Questions about the concept of free will in Heaven

[Wesrock]

We seek the good. Due to our disordered nature sometimes we prioritize some goods selfishly and to excess, but we still do it because it seems like the “best” option at the time. Whatever is goinv on in our heads makes it outweigh anything else.

So there are two things of importance here. The first is ghat we are cleansed of any residual attachment to sin before obtaining the beatific vision. The second is that the beatific vision is the unveiling of the infinite and perfect good to us. Since we desire to meet the good but struggle to fulfill that need in life, could we possibly turn away once that perfect good is suddenly present to us fully? If we are finally completely fulfilled by God, not just hypothetically, but fulfilled to the core of our being, feeling it at all levels within us, having something we may never have realized was needed all along but in an infinite and perfect way compared to anything finite in this life, to which even barely turning your face away (figuratively) would result in an incredible absence within you, who could ever turn away? Being perfectly fulfilled, and I stress this because I fear people can only think of this analogously with imperfect goods which can grow stale or still not be enough, no one would ever turn away from God. We are free to do so, technically, perhaps, but it’s inconceivable that anyone would at that point.

And I should stress that God doesn’t just make us feel good or enrapture us to feel so. He IS the perfect good, full stop. Not the perfect good [insert qualification here], but goodness itself. The beatific vision isn’t just a subjective good, but the obtaining of a vision of the true, objective good.

While our ability to prioritize goods is affected by our disordered nature, all of us are moved by the will to seek the good. Any disordered actions are themselves an attempt to try to fulfill this need within us. The movement of the will towards the good is ultimately the movement of the will towards God. All of our actions and choices, then are directed towards seeking God, whether we know it or intend it, that is what the fundamental movement of the will is towards, though we have choice in how we exercise our will in response to that.

 

[Bradski]

I think the problem here is we don’t make any distinction between freedom of the will and the necessity of a choice. Maybe we have a distorted vision of “freedom”.

Precisely. Although you are incorrect in saying that free will directs us to the good. That ain’t necessarily so. Generally speaking, we choose what is beneficial to is but free will enaes us to make sacrifices as well. Which is what we might watn but which is not to our benefit.

The concept of free will cannot exist unless there are choices. But having choices does not mean that you choosee freely. In a given set of circumstances, and that would include a particular mind set, you would always choose the same path.

The common understanding of free will is that you would make different choices under the same circumstances. Which seems bizarre to me.

So I think that you are close to describing what free will actually means. Except that it is applicable in the here and now as well.

 

[Wesrock]

Precisely. Although you are incorrect in saying that free will directs us to the good. That ain’t necessarily so. Generally speaking, we choose what is beneficial to is but free will enaes us to make sacrifices as well. Which is what we might watn but which is not to our benefit.

Well, in either case, by “the good” we mean a good in each choice that the person is putting first as the most desirable. It can be sacrificing something for yourself in order to achieve something you see as a greater good. Or it could be a hasty choice to grab the last cookie before someone else to satisfy your taste cravings. That’s all we mean by a seeking of the good. It doesn’t mean the morally good choice wins out, just that in every choice we choose a good which (at least at the time) trumps the other. Even immoral actions are caused by a person prioritizing some good over another in an inappropriate way (good feelings, a sense of authority, satisfying a want). A person mught even know an action is immoral, but they choose something else because it’s the most good for them personally. Or vice versa.

I could go on and on. I think my point is coming across. People use this “everyone chooses what seems like the best option to them (for good or bad reasons), therefore they couldn’t have chosen differently!” To question free will.

 

[Bradski]

Well, in either case, by “the good” we mean a good in each choice that the person is putting first as the most desirable. It can be sacrificing something for yourself in order to achieve something you see as a greater good. Or it could be a hasty choice to grab the last cookie before someone else to satisfy your taste cravings. That’s all we mean by a seeking of the good. It doesn’t mean the morally good choice wins out, just that in every choice we choose a good which (at least at the time) trumps the other. Even immoral actions are caused by a person prioritizing some good over another in an inappropriate way (good feelings, a sense of authority, satisfying a want). A person mught even know an action is immoral, but they choose something else because it’s the most good for them personally. Or vice versa.

