If God wants to destroy evil...

[Zarathustra]

God created everything that has been, is, and is going to be in existence. He created the Earth and the Heavens. He created the Lake of Fire in which he casts sinners. He created Good, and He created evil. Does not the old adage says "I have created you, and so can I destroy you"?

If God wanted to, couldn't He, in theory, destroy evil with no need for the battle of the apocalypse?

[keltzkroz]

I’ll try to address the concerns you have regarding my previous post.

I did write ‘Let me add a few things to your train of thought:’. My response was never intended to answer your question, merely to help out in your search for an answer.

Let me add a few things to your train of thought:

1) There is obviously no sin in heaven.

Is Heaven a place where painters have only one color to work with, or a place where painters use only one color out of all the others every time?

How do you define or describe ‘sin’?
I will try to make my previous post clearer. I think Zarathustra came quite close to what I had in mind. If all that we have ever known is ‘hot’, and all that there is is hot, would we know what ‘hot’ is if we don’t know what ‘cold’ is? Would there be such a thing as ‘hot’ if there is no such thing as ‘cold’? I hope that made sense, but let’s just say that I’m struggling with the right words to convey my thoughts.

2) But is there free will? The assumption is yes, since God has made it clear that he greatly values Free Will in his creations; that, in fact, is what this "song and dance" is all about. And of course, it wouldn't be heaven if we couldn't do as we pleased! Very Happy
3) So this means that when we arrive at the pearly gates, we are stripped of Original Sin, but not of our Free Will.

I'd rather think of heaven as a place where we could not do what is not pleasing to everybody, and everything we do is pleasing to everybody, not a place where we can do as we please.

How do you define or describe ‘free will’?
I think The Happy Humanist came very close to what I’m actually thinking. However, I doubt if automatons have a will of their own, or that they are actually pleased. Let me rephrase what I wrote earlier: I like to think of Heaven as a place where anything we want to do is pleasing to everybody (which includes ourselves). Our wills would be as one.

And for Arch, I believe Jesus died for our sins because people could not get to Heaven on their own.

4) It is therefore within God's ability to create free agents that are incapable of sin.
Now for the conundrum (drum roll please):

WHY DIDN'T HE DO THIS TO BEGIN WITH?

Why would He do it in the first place? Because He loves us? I'm curious about your thoughts on this.

I wrote ‘Because He loves us?’ followed by ‘I'm curious about your thoughts on this.’ It’s an honest question, and I’m genuinely curious about your thoughts on why God would do it in the first place. Why are we this way? As mentioned earlier in this thread, this question is very much related to the meaning of our lives.

I hope that was clearer that my last post.

[Zarathustra]

Thank you keltzkroz, that does help.

However, it still seems like you are saying that if/when we enter Heaven, we are changed. Our desires/motives/ambitions/thoughts are all changed with the absolution of Original Sin. Well I suppose this would technically be possible (as far as God goes), what's the point. To ask what the meaning of life is in yet another way ( ): What is the point of living if we are all going to end up essentially the same person in Heaven?

But, it seems we are straying from the topic. Perhaps we should take this discussion over to The Happy Humanist's What's It Like In Heaven thread.

[The Happy Humanist]

Sorry for my long absence. I've wanted to revisit this thread for some time now...

How do you define or describe ‘sin’?
I will try to make my previous post clearer. I think Zarathustra came quite close to what I had in mind. If all that we have ever known is ‘hot’, and all that there is is hot, would we know what ‘hot’ is if we don’t know what ‘cold’ is? Would there be such a thing as ‘hot’ if there is no such thing as ‘cold’? I hope that made sense, but let’s just say that I’m struggling with the right words to convey my thoughts.

This is somewhat related to the old saw about "If you want to know about water, DON'T ask a fish." Yes, there would be such a thing as hot, there just wouldn't be a word for it. But I'm not sure exactly where you're going with this, in relation to "How do you define or describe sin"? Are you saying that sin is so universal that there is no such thing as "not-sin"? So there is sin in heaven?

