules.

I can reasonably claim that my parents have gone further than they should (under the circumstances). They have gone as far as I believe they will under the circumstances. But if they so choose, they certainly could continue to engage in far more detrimental actions toward me. What they "should" does not necessarily constrain what they would do. It certainly doesn't limit what they could do.

Feel free to dictate to god what you think he should do. I suspect he'll take you just as seriously as I do.

You're also welcome to tell god what he will do. I'm sure it will be nearly as effective as telling the U.S. Government what they will do.

Free will does not imply a lack of consequences. If you believe that it does, walk up to the biggest, meanest guy that you know and punch him in the face. You have free will.

 

[Greatest I am]

Looking for logical consistency in religion is like looking for a gold bar in an elephant's butt.

Laughed so hard my false teath fell out. Thanks for that.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Good thought! I never thought of this aspect of the free-will argument. The concept seems pretty solid: We can not truly have free-will if we are not truly free to choose whatever we want without consequences.

Though, I do think the defense will be just to leave off the "without consequences" in my last sentence, ie, free-will is just the ability to freely choose whatever we want.

That is why I say that if God is true to his word, there can be no hell.

Regards
DL

 

[Falvlun]

Free will does not imply a lack of consequences. If you believe that it does, walk up to the biggest, meanest guy that you know and punch him in the face. You have free will.

Do I get kudos for prescience?

Karl, God makes man because he wants something that can freely choose to love him. He gives man the ability to choose. But, he tells man that there will be a really, really bad consequence for not choosing to love him. Doen't there seem to be a constraint on this whole "I want man to freely choose to love me" thing?

 

[Greatest I am]

As an adult, I have complete freedom from my parents. I have complete responsibility for my life. They have no right or responsibility to punish me.

I've been estranged from my parents for about 15 years. They stopped sending me gifts at Christmas. When I continued to send them gifts, they sent me a note asking me to stop. They've said a few unflattering things about me to relatives and mutual acquaintances. And there is a high probability that they've written me out of their will.


I can reasonably claim that my parents have gone further than they should (under the circumstances). They have gone as far as I believe they will under the circumstances. But if they so choose, they certainly could continue to engage in far more detrimental actions toward me. What they "should" does not necessarily constrain what they would do. It certainly doesn't limit what they could do.

Feel free to dictate to god what you think he should do. I suspect he'll take you just as seriously as I do.

You're also welcome to tell god what he will do. I'm sure it will be nearly as effective as telling the U.S. Government what they will do.

Free will does not imply a lack of consequences. If you believe that it does, walk up to the biggest, meanest guy that you know and punch him in the face. You have free will.

True but that big guy did not tell me I was free to do whatever I wanted. In my OP God does and then when punched, sends me to hell. I see that as God lying.

As to your parents are they doing a moral thing in imposing their standards on you, a free man?

Regards
DL

 

[Hospitaller]

Has God given up the right to punish through giving free will? If so, there is no hell.

It is said that God gave man free will.
This to me, means that God gave man dominion over himself and over the earth. Without any restrictions or coercion from Him.
The idea then that He would mean that we must do as He says or go to hell cannot be a true concept if the term free will is to mean anything.
If we as parents give or allow our children to have freedom when they leave our homes, then that means that we give up any right or responsibility to punish them.
To keep things simple, let us say that the rules of my home includes making the bed.
I notice when visiting my children in their home, that they have chosen not to make their beds.
I then would be out of line to reprimand or punish them for not making their beds. They are free to do so or not if they have free will.
This seems right. It is no longer my place as a father to punish them. They are free and have dominion over themselves.
God then should not and would not hold a hell over our heads to demand compliance to His rules.
Is free will with consequences from God, hell for non compliance, free will at all?
Is being free to only follow His rules free will?
Has God given up the right to punish free men?
Do we truly have dominion on earth?

Regards
DL

hmm i get what you're saying but i think your definition of free will is a little exaggerated. what is freedom? freedom is the "condition of being free from restraints". we're alowed to do wrong, hence no restraints. yet we suffer the consequences of our actions, which could be hell. God isnt evil and he wants to send us all to hell because we wronged him. by the sin of the devil hell was created and going there is a consequence of our actions, as is heaven. God has put no restraints on us which means that we can sin and go to hell. yeah, its possible.

 

[Greatest I am]

hmm i get what you're saying but i think your definition of free will is a little exaggerated. what is freedom? freedom is the "condition of being free from restraints". we're alowed to do wrong, hence no restraints. yet we suffer the consequences of our actions, which could be hell. God isnt evil and he wants to send us all to hell because we wronged him. by the sin of the devil hell was created and going there is a consequence of our actions, as is heaven. God has put no restraints on us which means that we can sin and go to hell. yeah, its possible.

No.

If you tell your children that they are free to do as they wish, do you still have the right o punish them after they suffer or enjoy whatever consequences they have created for themselves?

If you had the keys to hell would you send them there?