I’ve no problem with any of that.

I could go on and on. I think my point is coming across. People use this “everyone chooses what seems like the best option to them (for good or bad reasons), therefore they couldn’t have chosen differently!” To question free will.

Whatever you do when you finish reading this sentence you would always do if the exact circumstances were in place at any other time.

 

[goout]

Whatever you do when you finish reading this sentence you would always do if the exact circumstances were in place at any other time.

Your “exact circumstances” are speculation and so are somewhat pointless.
In any case, each circumstance is evaluated, so…you don’t know what you would do.
You have an idea, but no certainty.

People change.
(because their will is moving etc…)

 

[Bradski]

Your “exact circumstances” are speculation and so are somewhat pointless.
In any case, each circumstance is evaluated, so…you don’t know what you would do.
You have an idea, but no certainty.

People change.
(because their will is moving etc…)

No-one has suggested that you know before time what you will do (although there are experiments that prove that in some circumstances you make an unconscious decision before you become consciously aware of it.

I am saying that for any given set of circumstances, the decision will always be the same. Otherwise it becomes arbitrary and is not really a decision.

 

[goout]

No-one has suggested that you know before time what you will do (although there are experiments that prove that in some circumstances you make an unconscious decision before you become consciously aware of it.

I am saying that for any given set of circumstances, the decision will always be the same. Otherwise it becomes arbitrary and is not really a decision.

And I respond as i did, that in essence, you don’t have foreknowledge of your behavior/decisions or anyone else’s. People change. Some people call it “conversion”.

The foreknowledge of “decisions in any given set of circumstances” smacks of arrogating omniscience to one’s self, which would be a very odd position for a claimed atheist.

 

[Bradski]

The foreknowledge of “decisions in any given set of circumstances” smacks of arrogating omniscience to one’s self, which would be a very odd position for a claimed atheist.

I didn’t say that you know what the decision will be. Quite the opposite, in fact. The decision is made unconsciously before you become aware of it.

Admittedly, this smacks of dualism. That there’s a little guy somewhere making the calls before he gets around to telling you about it. Except the little guy is you.

It could be that decisions we make are simply our conscious selves justifying a call that has already been made. There’s not enough known about the matter as yet so I am not making an argument for it. But it does lead to a lot of interesting questions.

 

[tonyrey]

I didn’t say that you know what the decision will be. Quite the opposite, in fact. The decision is made unconsciously before you become aware of it.

Admittedly, this smacks of dualism. That there’s a little guy somewhere making the calls before he gets around to telling you about it. Except the little guy is you.

It could be that decisions we make are simply our conscious selves justifying a call that has already been made. There’s not enough known about the matter as yet so I am not making an argument for it. But it does lead to a lot of interesting questions.

If our decisions about what to (dis)believe are made before we are aware of them there is no guarantee we shall ever know the truth because there are countless ways of being wrong but only one correct solution. Not only that. The subconscious is notoriously unreliable for being swayed by emotion at the expense of logic, coherence and consistency.

 

[Bradski]

If our decisions about what to (dis)believe are made before we are aware of them there is no guarantee we shall ever know the truth because there are countless ways of being wrong but only one correct solution. Not only that. The subconscious is notoriously unreliable for being swayed by emotion at the expense of logic, coherence and consistency.

I said nothing about formulating a belief. Maybe go back and read what I wrote. Whether the subconscious is reliable or not is a debatable point, but you better hope it is, because most of what you decide happens there well before you are aware of it. sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080414145705.htm

Incidentally, that’s twice in just two posts I’ve had to correct what people think they read versus what I actually wrote. If this was an isolated incident, then I’d ignore it, but I am constantly having to do this.

