Can Heaven Exist Without Sin? (Christian vs. Atheist Debate)

[@ajhieb]

9:21 _"Rather than to just crumple it all up, like an artist who's unpleased with his artwork and chucking it way..."_ You mean "rather than what he did in the Old Testament." Genesis 6:11-13 "Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. So God said to Noah, *“I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth."* "

[@CringerZ]

he didn't get rid of the world and humans fully he just kind of restarted the world

[@ajhieb]

@@CringerZ _"he didn't get rid of the world and humans fully"_ Yeah, and the leader of the National Socialist German Workers' Party didn't get rid of the Jews, _fully._ Do you realize what a silly distinction that is?

[@SPL0869]

I’ve never seen anyone say so much and not actually address the question that he was asked. And I say this as someone who is used to watching Christians dodge questions.

[@TheThinkInstitute]

Interesting perspective. Thanks for watching.

[@JohnSpencer90]

So, here is the question. If a new heaven and a new earth is possible, why not place us there in the first place? Is this a game?

[@TheThinkInstitute]

Great question. When the Lord created us, He initially placed us in a perfect paradise. We broke it through our sin. The next one will be incorruptible, because we will be incorruptible. If you want to be incorruptible, then repent and trust in Jesus Christ, and you will be prepared for that world.

[@JohnSpencer90]

@@TheThinkInstitute There are several problems with that answer. Firstly, it’s illogical to say something is perfect, but that humans made it imperfect. Clearly, it was not perfect to begin with. Secondly, if an entity is all-knowing, then nothing would surprise it. And if it is maximally powerful, it has the ability to create any type of existence it desires. This is further supported by your argument that this entity plans to create a new heaven and a new earth. Does this mean humans could also sin in this new, supposedly perfect place? Consider the possibility that this so-called paradise was never perfect, and that the imperfections were intentional. If so, this would imply that we are the subjects of a divine game. Alternatively, what you are saying may simply not be true.

[@TheThinkInstitute]

@@JohnSpencer90 first, you are confusing imperfect with perfect but corruptible. Second, logic presupposes God, and God and His will are revealed in Scripture. So no I will not consider that Scripture is wrong. On the contrary, you should turn from your sin that has helped make the world imperfect and turn to Jesus in faith.

[@ajhieb]

@@TheThinkInstitute _"you are confusing imperfect with perfect but corruptible."_ So to be very clear, is it your position that corruptability is a perfection, and _incorruptability_ is an imperfection? Because that seems to be a direct implication of your statement that 'perfect' and 'corruptable' are compatible. Is God perfect or imperfect? Is God corruptable or incorruptable? If God is perfect and incorruptable, (which is what I understand your position to be) it seems to me that it is inescapable that incorruptability is necessarily a perfection in your worldview. (if you're being consistent and not arbitrary) That is to say, you can only claim that corrptability is a perfection if you're using some external standard for perfection. If your standard for perfection is God (and God is incorruptable) then incorruptability is a perfection and it's negation (corruptability) is necessarily an imperfection. Then it would necessarily follow that anything that is corruptable isn't perfect.

[@russellsteapot8779]

@@TheThinkInstitute // “logic presupposes God, and God and His will are revealed in Scripture. So no I will not consider that Scripture is wrong.” // You have a mere _BELIEF_ that “logic presupposes God”, and a mere _BELIEF_ that the God referred to in your preferred scripture is actually *real* . I understand that these _BELIEFS_ are part of *your* “worldview”, but repeatedly asserting them as though they should be accepted as “facts” by people who do NOT share your beliefs, and stating that you cannot even consider the possibility of being wrong, is cringeworthy. You understand that _anyone_ can doggedly INSIST that _they_ are right, and stick their fingers in their ears when facing any scrutiny? It's a feeble position. The requirement on you is to _demonstrate_ that (a) the God in your scripture actually _exists_ , and (b), given (a), that it is THE *necessary condition* for logic to obtain. I get that you _believe_ it to be the case, but just confidently asserting it over and over doesn't make it so! :)

[@ajhieb]

17:51 _"And you have no standard to judge God."_ The critique provided isn't a judgement of God per se, rather it is a demonstration of the incoherency of your worldview, by the standards set within your worldview. The standard comes from your Bible. The standard comes from your worldview. The standard comes from your claims about moral obligations.