How do you define or describe ‘free will’?
I think The Happy Humanist came very close to what I’m actually thinking. However, I doubt if automatons have a will of their own, or that they are actually pleased. Let me rephrase what I wrote earlier: I like to think of Heaven as a place where anything we want to do is pleasing to everybody (which includes ourselves). Our wills would be as one.

Sounds lovely, but there is no avoiding the fact that this would entail an external force "changing" our free will, which means it would no longer be ours, it would no longer be free, it would no longer be will. As I have argued elsewhere, our wills, our wants, our desires, are intextricably linked to our identities, to who we are in the first place. Any external, forced "editing" of our will would be tantamount to creating a fundamentally different person altogether. In other words, it may be nice in heaven, but we'll never find out. Some altered version of us will be in there, not us.

For example, let's say that you have an obsessive fascination with the color fuschia, which few other souls in heaven can stand. Now you arrive at the Pearly Gates (hopefully a long time from now) and your secret love for fuschia is discovered. A quick editing job, and presto! Your color preferences now coincide with everyone elses.

Is it still you?

Substitute any harmless but quirky fascinations you may have - oddball ice cream flavors, foreign movies (yech), - and think about how much these things define who you are. Would you be the same person in this life without them?

So, with this in mind, what exactly is it about heaven that you were looking forward to?

4) It is therefore within God's ability to create free agents that are incapable of sin.
Now for the conundrum (drum roll please):

WHY DIDN'T HE DO THIS TO BEGIN WITH?

Why would He do it in the first place? Because He loves us? I'm curious about your thoughts on this.

I wrote ‘Because He loves us?’ followed by ‘I'm curious about your thoughts on this.’ It’s an honest question, and I’m genuinely curious about your thoughts on why God would do it in the first place. Why are we this way? As mentioned earlier in this thread, this question is very much related to the meaning of our lives.

I hope that was clearer that my last post.

Well, not really, but maybe that's my fault. Let me restate the conundrum.

1) We are told that we need to believe in Jesus Christ in order to go to heaven. Jesus died to save us from our Original Sin.

2) We are told that we acquired that Original Sin through the actions of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. All the torments of evil we suffer in the world today are the direct result of this Fall from grace. Or so we are told. In other words, evil is humanity's fault, not God's.

3) When we ask why God would create us with the capacity to sin, we are told that to do otherwise would constrict our free will, and make us automatons. We provisionally agree with this.

4) But then we consider the situation in heaven. There cannot be sin in heaven, as it is not in the nature of God to abide evil in his own dwelling place, especially if it is to be a reward for those who have led Godly lives on earth.

5) But we must also retain some semblance of our free will in heaven, otherwise "it just ain't us in there," and besides, if God did not want to be worshipped by automatons on the earthly plane, it stands to reason that he would feel the same way about automatons in heaven.

6) It therefore must be possible for God to perform a "radical sin-ectomy" on our souls before entering heaven, in such a way as to take away our desire to sin without removing our free will. I understand that this is actually referred to in Christian circles as "Glorification."

7) Here comes the conundrum, but we'll skip the drum roll this time:
IF 6 THEN NOT 3.
IF NOT 3 THEN NOT 2.
IF NOT 2 THEN NOT 1.
ABEND ROUTINE "SALVATION"
ABEND PROGRAM "CHRISTIANITY"

Sorry, I couldn't resist...let's try that again in English.

If it is possible for God to create us with our Free Will intact but without the capacity to sin, then point 3 above is invalid. There must be some OTHER reason God created Adam and Eve with the capacity to sin. Yet, no reason comes to mind that is reconcilable with an all-good, all-knowing God. It is therefore reasonable to conclude, either a) God is not all-good, not all-knowing, or neither, or b) the God of the Christian Bible does not exist.

You asked for my thoughts on this. My thoughts are that, golly, atheism makes so much sense!

[hannahjoy]

Sounds lovely, but there is no avoiding the fact that this would entail an external force "changing" our free will, which means it would no longer be ours, it would no longer be free, it would no longer be will. As I have argued elsewhere, our wills, our wants, our desires, are intextricably linked to our identities, to who we are in the first place. Any external, forced "editing" of our will would be tantamount to creating a fundamentally different person altogether. In other words, it may be nice in heaven, but we'll never find out. Some altered version of us will be in there, not us.