Regards
DL

 

[Scott C.]

It is said that God gave man free will.
This to me, means that God gave man dominion over himself and over the earth. Without any restrictions or coercion from Him.
DL

Free will is not freedom from consequences. Where did you get that idea?

 

[Greatest I am]

Free will is not freedom from consequences. Where did you get that idea?

From the fact that if told you are free to chose right or left and right is a hell and left is a heaven then you are not free to chose are you. Only the insane would chose the right. So if there is only the one choice to a sane person, where is the freedom of choice?

God would not say that you are free to chose my way or burn. That is not a viable freedom.

Regards
DL

 

[CarlinKnew]

From the fact that if told you are free to chose right or left and right is a hell and left is a heaven then you are not free to chose are you. Only the insane would chose the right. So if there is only the one choice to a sane person, where is the freedom of choice?

God would not say that you are free to chose my way or burn. That is not a viable freedom.

Regards
DL

Exactly. That is not free choice; that is an ultimatum.

 

[sojourner]

Good thought! I never thought of this aspect of the free-will argument. The concept seems pretty solid: We can not truly have free-will if we are not truly free to choose whatever we want without consequences.

Though, I do think the defense will be just to leave off the "without consequences" in my last sentence, ie, free-will is just the ability to freely choose whatever we want.

There are always consequences to our actions, whether good or bad.

 

[sojourner]

Has God given up the right to punish through giving free will? If so, there is no hell.

It is said that God gave man free will.
This to me, means that God gave man dominion over himself and over the earth. Without any restrictions or coercion from Him.
The idea then that He would mean that we must do as He says or go to hell cannot be a true concept if the term free will is to mean anything.
If we as parents give or allow our children to have freedom when they leave our homes, then that means that we give up any right or responsibility to punish them.
To keep things simple, let us say that the rules of my home includes making the bed.
I notice when visiting my children in their home, that they have chosen not to make their beds.
I then would be out of line to reprimand or punish them for not making their beds. They are free to do so or not if they have free will.
This seems right. It is no longer my place as a father to punish them. They are free and have dominion over themselves.
God then should not and would not hold a hell over our heads to demand compliance to His rules.
Is free will with consequences from God, hell for non compliance, free will at all?
Is being free to only follow His rules free will?
Has God given up the right to punish free men?
Do we truly have dominion on earth?

Regards
DL

I don't believe that God does punish as we deserve. The overriding theme of the Bible is God's ultimate mercy, not God's ultimate wrath.

 

[Greatest I am]

Exactly. That is not free choice; that is an ultimatum.

I find it strange that non or partial believers agree with the logic but that true believers do not.

I guess when your beliefs start with talking snakes that are real, logic takes a hike. Oh well.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

There are always consequences to our actions, whether good or bad.

Not quite the point.

Free choice with ultimatums are not free. To coerce is to not allow free choice.
To think that God would say you are free top chose heaven or hell means that only the insane would chose hell. History shows that more go to hell than not. Does that mean that God creates more insane souls than sane. Seems like it does if Christians are to be believed.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

I don't believe that God does punish as we deserve. The overriding theme of the Bible is God's ultimate mercy, not God's ultimate wrath.

I take it then that you do not believe in scripture of Sodom or the flood. In fact most of the old testament.

Regards
DL

 

[Karl R]

God makes man because he wants something that can freely choose to love him. He gives man the ability to choose. But, he tells man that there will be a really, really bad consequence for not choosing to love him. Doen't there seem to be a constraint on this whole "I want man to freely choose to love me" thing?

You're making a couple assumptions that weren't in the original post:
1) People were given free will so we could freely choose to love god.
2) Loving god gets you into heaven; not loving god gets you into hell.

Maybe the OP intended those to be part of his premises, but since he didn't state them, I didn't consider them (even though some people clearly do believe that).

Perhaps god gave us free will so we could grow and mature. Perhaps people get sent to hell because they treat others horribly. If either one of those is true, your premise is no longer valid.

Your statement is internally consistent. If god gave people free will so we could love him, punishing people for choosing otherwise does seem to defeat the purpose. I just don't agree with your premises.

True but that big guy did not tell me I was free to do whatever I wanted. In my OP God does and then when punched, sends me to hell. I see that as God lying.

I would say that you have a very different definition of free will than most of the rest of us. To you, free will involves freedom from consequences. To me, free will includes the freedom to accept the consequences.

For example, on Friday I went to a friend's birthday party, and I had too much to drink. On Saturday morning I had a horrible hangover. On Friday I realized that I would probably have a hangover (I underestimated the severity), and I chose to keep drinking anyway. Nobody poured a drink down my throat. Even though I had somewhat impaired judgment, I still made a conscious decision. I exercised my free will.

On Saturday evening I was at another party. I decided not to drink (despite some encouragement to), because I thought I'd messed with my body enough for the weekend.

I could have also chosen to have one drink (probably without consequences) or multiple drinks (and faced similar consequences).

