If we will have free will and be sinless in Heaven at the same time, then why did God not create a world with sinless free creatures to begin with?

Question

This question is scoped to those who believe that:

We have libertarian free wills
We will retain our free will in Heaven
We will be sinless in Heaven

Question: If Heaven demonstrates that it is possible to live in a world where (1) there is no sin and (2) everyone has free will, then why did God not create a world like that to begin with? The Garden of Eden was a place where Adam & Eve had free will but could sin (in fact, they did), whereas Heaven (after Jesus' second coming) will be a place where everyone will have free will and yet will never sin. Is there a fundamental difference between the nature or the setting of Adam & Eve and the nature or the setting of the saints in Heaven? If so, why?

"everyone will have free will and yet will never sin" Not doing something isn't the same as not being able to do something. I am not going to jump off a 30-storey building. Am I incapable of doing so? No. It fundamentally comes down to the difference between "possible" and "probable". It's possible that I will jump off a 30-storey building, but it is not probable that I will do so. It's the same with Heaven. Adam and Eve were innocent(like children), not knowing good from evil. We, when we are resurrected, will not be as such. We will be fully conformed to the image of Jesus(Romans 8:29). — Rajesh, Feb 12 '22 at 03:58
@Rajesh - by talking about "probable", are you suggesting that probability applies to free will? — , Feb 12 '22 at 04:05
Well, that depends on whether or not the universe is deterministic. I personally don't believe so, though one can make a tremendous case for the positive. I don't know what your stance is on that. But if the universe isn't deterministic and free will exists, then yes, probability most certainly applies to free will. If there is a 100% chance that you'll pick something, then there's a 0% chance that you'll pick anything else, and the universe is deterministic. Hence, in a universe with free will, there must be probabilities when it comes to choosing options(which is what FW allows you to do). — Rajesh, Feb 12 '22 at 04:11
@Rajesh: in a universe with free will, there must be probabilities when it comes to choosing options - if that's the case, then your decisions would still be forced to follow a probability distribution. What determines that distribution? And given any distribution, why would a free agent be forced to follow it? He should be able to ignore the distribution and do whatever he wants. — , Feb 12 '22 at 04:14
I don't know. The only point I'm making is that we will still have the ability to choose evil. If there was a 100% chance that we would do good, and a 0% chance that we would do bad, then we have no free will. We literally cannot choose one over the other(100% chance means 100% chance, as in, we literally cannot choose to do anything but that). If one cannot choose between options, then one does not have free will. Since we don't lose free will in Heaven, we will still be able to choose between good and bad. That's the only point I'm making. I'm not at all a philosopher. :-) — Rajesh, Feb 12 '22 at 04:18
@Rajesh - if you believe that free will follows probability distributions, and you claim that there is a probability greater than 0% for people to sin in Heaven, then, given enough time, people will sin, it should happen statistically. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense to talk about probabilities and events following probability distributions. — , Feb 12 '22 at 04:22
@SpiritRealmInvestigator are you looking for theological answers (from within the Christian world) or for answers to outsiders, apologetics etc.? — ninthamigo, Feb 12 '22 at 04:22
"given enough time, people will sin, it should happen statistically" Perhaps. But theoretical probability is not the same as experimental probability, so, you can't know for sure. :-) — Rajesh, Feb 12 '22 at 04:25
@ninthamigo - I just watched a video where an atheist brought up this challenging question while debating against a street preacher, so answers from apologists would be quite handy actually :-) — , Feb 12 '22 at 04:25
@SpiritRealmInvestigator cool cool, I will try my best as an Arminian to answer your question, but to clarify, by free-will do you mean libertarian free will, compatibilist free-will, or leave that open to the answerer? — ninthamigo, Feb 12 '22 at 04:28
@SpiritRealmInvestigator that's what I figured by the clarification that we have it, just wanted to be sure — ninthamigo, Feb 12 '22 at 04:30
@Rajesh Probability describes things, it does not determine things. God cannot deny Himself. There is 100% chance that He will not deny Himself and 0% chance that He will. Does this probability mean that God does not have free will or that His will is perfect? — Mike Borden, Feb 12 '22 at 13:54
"Probability describes things, it does not determine things" I never said it determines things. I said it predicts things. That's called theoretical probability. But it can also describe actuality, i.e. experimental probability. You should be telling that to SpiritRealmInvestigator. He said, "given enough time, people will sin, it should happen statistically" Theoretically, yes, given enough time people will sin. But as you say, probability does not determine outcomes. It describes them(whether theoretically or experimentally). — Rajesh, Feb 12 '22 at 18:14
"Does this probability mean that God does not have free will or that His will is perfect?" If He is literally incapable of choosing any other option BUT to not deny Himself, then yes. If there's a 0% chance that God will deny Himself, then He is literally incapable of denying Himself(if He wasn't, then there would be a chance that He would). He's incapable of picking one option and is only capable of picking the other. In this case, God does not have the free will to choose between options; He can only choose one. Free will enables you to choose between multiple options. — Rajesh, Feb 12 '22 at 18:17
@Rajesh - probability describes how things work. For example, if you say that "there is a 2 percent probability that a person's decision will be sinful in Heaven", then, on average, of every 100 decisions in Heaven, 2 of them will be sinful. If, on the contrary, after trillions of decisions none of them is sinful, then your probabilistic description wouldn't make sense. — , Feb 12 '22 at 18:18
"probability describes how things work" That's what I said. — Rajesh, Feb 12 '22 at 18:24
@Rajesh If God does not have free will, what limits Him. Is there some greater paradigm which applies force upon Him making Him incapable of denying Himself. — Mike Borden, Feb 12 '22 at 23:05
Ah.. A great question! It’s because we are not the focus of the created world. The purpose of the created world was to make something perfect, but open to corruption, in order to show love and redemption to that world by being subject to it and giving one’s life for it, thus earning the right to judge rebellion whilst remaining all loving. We are pawns in a bigger picture, a bigger fight, that went down between God and Satan. A fight that said “You can’t punish my rebellion without denying your loving nature.” … — , Feb 17 '22 at 01:34
… Earth 1 is the result of this challenge; Earth 2 (or heaven) sees Satan banished, and humans resurrected incorruptible. — , Feb 17 '22 at 01:34
@ Mike Borden I think there is a scripture somewhere which says something like “God cannot do x, for he cannot deny his nature”, implying that constraint stops with God, but does not exclude God? Not to suggest however that we have a capricious God who is constantly being constrained by his own nature of course. — , Feb 17 '22 at 01:43