It's interesting that you would say this, because that's basically but happens - but not against our wills.

6) It therefore must be possible for God to perform a "radical sin-ectomy" on our souls before entering heaven, in such a way as to take away our desire to sin without removing our free will. I understand that this is actually referred to in Christian circles as "Glorification."

You're pretty close there, but that's not "glorification".

What happens at salvation is a "new creature" being born - that's why it's called being "born again" and "regeneration".

II Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
The process of God continually developing us and purifying us from sin is sanctification. This is a work of the Holy Spirit, in us individually and the Church as a whole, accomplished through God's word, and it takes place with our will, not against it.

1 Peter 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Ephesians 5:25-27
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

That work is perfected when we reach heaven - that is glorification.

Romans 8:17-18,29-30
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

So, to get back to the original question - God is destroying evil in those who submit their wills to Him, and He will finally destroy evil.

The best thing about heaven is not having whatever we want, but being with God and free from sin. The desire for that is not natural, it is miraculous. For me one of the strongest proofs of the truth of the Bible is that God has given me that desire.

Hannah Joy

[Zarathustra]

This may just be my opinion, but being free from sin probably isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Sin makes the world go 'round, humans strive for conflict. Being exactly like everyone else probably isn't worth just being near God. Humans strive for conflict and humans strive for individuality. That is why we are all here, no? We all have our own beliefs, and we are all willing to debate about them. Conflict/individuality. I'm sure most of you have seen that cliched TV show story-line: the bad guy finally thinks he has destroyed the good guy. Sure he celebrates at first, but them he just feels empty inside.

Again, just my opinion, but I don't think I'd be able to stand it in heaven. But, then again, as the Happy Humanist pointed out: I'm not going to be in heaven (let's assume I've actually met the prerequisites ), I'm going to go through "Glorification" or "Salvation" or whatever the correct term is, and I will no longer be "me".

But, on the flip side, I may still be "me" but the adult to my child respectivley. To use Happy Humanist's example "Oh, why did I ever like fuschia? It clashes with EVERYTHING." However, this having been done against my will, would infringe upon free will. Unless, as a good Christian, I willed salvation upon myself.

You're right, Happy Humanist, atheism does make a lot of sense. If only I could make a sensical argument instead of debating both sides of the issue against myself simultaneously.

[The Happy Humanist]

What happens at salvation is a "new creature" being born - that's why it's called being "born again" and "regeneration".

Ok, lemme see if I got this straight...a new creature is being born...but its still "us"...right? I don't know about this....

I am a Frank Sinatra tribute artist, and a huge fan of the man from the age of 6. Now Sinatra was an intensely complicated man, an artist whose art was informed by his passions, his jealous rages, his fits of depression, his celebrated lust...his "sinful" side. I realized early on that without that dark side, we would never have heard of him, or at best he'd have achieved no more than say, Jack Jones...just another pretty voice. Although I found some of his exploits disturbing to say the least, I admit to a sneaking admiration for some of his bravado, and that certainly impacts my admiration for his music. If he wore cardigan sweaters and drank milk, I would probably want nothing to do with him. So...two questions:

1) If someone had waved a magic wand and suddenly Frank Sinatra became Perry Como, would that be more desirable? (This touches on what Zarathustra said above as well).

2) If I go to heaven, will I have to lose my admiration for Sinatra, since that admiration is inextricably tied to his "sinful" side? Will I be changed into someone who doesn't care for Sinatra? You do realize that that someone will not be "me." My Sinatra fandom has become very much a part of my identity. (Ironically, Sinatra's early recordings on Columbia were one of the very few things that ever made me question my atheism. I'm still not 100% certain that such a talent is a product of evolution).

So, to get back to the original question - God is destroying evil in those who submit their wills to Him

Interesting choice of words..."those who submit their wills to Him"...sure sounds like an abdication of free will to me.

and He will finally destroy Evil

You make this sound like it takes a monumental effort on His part. Again, why would he ever abide Evil in the first place? The point of this thread is to answer the challenge of why God has put us through this monstrous rigamarole when it apparently wasn't necessary. And please, no talk of His great, unknowable "plan." If He really has such a plan, he needs to share all of the details with us, otherwise he has no right to expect our fealty. On the other hand, if the Plan really is unknowable, then the certitude with which you speak of these things is just so much whistling past the graveyard.

