Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What would heaven be like?
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 33 (27791)
12-24-2002 1:47 PM


I i went to heaven, would i be able to 'sin'? or would that priveledge be taken away?
If I went to hell, would I be able to do 'good'?
if all is 'good', there is no such thing as 'good' since what do you measure 'goodness' by? won't you always do the most 'good' thing making your life predictable, unfree and robot-like? or do you have the choice to 'sin', preserving your free will?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-24-2002 3:16 PM Gzus has not replied
 Message 4 by Mr. Davies, posted 12-24-2002 11:14 PM Gzus has not replied
 Message 5 by Brad McFall, posted 12-24-2002 11:25 PM Gzus has not replied

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 33 (27838)
12-25-2002 2:04 PM


How did the 11th amendment get into this? And what the hell does it have to do with Aristotle!!!
Speak sense mate

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Brad McFall, posted 12-25-2002 2:43 PM Gzus has not replied

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 33 (27839)
12-25-2002 2:07 PM


The privilege of sin is basically our free will to right and wrong

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Brad McFall, posted 12-25-2002 2:44 PM Gzus has replied
 Message 17 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-26-2002 4:45 AM Gzus has replied

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 33 (27849)
12-25-2002 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Brad McFall
12-25-2002 2:44 PM


Yes, ok, I admit
Privilege presupposes want, which presupposes purpose, which presupposes meaning etc. all of which by the way, I hold (through the reasoning of past philosophers) to be delusions of the human ‘mind’ which has no freedom. —let’s not get into that shall we.
But I accept your point. A privilege it is not, for those who do not hold the maxim ‘freedom is good’. But the existence of sin is a necessity for freedom since if all is good, perfect, then there can be no other choice than perfection (assuming that sin has meaning and that it is not merely a delusion).
I am attempting merely to find fault in the biblical interpretation of heaven by revealing a seeming violation of free will.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Brad McFall, posted 12-25-2002 2:44 PM Brad McFall has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by forgiven, posted 12-25-2002 8:47 PM Gzus has not replied

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 33 (27924)
12-26-2002 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by funkmasterfreaky
12-26-2002 4:45 AM


I think that the analogy has to be taken further.
If I have a Ferrari and you have a Volvo, then I can value my Ferrari, but if everyone has a Ferrari and no other car ever existed and I’ve never even heard/thought about the possibility of having a ‘volvo’ then there really is truly only Ferrari. Hence Ferrari is normal and rather ordinary.
If Volvo is sin, then is it not sinful to imagine/think about the possibilities of Volvo?
If Ferrari is good, then the only choice can be good and since all Ferraris are the same (perfection is the only good), then there is not freedom of choice. No free will.
To be ‘good’ you must always make the perfect choice, there can only be one perfect choice hence you are unfree.
Why is it bad to be unfree? Because, then you are unconscious, you have no freedom of mind as there can only be one perfect thinking pattern.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-26-2002 4:45 AM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by shilohproject, posted 12-26-2002 7:53 PM Gzus has replied

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 33 (27962)
12-27-2002 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by shilohproject
12-26-2002 7:53 PM


Take water for example. Water is water not bater. But do we appreciate this, no! because bater is a word I just made up. Before I invented/thought about the ‘bater concept’ no one appreciated the fact that water is water and not bater, since bater did not exist in fact or mind.
The same is applicable to good and evil. No one appreciated that good was good and not evil before the concept of ‘evil’was introduced. No one could appreciate good, as there was no reference point for appreciation, just as we could not appreciate the fact that water is water and not bater before the creation of bater.
If there is no sin in heaven, there can be no sin in fact or mind hence ‘setting the clock back’ to the time when sin was as real as bater, hence good cannot be appreciated for its ‘goodness’ in comparison to ‘badness’.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by shilohproject, posted 12-26-2002 7:53 PM shilohproject has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by shilohproject, posted 12-27-2002 1:37 PM Gzus has not replied
 Message 29 by doctrbill, posted 12-28-2002 11:17 PM Gzus has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024