[@ajhieb]

13:37 _"There's nothing in God's nature that says he has to do things the way you want him to do them."_ This (as per your usual m.o.) is a misstatement/misunderstanding of the criticism. No one is saying that God should conform to their _preferences._ It has nothing to do with what your interlocutor _wants._ The issue is that the reality we experience is not logically compatible with how _you or the Bible_ describe God's nature. A few seconds prior to the above quote you claimed that God is "perfectly just." Then you turn right around and say that God is merciful. Those two concepts are mutually exclusive. To be merciful is to suspend justice for some secondary motivation. If we consider sin to simply be what ought not be done (In God's eyes) and God is sovereign over his creation then everything that comes to pass is God's will, and by definition _ought_ be done. This seems to be your position, and it boils down to arguing for a world where everything that happens _ought_ to happen, ergo there is no sin. The point being, the caller was correct that you never actually answered his question sure, you _responded_ to it, but his original question went unanswered.

[@juniormint5065]

If God is perfectly just AND merciful, yet both are mutually exclusive, wouldn't it then require some sort of payment or atonement to be made that would satisfy the wrath of said perfectly just God? I wonder what possible situation might satisfy this perplexing conundrum. Could you perhaps help me out? I am drawing a blank.

[@ajhieb]

@juniormint5065 If they are mutually exclusive then NOTHING _by definition_ will satisfy the conundrum.

[@juniormint5065]

@@ajhieb This show how narrow your thinking is. Substitution would satisfy it. If God takes the punishment due to you and transfers it to another, say, idk, Jesus, then God can satisfy the need for justice while providing mercy by allowing a path for you to transfer your punishment to another, like Jesus. Because Jesus is God, He can both provide the perfect substitute, and have the authority to transfer the judgement in the first place. Since God is the one taking the punishment upon Himself He is the one who then has the authority to punish AND decide the conditions for the transference of that punishment. We call this a debt in the Bible. As you sin, which is failing to meet the perfect standard, you incur a debt. This debt is owed to the perfect being who created and owns all of creation. It would be like destroying company property that your buddy drove. The buddy may be the one leasing or renting or borrowing the company property but the debt is not owed to him, it is owed to God who owns the property because He set a perfect standard of use and we have failed to abide by that standard of use. Thus all debt is ultimately owed to God as the ultimate authority of all creation. See it is possible to have both justice and mercy. You can of course read this for yourself in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. They detail the teaching of Jesus (God) in great detail and have been proven time and again to be exceedingly reliable.

[@ajhieb]

@@juniormint5065 _"Substitution would satisfy it. "_ No. It wouldn't. Substitution is not just. It's actually quite unjust. Punishing a person that didn't commit the crime is not just. Allowing a person that committed a crime to go unpunished is not just. Both of these things are wildly unjust. You seem to be under the impression that the only form of punishment is compensatory, while totally ignoring the concept of punitive punishment.