For me one of the strongest proofs of the truth of the Bible is that God has given me that desire.

One has to wonder why this desire is withheld from individuals such as myself...

[hannahjoy]

Being exactly like everyone else probably isn't worth just being near God.

Who said we would all be exactly alike? There's no prescribed personality that I know of.

I don't want to get into a discussion of what makes you "you", or whether you would still be "yourself" if you didn't like Sinatra. I don't see why we would lose our identity by being "born again".
We are corrupted by sin - physically, mentally, emotionally, and volitionally. If I am first born corrupted - corruption is not a thing by itself, but a defacing of something pure. The new, "incorruptible" creature born at salvation is still "me", without the corruption of sin - more "myself" as God intended me to be. When I am glorified, I will receive an incorruptible body.

I know this is long, but it's probably the clearest teaching on the subject in the Bible - and you asked!

I Corinthians 15:42-54
54 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

These also address the same idea.

I Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Ephesians 4:22-24
22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

Romans 8:21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

Interesting choice of words..."those who submit their wills to Him"...sure sounds like an abdication of free will to me.

It's not going from freedom to slavery, but from one master to another, better master.

Romans 6:16-23
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.
20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.
21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.
22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

If He really has such a plan, he needs to share all of the details with us, otherwise he has no right to expect our fealty.

That's simply not true. Why should He tell you all the details, when you reject what He has told you? His plan is not completely "unknowable". By "finally" I didn't mean after great effort, but that He is waiting to do it.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

If God is going to destroy sin - and you won't let go of sin - and He won't take away your sin against your will - you don't have to worry about going to heaven.

One has to wonder why this desire is withheld from individuals such as myself...

You could ask for it.

Hannah Joy

[Zarathustra]

Being incorruptable sounds like a personality in and of itself. Let's say that on Earth, I enjoy stand-up comics. I think it's pretty clear that a lot of them are going to Hell. I somehow manage to get into Heaven. I am now incorruptable I no longer enjoy stand-up comics. Am I still me?

It's not going from freedom to slavery, but from one master to another, better master. [/quote[
I'm not sure who my master is here on Earth. But I feel pretty free to do whatever I want.

You could ask for it.

I tried being a Christian for most of my life so far. I felt guilty about having some of the thoughts I'm expressing on this forum. Sometimes I still do. I talked to God, I tried to accept Him and His word. I asked Him to let me feel the power of the Holy Spirit within me. I asked to feel the feeling that all of these evangelists are preaching about. It never happened. Then I realized, hey, Christianity doesn't make much sense.

[keltzkroz]

Am I still me?

I often ask that question myself. After all, it did say in the Bible that 'we shall be changed'.

I like to think of it this way: when I was a baby, I cried a lot, I hated vegetables, and I liked playing with my baby toys. When I grew up, I did not cry so much anymore, I liked vegetables, and stopped playing with my baby toys. And I'm still me.

When I think of 'we shall be changed', I like to think of it as something like growing up. And I would still be me.

[The Happy Humanist]

I don't want to get into a discussion of what makes you "you", or whether you would still be "yourself" if you didn't like Sinatra. I don't see why we would lose our identity by being "born again".
We are corrupted by sin - physically, mentally, emotionally, and volitionally. If I am first born corrupted - corruption is not a thing by itself, but a defacing of something pure. The new, "incorruptible" creature born at salvation is still "me", without the corruption of sin - more "myself" as God intended me to be. When I am glorified, I will receive an incorruptible body.

Did you see the movie "The Stepford Wives"? Were those people still "themselves"? I maintain it is impossible to forcibly change someone's wants, desires, innermost thoughts - which is what "glorification" or whatever would entail - without changing them into a different person. And again, if he could have done that in the first place, then there is no reason for us to have endured all these millenia of hardship.

One has to wonder why this desire is withheld from individuals such as myself...

You could ask for it.

Why do you people always assume we haven't?