Am I not being clear enough? I try to take care in what I am saying and the way that I say it. It may not always be right, but surely it is comprehensible…

 

[fred_conty]

1. Do you think people have free will in Heaven?
2. If so, what’s to stop people from rebelling against God in Heaven like Adam and Eve did on earth, bringing upon sin?
3. And if one can’t rebel against God in Heaven for some reason, why couldn’t God have done the same thing to stop people from rebelling against him on earth?

Complex questions…

1. Do you think people have free will in Heaven?

The nature of man is that he is body and soul. Soul consists of intellect and will. It is the will that chooses and is free. If there is no free will then we have something other than man. So man still has his free will in heaven that he was created with.

2**. If so, what’s to stop people from rebelling against God in Heaven like Adam and Eve did on earth, bringing upon sin?**

Heaven is the Face to Face knowledge of goodness. The object of free will is to choose good.

Face to Face means that the soul sees God directly as the greatest good or being infinitly good containing all good that is. There would be no attraction for a lessor good once this infinite good, having all lessor goods, is realized. There is nothing to distract the soul from God, because God has contains all good in an over whelming way. The soul is in a constant state of choosing God’s majestic beauty, love, and joy, and is completely satisfied and fulfilled.

3. And if one can’t rebel against God in Heaven for some reason, why couldn’t God have done the same thing to stop people from rebelling against him on earth?

The simple answer is that on earth we do not yet see God face to face making it possible to know that He possesses all we would ever dream of having to make perfect satisfaction and fulfillment possible.

This goes back to the old catechectical question: “Why were we made?”
Answer: “To know God, to love God, to serve God, and to be happy with him in heaven forever.” In other words, we are put in a learning process to be made ready for heaven. And when the learning process ends at death, we are graded with A,B,C,D,and F. And we take our position according to our grade.

The angels were treated in much the same way. They were created without the Face to Face vision. Then they were given a test of some sort. Those that rebelled went to the wrong place and those that were loyal received the Face to Face vision. They were graded and took their position accordingly.

My personal opinion on this is … why would we be created with a soul that has the power of choosing if we are never put in a position of choosing. That is, if we were given straightway this Face to Face vision, we really did not use this power at all. So we are endowed with this power of choice and now are given the oportunity to use it…for good. Unfortunately some angels and some men use it unwisely … but use it we must for that belongs to our nature.

Psalm 16
And I, being upright, shall see your face, the sight of you, when I wake, will be all that I need.

 

[tonyrey]

I said nothing about formulating a belief. Maybe go back and read what I wrote. Whether the subconscious is reliable or not is a debatable point, but you better hope it is, because most of what you decide happens there well before you are aware of it. sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080414145705.htm

If what we decide is a subconscious activity it follows that we do not formulate any beliefs.

The time lapse between our **physical **awareness of our decisions doesn’t imply they have a physical origin. In fact if they did it would imply we have no control whatsoever over any of our mental activity and are never responsible for anything we think, say or do

 

[tonyrey]

1. Do you think people have free will in Heaven?

The nature of man is that he is body and soul. Soul consists of intellect and will. It is the will that chooses and is free. If there is no free will then we have something other than man. So man still has his free will in heaven that he was created with.

2**. If so, what’s to stop people from rebelling against God in Heaven like Adam and Eve did on earth, bringing upon sin?**

Heaven is the Face to Face knowledge of goodness. The object of free will is to choose good.

Face to Face means that the soul sees God directly as the greatest good or being infinitly good containing all good that is. There would be no attraction for a lessor good once this infinite good, having all lessor goods, is realized. There is nothing to distract the soul from God, because God has contains all good in an over whelming way. The soul is in a constant state of choosing God’s majestic beauty, love, and joy, and is completely satisfied and fulfilled.