[@juniormint5065]

@ajhieb that is about if statements made with no logical backing. You simply said " this is just and this is unjust" By definition God is just. If God is perfect, then He is just. If God is just then by nature his actions cannot be unjust. Then by nature His actions, although you may not agree, are still just. And God isn't pushing the punishment upon someone. God is taking the punishment upon Himself. God isn't "letting them get away with it" God is punishing someone for it. Since sin is always against God, as I started previously if you had read my position, then God has the right and authority to decide how He is repaid and what the conditions are for that. Thus why God can have justice and mercy. You really need to read the Gospels. It is very well explained by Jesus. If you owe 50,000$ You owe a debt. That's debt needs to be paid. Sin is like a debt. It is also like a crime. Similar to how failure to pay what you owe is a crime. Yes you can go to jail for money you owe and be forced to pay it off. Happens to fines all the time. Your punishment is payment. When you are imprisoned you are paying a debt to society. A social debt. When you finish said debt you are released and can't return to normal life. This is in the Constitution regarding no excessive punishments. So you owe debt to God. The punishment is death. The debt is death. Death is separation from God. You are spirit, not flesh. Thus the punishment is ultimately that separation. When Jesus(God) took our punishment on the cross, He both paid and forgave our debt. Or social debt. Just as with the 50,000$, as long as it is paid you are free. Your family can pay it or a random stranger. The problem is that the only way to pay your debt to God is with death(separation). So in order for you to retain life (connection) to God you must have your debt paid in full by Someone who can pay the fine. A perfect sacrifice. This sacrifice cannot be forced and cannot be coerced. Its voluntary. Thus God as the debt holder, and perfect, and as the only one able to pay the debt, chooses to take on our form that He may substitute Himself in our place to take the death (separation) we deserved. Thus after transferring the debt to Himself He then becomes the debt holder much as you might owe a debt to someone who posted your bail like a bail bond. That Person now has the right to forgive(mercy) your debt. The only condition He asks is repentance ( turning away) from sin. This is all very elementary sir. You seem to be confused on the nature, basis, and meaning of every day words. Before you respond I would hope you would read the Gospels. Barring that maybe you'll read up on what a root meaning is and where the root concepts come from such as what ultimately is a punishment and how is it viewed. No punishment isn't punishment. If it was then it would be akin to revenge and not justice. Justice needs to be a equalizer. To become equal is to balance the scales, much as in paying a debt that you incurred, only this one isn't physical money, it's social trust and well being. Some debts are too much to pay in a human life. You know, like a human life. The only equalizer for life is life, this is why murder is so evil and carries a life sentence. Life for life. But yeah please look up root meanings. Words didn't just appear out of nothing. Words convey concepts in your head. Concepts have beginnings and that begins with the wisdom of God. Who shared His wisdom with us that we me know something at all

[@fatfrankie]

Joel, you should have listened more closely. You never answered the first callers questions. He asked you to explain how you resolved the apparent contradictions in your beliefs. Instead you just kept asserting your beliefs without ever logically justifying them. God could have chosen a world like heaven where we have free will and yet never sin because we lack the dire to do so. Instead he creates a world where we have the desire to sin that is so strong that we all inevitably end up sinning and then deems us deserving of punishment for this. The question you failed to answer was essentially “why did god create us with this desire to sin when it wasn’t necessary”

[@TheThinkInstitute]

Interesting viewpoint-thanks for helping boost this video by commenting.

[@juniormint5065]

You seem rather misinformed. Have you read Genesis 1-4? God did create the world you suggested and then temptation came and sin happened as a result of giving into temptation. Before initial sin Adam had no concept of sin. Eve had no concept of sin. The serpent introduced doubt and deception which due to the position of eve lead her to commit sin with Adam.

[@fatfrankie]

@@juniormint5065 Assuming that Genesis is true, the serpent introduced doubt and deception into the garden, but who introduced the serpent to the garden? Did the serpent choose to be there himself or did god place him there knowing exactly what the outcome would be? If god did this knowingly is he not partly responsible for the sin in the world? Why would god do this if he hates sin so much? And who decided that corruption of human nature would be the result of Adam/Eve's sin?

[@fatfrankie]

​@@juniormint5065 By the way, doesnt the Genesis story sounds like those African myths about how the zebra got its stripes or the elephant got its long trunk? I cant believe any thinking person actually believes that these myths are literally true.