score 7 · Accepted Answer · edited Feb 12 '22 at 23:00

Introduction

I see your question as boiling down to the following: There is no sin in heaven, but free will continues; is it possible for God to create such a world via fiat? If yes, why did he create the garden and not heaven? I will suggest 2 possible answers consistent with versions of libertarian free will. The answers are complementary.

God can create such a world by fiat, and this is it.
God cannot create such a world because it would be internally inconsistent.

Answer 1: God can (and did create such a world)

Libertarian free will in its most basic sense is the ability to make real either/or choices. If, when you wake up in the morning you are genuinely free to choose to brush your teeth or not to brush your teeth, you have libertarian free will. This type of free will does not imply total freedom, since you are not free to brush an alien's teeth even if your choose to do so. We are, however, able to genuinely choose to do or not to do what is logically possible.

Furthermore, most advocates of libertarian free-will do not require all choices to be either/or, so in this sense you still may have genuine freedom not to brush your teeth, but by consistently choosing to brush your teeth every morning for 10 years, brushing your teeth ceases to be a choice and instead becomes an involuntary behavior.

To expand on this sense of "habituation" consider the process of learning to read. A young child begins by memorizing the shapes of letters, and the basic sounds that those letters symbolize. In time, children learn to put the sounds together in the same way that the letters are joined on a page in the form of words. With even more time, reading no longer consists of sounds but words and eventually phrases.

Similarly, the choices we make form habits that accumulate into character so that much of our behavior and personality is an expression of natural (virtually involuntary) impulses.

Walking, riding a bike, talking, all move from conscious, focused choices into unconscious higher-order behavior. These are still the result of genuinely libertarian choices, but they accumulate into a mature you that does not choose things that are out of character because of the accumulated free choices that they made before. In this way, advocates of libertarian free will can hold to both its reality, and to its formation of a person into something that is not arbitrary but entirely consistent with themselves.

Through this process of maturation, a person can therefore be transformed from an arbitrarily free child to an entirely consistent adult. This is the exact process that the Holy Spirit kicks off in a new believer when they are born again. Go enters the heart of a repentant sinner and restores their dead (enslaved) heart and will to live (freedom). Out of this freedom, believers are now capable of making choices that accumulate into new habits and entirely eliminating old ones (e.g., alcoholism and pornography can be eliminated from a person's life, while hospitality can be habituated to the level of a reflex).