3. And if one can’t rebel against God in Heaven for some reason, why couldn’t God have done the same thing to stop people from rebelling against him on earth?

The simple answer is that on earth we do not yet see God face to face making it possible to know that He possesses all we would ever dream of having to make perfect satisfaction and fulfillment possible.

This goes back to the old catechetical question: “Why were we made?”
Answer: “To know God, to love God, to serve God, and to be happy with him in heaven forever.” In other words, we are put in a learning process to be made ready for heaven. And when the learning process ends at death, we are graded with A,B,C,D,and F. And we take our position according to our grade.

The angels were treated in much the same way. They were created without the Face to Face vision. Then they were given a test of some sort. Those that rebelled went to the wrong place and those that were loyal received the Face to Face vision. They were graded and took their position accordingly.

My personal opinion on this is … why would we be created with a soul that has the power of choosing if we are never put in a position of choosing. That is, if we were given straightway this Face to Face vision, we really did not use this power at all. So we are endowed with this power of choice and now are given the opportunity to use it…for good. Unfortunately some angels and some men use it unwisely … but use it we must for that belongs to our nature.

:clapping: An excellent analysis.

 

[tonyrey]

Well, in either case, by “the good” we mean a good in each choice that the person is putting first as the most desirable. It can be sacrificing something for yourself in order to achieve something you see as a greater good. Or it could be a hasty choice to grab the last cookie before someone else to satisfy your taste cravings. That’s all we mean by a seeking of the good. It doesn’t mean the morally good choice wins out, just that in every choice we choose a good which (at least at the time) trumps the other. Even immoral actions are caused by a person prioritizing some good over another in an inappropriate way (good feelings, a sense of authority, satisfying a want). A person mught even know an action is immoral, but they choose something else because it’s the most good for them personally. Or vice versa.

I could go on and on. I think my point is coming across. People use this “everyone chooses what seems like the best option to them (for good or bad reasons), therefore they couldn’t have chosen differently!” To question free will.

The fact that we can choose to be unreasonable implies that we are not biological computers…

 

[Vera_Ljuba]

If what we decide is a subconscious activity it follows that we do not formulate any beliefs.

The subconscious is part of “WE”.

 

[tonyrey]

If we didn’t have free will in heaven we would be incapable of the highest form of love which transcends self-interest and is reflected in the idea of John Keats that we are capable of “negative capability”.

 

[tonyrey]

The subconscious is part of “WE”.

The real question is what are “we”?

 

[STT]

I didn’t say that you know what the decision will be. Quite the opposite, in fact. The decision is made unconsciously before you become aware of it.

Admittedly, this smacks of dualism. That there’s a little guy somewhere making the calls before he gets around to telling you about it. Except the little guy is you.

It could be that decisions we make are simply our conscious selves justifying a call that has already been made. There’s not enough known about the matter as yet so I am not making an argument for it. But it does lead to a lot of interesting questions.

I said nothing about formulating a belief. Maybe go back and read what I wrote. Whether the subconscious is reliable or not is a debatable point, but you better hope it is, because most of what you decide happens there well before you are aware of it. sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080414145705.htm

Incidentally, that’s twice in just two posts I’ve had to correct what people think they read versus what I actually wrote. If this was an isolated incident, then I’d ignore it, but I am constantly having to do this.

Am I not being clear enough? I try to take care in what I am saying and the way that I say it. It may not always be right, but surely it is comprehensible…

I think that the result of that experiment just suggest that subconscious mind makes the decision for routine tasks. We all experience that we can decide consciously.

 

[STT]

1. Do you think people have free will in Heaven?

I am not sure if we can perform any act in the state of eternal joy and bliss.

 

[Bradski]

If what we decide is a subconscious activity it follows that we do not formulate any beliefs.

Having your subconscious make decisions for you and you making conscious decisions as to whether accept or reject any given evidence (which automatically leads to belief or unbelief) are, obviously, two different things.