The Instigator
Trupsebteri
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points
The Contender
Kumquatodor
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

There is no free will in Heaven

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Trupsebteri
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/25/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,036 times Debate No: 38122
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)

 

Trupsebteri

Pro

First round is for acceptance.
Kumquatodor

Con

I accept!
Debate Round No. 1
Trupsebteri

Pro

I would first like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate and look forward to engaging him in my first debate here!

I have taken the stance that due to the nature of Christianity, God, and the Bible that there can be no free will in Heaven.

For my first supporting facts I will turn to the bible itself. There are many descriptions of heaven throughout the bible and many of them simply are not possible with the introduction of humanity. Take for instance Revelation 21:4 "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

How can that be possible? If we retain free will then emotional pain will always be a possibility. If we retain our ability to choose then inevitably there will be hurt as there are some who choose to sin in heaven.

For my second supporting facts I will once again pull from the bible. During the bible we see God has no problem messing with free will if means he achieves his goals. The most notable example is of course Pharaoh from Exodus. In the verses Exodus 4:21, Exodus 7:3-13, Exodus 9:12, Exodus 10:1-27, Exodus 11:10, and Exodus 14:4-17 God shows not only his planning and intent to disturb the free will of Pharaoh but also his willingness to carry out the plan.

There are other examples abound through the bible of God doing this, my personal favorite being Deuteronomy 2:30 "But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the LORD thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day." This is followed by the Israelites massacring Sihon"s people all because God messed with his free will.

I believe I have not only demonstrated using simple logic have shown that it is impossible for free will to exist in a supposedly sin-less heaven but that God has no issue with manipulating free will for his own ends.
Kumquatodor

Con

Thank you.


Now, it is important to realize that free will is one of the most important things to God.


God made the angels, presumably for worship, and yet he gave them free will enough to turn against him. Why? Because God values free-will.




I think God will destract us from sin, and pain. If he destracts us, we will not commit sins nor shall we feel pain. This destraction would not voilate free-will which God clearly wants us exercising.

We must remember with your examples, that they occurred in the Old Testament. The OT's relationship with Christianity is complex, to the point that many people do not consider it relevant. Even if God would affect our free-will now, why give us free-will in the first place?!
Debate Round No. 2
Trupsebteri

Pro

"God made the angels, presumably for worship, and yet he gave them free will enough to turn against him. Why? Because God values free-will."

This further goes to show that the idea of a sin-less heaven is impossible. Angels who were created by God and live with him in heaven still decided to rebel against his rule from time to time, only by taking away their ability to choose would he ensure a sin-less heaven. The same goes for humanity if this is his ultimate game.

"I think God will destract us from sin, and pain. If he destracts us, we will not commit sins nor shall we feel pain. This destraction would not voilate free-will which God clearly wants us exercising."

I am unclear of the meaning of the word destract but I assume you mean the removal of sin.

Forcibly altering someone"s personality to fit a certain behavior and then claiming in the same sentence that it is free will is mind boggling. Brainwashing with drugs, surgeries, or it"s supernatural equivalent can most certainly not be called free will. A person being altered to act a certain way has had his free will taken away to act out the things he would normally do without such interventions.

"We must remember with your examples, that they occurred in the Old Testament. The OT's relationship with Christianity is complex, to the point that many people do not consider it relevant. Even if God would affect our free-will now, why give us free-will in the first place?!"

The Old Testament is a massive part of the bible. 60-77 percent of the Bible is made up from the Old Testament. Such a huge chunk of the lore cannot be discounted or ignored for any reason.

It is also relevant to the discussion since God does not change.
Malachi 3:6 "For I, the Lord, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed."
This indicates that something God once did God has no issue doing again as long as it serves his purpose in the end.

I thank my opponent for this debate and look forward to his answers.

Vote pro!
Kumquatodor

Con

Wow... Conceded.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Trupsebteri 3 years ago
Trupsebteri
Blagh as soon as I posted I noticed I used a have in the wrong place at the end.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by MysticEgg 3 years ago
MysticEgg
TrupsebteriKumquatodorTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: I really had no opinion on this until after this debate - so my opinion was swayed! Conduct to Con due to a concession. Spelling and grammar were fine. Arguments to Pro due to good arguments and refutes. No one used sources, so sources tied.
Vote Placed by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
TrupsebteriKumquatodorTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by retroman000 3 years ago
retroman000
TrupsebteriKumquatodorTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro simply made better arguments, as well ass valid refutations of Con's points.
Vote Placed by dragon_slayer489 3 years ago
dragon_slayer489
TrupsebteriKumquatodorTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: this debate was hard to follow