These are examples of how God can habituate us into the type of humans who do not sin, and the connection between libertarian free will and non-sinning is the process of habituation. This process continues until death, at which point our resurrection bodies shed the last influences of the flesh and we are totally habituated to sinlessness. It is in this sense that it is possible for us to be possessors of libertarian free will, and yet never sin in heaven.

So far I have been attempting to explain how there can be both genuine libertarian free will, and yet sinlessness in heaven. Once we understand how such an outcome can be achieved, we realize that it includes the process of birth and maturation which include making choices that define us more and more. God did create such a world by his fiat, and we live in it right now. The externalities of such a world include many people whose free choices at a young age (many of them influenced by parents/society) accumulate into total resistance to God, the gospel, and sinlessness.

What I am suggesting is that to fiat heaven as you describe it, with genuine libertarian freedom, entails fiating a world that includes lifetimes of choices that constitute the history of the human race. The garden is a world with libertarian free will without the accumulation of character, whereas heaven is a place full of those who, having libertarian free will through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, have developed the character of sinlessness in imitation of Christ. In other words, the creation of heaven (as you describe it) entails the creation of the garden.

Answer 2: God cannot logically create such a heaven without such an earth

That is how I understand free will, the garden, and heaven. At this point, however, you may believe I have misunderstood your question. If you are questioning whether God could have instantaneously created heaven full of people who are both genuinely free and yet entirely sinless, then I will have to answer no, given the nature of libertarian freedom. Only libertarian freedom combined with the accumulation of choices over time is compatible with sinlessness, and such a timeline virtually necessitates some people making choices that are corrupting, not sanctifying.

For people to be both free in an undeveloped libertarian sense (which is essentially capable of choosing good or evil arbitrarily) and for all of them to never sin is not logically possible. More importantly for your question, even if they never sinned, the process of training their free will to the point where they would never sin (not could) had to occur across time.

In this sense, God could not create that kind of world by fiat. To create such a world would require a compatibilist sense of free will such as is espoused by Calvinists and is ultimately a form of determinism. My answer here gives a bit more background on the importance of responsibility in free will, and why I think God chose libertarian free will.

God cannot deny Himself. Does this mean that God does not have libertarian free-will or does it mean that His will is perfect? — Mike Borden, Feb 12 '22 at 14:02
@MikeBorden This is a great question! I'm not entirely sure what kind of will God has? It would make a great other question, but it's beyond anything I've studied. I would lean towards the idea that his will (which is outside the process of time) is perfect so though he is technically capable of doing other than he does, he only ever does what he does. I think another factor might be his basis as the center of the moral universe, ie. everything he does is by definition good as he is himself goodness and the source of all moral goodness. — ninthamigo, Feb 12 '22 at 14:09
@ninthamigo Are you still around? Someone referred me to this question and I found your answer very thought-provoking, but I have some deep questions that are a stumbling block in my way to adopting a libertarian view of free will in the context of finding a satisfying solution to the problem of evil. I recently asked this question. Would you like to answer it? — Mark, Jun 27 '23 at 02:23
@Mark I still lurk about, but am quite busy with school, right now, I'll take a look at your question. I am a fan of pluralism in the church since a measure of humility is important for Christian truth seekers and skepticism (different than cynicism) tends to produce it, so you may find it better to commit to something humbly, and live with the uncertainty :). — ninthamigo, Jun 28 '23 at 03:16

score 3 · Answer 2 · edited Jun 14 '23 at 17:28

A Related Question With a Common Answer

A strikingly similar question is asked of Alma in the Book of Mormon:

20 ...what is this that thou hast said, that man should rise from the dead and be changed from this mortal to an immortal state, that the soul can never die?

21 What does the scripture mean, which saith that God placed cherubim and a flaming sword on the east of the garden of Eden, lest our first parents should enter and partake of the fruit of the tree of life, and live forever? And thus we see that there was no possible chance that they should live forever.

The essence of the question is quite similar...if as a result of their exercise of free will, God actively prevented people from living forever--he deliberately took some choices off the table--are free will and living forever inherently incompatible? Why would God set things up this way if the goal was living forever, sinless, in heaven?