As to your parents are they doing a moral thing in imposing their standards on you, a free man?

They are acting in a manner that they feel is moral. And you can safely assume that their description of the situation would differ from mine.

You see a situation like this as one of imposing standards (and perhaps coercion). I see it as action/reaction. We had a disagreement. The consequences came about as a result of that disagreement.

And you're equating these consequences as punishments. In my opinion, I don't have a "right" to gifts or an inheritance. If my parents decide not to give either, that's not a punishment. That is their exercise of free will.

So even if god is excluding certain people from heaven, that is not (in my viewpoint) a punishment. We don't have a right to go to heaven. It's a gift. (If a parent promises their child a trip to Disney World as a reward for good grades, the child still has free will when deciding to study.)

Hell could be seen as a punishment ... depending on the nature of hell. Numerous references to the afterlife in the bible simply refer to "Sheol" (literally, "the grave"). Therefore, it's possible that there is no punishment ... just the end of existence.

One of my uncles once said, "My girlfriend could be in heaven, and I could be in hell, and it would be the same place ... a bingo game." It's entirely possible that we all end up in the same afterlife. It's our own perception that makes it a reward or punishment.

There's another saying: "Hell wouldn't be so bad, except for the company you have to keep." It could be that heaven and hell are roughly the same ... except hell contains all the cruel, self-centered, judgmental and otherwise unpleasant people; while heaven contains all the friendly, good and uplifting people. It's heaven because you're surrounded by all the wonderful people like yourself ... or it's hell because you're surrounded by all the nasty people like yourself. You (collectively) make it what it is.

So even hell could be a natural consequence of our own actions ... not the coercive punishment that you envision.

 

[Greatest I am]

You're making a couple assumptions that weren't in the original post:
1) People were given free will so we could freely choose to love god.
2) Loving god gets you into heaven; not loving god gets you into hell.

Maybe the OP intended those to be part of his premises, but since he didn't state them, I didn't consider them (even though some people clearly do believe that).

Perhaps god gave us free will so we could grow and mature. Perhaps people get sent to hell because they treat others horribly. If either one of those is true, your premise is no longer valid.

Your statement is internally consistent. If god gave people free will so we could love him, punishing people for choosing otherwise does seem to defeat the purpose. I just don't agree with your premises.


I would say that you have a very different definition of free will than most of the rest of us. To you, free will involves freedom from consequences. To me, free will includes the freedom to accept the consequences.

For example, on Friday I went to a friend's birthday party, and I had too much to drink. On Saturday morning I had a horrible hangover. On Friday I realized that I would probably have a hangover (I underestimated the severity), and I chose to keep drinking anyway. Nobody poured a drink down my throat. Even though I had somewhat impaired judgment, I still made a conscious decision. I exercised my free will.

On Saturday evening I was at another party. I decided not to drink (despite some encouragement to), because I thought I'd messed with my body enough for the weekend.

I could have also chosen to have one drink (probably without consequences) or multiple drinks (and faced similar consequences).


They are acting in a manner that they feel is moral. And you can safely assume that their description of the situation would differ from mine.

You see a situation like this as one of imposing standards (and perhaps coercion). I see it as action/reaction. We had a disagreement. The consequences came about as a result of that disagreement.

And you're equating these consequences as punishments. In my opinion, I don't have a "right" to gifts or an inheritance. If my parents decide not to give either, that's not a punishment. That is their exercise of free will.

So even if god is excluding certain people from heaven, that is not (in my viewpoint) a punishment. We don't have a right to go to heaven. It's a gift. (If a parent promises their child a trip to Disney World as a reward for good grades, the child still has free will when deciding to study.)

Hell could be seen as a punishment ... depending on the nature of hell. Numerous references to the afterlife in the bible simply refer to "Sheol" (literally, "the grave"). Therefore, it's possible that there is no punishment ... just the end of existence.

One of my uncles once said, "My girlfriend could be in heaven, and I could be in hell, and it would be the same place ... a bingo game." It's entirely possible that we all end up in the same afterlife. It's our own perception that makes it a reward or punishment.

There's another saying: "Hell wouldn't be so bad, except for the company you have to keep." It could be that heaven and hell are roughly the same ... except hell contains all the cruel, self-centered, judgmental and otherwise unpleasant people; while heaven contains all the friendly, good and uplifting people. It's heaven because you're surrounded by all the wonderful people like yourself ... or it's hell because you're surrounded by all the nasty people like yourself. You (collectively) make it what it is.

So even hell could be a natural consequence of our own actions ... not the coercive punishment that you envision.

Let me just say that your hangover was temporary. God offers a hangover that lasts forever.

To sin for 120 yrs. and then have to spend 120000000000000000000000+ yrs paying for then is just plain unjust. Even if as you say hell might just be death as opposed to life. Any system where the penalty does not fit the offence is unjust.

Just because we hurt poor little God's feelings by not loving Him. I LOL at such a God.

Regards
DL