--

A Time of Preparation

Alma's response correlates with the OP's question even more:

24 And we see that death comes upon mankind, yea, the death which has been spoken of by Amulek, which is the temporal death; nevertheless there was a space granted unto man in which he might repent; therefore this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God; a time to prepare for that endless state which has been spoken of by us, which is after the resurrection of the dead. (Alma 12:24)

Adam & Eve weren't ready for eternity yet; this life is a time of development to prepare for eternity. The Fall permitted that time of preparation.

A few verses later Alma continues:

33 But God did call on men, in the name of his Son, (this being the plan of redemption which was laid) saying: If ye will repent, and harden not your hearts, then will I have mercy upon you, through mine Only Begotten Son;

34 Therefore, whosoever repenteth, and hardeneth not his heart, he shall have claim on mercy through mine Only Begotten Son, unto a remission of his sins; and these shall enter into my rest. (Alma 12:33-34)

Repentance isn't a incidental defect that comes through working with humans; transformation of character (which often comes through repentance) was baked into the plan from the outset.

--

Freedom to choose what we become

In the same chapter Alma also echoes one of the Messianic prophecies of Lehi:

26 And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon, save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day, according to the commandments which God hath given.

27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil (2 Nephi 2:26-27)

--

Conclusion

The whole point of the plan was that we could go through a time of probation and learn by experience. Jesus made it possible for us to have these experiences without being condemned by them.

score 2 · Answer 3 · answered Jun 13 '23 at 00:39

Bit late to the party, but I thought I'd offer a couple of additional possibilities:

Because it makes our relationship with Him more meaningful

Perhaps what makes a free relationship more meaningful is not simply the possibility, but the actuality of evil and rejection of God; in other words, it's not simply a theoretical possibility that we could reject Him, people actually do. It means it took a real choice to cling to the One who(m?) others had already rejected.

Because it glorifies Him

Lately I'm inclined to believe that the ultimate purpose of everything is to glorify God (what is the chief end of man?). Given this, perhaps it glorifies Him more to be chosen by creatures belonging to a group inclined against said choice.

Additionally, by creating creatures He knew would fall, He is able to better display His other attributes. He demonstrated His love by sending His son to die for us, a sacrifice that would have been unnecessary if there had been no sin. He demonstrates His power by answering prayer even in a fallen world. And one day He will demonstrate His justice by judging us all and destroying those who rejected Him.

score -1 · Answer 4 · answered Jun 15 '23 at 22:47

Psalms 115:16 The heavens are the heavens of the Lord, But the earth He has given to the sons of men.

Psalms 11:4 The Lord is in His holy temple; the Lord's throne is in heaven; His eyes behold, His eyelids test the sons of men

Matthew 3:16 After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him

Hebrews 9:24 For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God

1 Corinthians 2:9 No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no heart has imagined, what God has prepared for those who love Him

Instead of just posting several scriptures, it would be helpful if you could explain why you are using them and how they answer the question posed. I would also recommend reading the Help Center's sections on answering questions. — agarza, Jun 15 '23 at 23:40

score -2 · Answer 5 · answered Feb 12 '22 at 09:58

The problem was as God warned in the beginning.

The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is not stated to be in the garden. Nor did God directly create it.

It is a liability of the creation of sentient beings. A creation of intelligent beings will, of necessity, cause there to be such a knowledge.

And that knowledge is a way of death. And humanity chose it.

The creature will always choose it.

Even in the best creation that is possible, in which everything is 'good'. It will still be there. And the created creatures - the highest created spirit, the formed man and the after-formed woman : will always choose the way of nature.

It is inevitable.

And it was foreseen.

And in the counsels of Deity, determination was made 'before the foundation of the world', Ephesians 1:4, to redeem.

Despite what it would cost (to Deity) despite all that would be required in righteousness - the determination was made.

In order 'to bring many sons to glory', Hebrews 2:10.

Such is the Love of God to share his being with sons.

Yes, we have free will.

And that will was amply demonstrated by the choice that Serpent, Woman and Man made, in the beginning.

That is the will which will - always - bring down the wilful creature.

Reading Genesis 1:9 it is factually incorrect to say the tree of knowledge was "not stated to be in the garden". In Genesis 1:9 we read: "The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." — ninthamigo, Feb 12 '22 at 13:18
Furthermore, I'm not sure how your answer, interesting though it is, answers the question which is about whether it is possible for God to create a world where free-will does not sin (ie. to simply create heaven with 'sanctified people'. — ninthamigo, Feb 12 '22 at 13:20