[@juniormint5065]

@ i place 20 dollars before you. Did i introduce theft and force you to take it by it’s mere existence or are you the one who came up with theft all on your own?

[@TheManicMan-p6l]

This guy is deconverting people every time he opens his mouth. Keep it up!

[@chrisc414]

Great conversation! The idea that God 'brings it back to 100%' is an interesting way to put it. But I’d add that creating a world with sin in it doesn’t make Him go below 100% to begin with, because God decreed it in such a way that He wasn’t the one sinning-man was. It was human beings, through their free choices, who brought sin into the world. And of course, God’s justice and redemption were always part of His plan. So I’d say it’s not that He was wrong and then had to make up for it. I know that’s not what Joel was saying, but just wanted to add that clarification.

[@TheThinkInstitute]

Yes, you're correct, and you're also correct that that's not what I was saying. Thanks for your comment.

[@DaveHarris-lr5my]

Is a lifetime of sinful thoughts erased in heaven? Does God just erase your sinful nature by accepting Jesus in your mortal life when you ascend to the supernatural realm of heaven?🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

[@TheThinkInstitute]

"Behold, I am making all things new." -Jesus Christ

[@dr_moreau]

Yes, he waves his wand and you will magically never think dirty thoughts again

[@knightofwangernumb2998]

Everything in existence is contingent upon the divine. As humans, we are not God and cannot create something from nothing. Without the divine, nothingness would persist indefinitely. Out of love, God granted us free will, allowing us to choose between drawing from His goodness or abstaining from it. When we choose to align with God, we embrace His love and sustaining power. Conversely, when we choose to sin, we distance ourselves from God, resulting in a return to spiritual nothingness (hell). Heaven is being fully in God. Being fully in God cannot contain nothingness (sin).

[@juniormint5065]

Adam lived and did not sin until the fall, he probably didn't even consider sin a possibility

[@TheThinkInstitute]

Well, he knew it was possible, given God's warning against it.

[@ajhieb]

@@TheThinkInstitute Did he? If I recall Genesis correctly, Adam had no knowledge of good an evil prior to the fall. A warning against something incomprehensible doesn't seem like much of a warning.

[@russellsteapot8779]

None of this makes any sense, and trying to make nonsense make sense is a fool's errand. When a story has an incoherent narrative, the only option is to *rewrite it* so it's coherent. But you can't do that, as the story has been circulated, so you're just stuck with a bad script that doesn't work. The "law of holes" suggests that when you're _in_ one, it's best to stop digging! :)

[@JohnSpencer90]

nothing to add here... Just noting that the "law of holes" reference was my best laugh all day.

[@dr_moreau]

Yes. More intellectually inclined Christians recognize this and try reinterpret it as a myth with allegorical meanings. But to me that just seems like cognitive dissonance

[@toddavis8603]

Heaven/paradise is a reward for the FAITHFUL; so there can be no sin or allowance for sin in Heaven.😊

[@TheThinkInstitute]

@@toddavis8603 well put

[@fatfrankie]

So what happened when Satan rebelled? Was that not a sin?

[@SPL0869]

@@TheThinkInstitutecan you explain how Satan and the angels rebelled then? In fact can you explain how Satan could be in heaven and be a “liar and a murderer from the beginning” if there was no sin in heaven?

[@TheThinkInstitute]

@@SPL0869 Good question. Do you first agree that the very concept of truth is meaningless without God?

[@TheThinkInstitute]

@@fatfrankie Don't confuse the eternal state with the initial state. Do you agree that the very concept of truth is meaningless without God?

[@lizadowning4389]

Sin is a concept that christians invented, not the god of Abraham. Jews do not believe in sin. Heaven and hell are also christian inventions. The Tanach says nothing on an afterlife other than the dead will go to the Sheol in silent existence, both the wicked and the righteous. Since they are [christian] inventions ... this discussion is useless.

[@davem.2191]

I'm with Ray on this. If God is real, he's perfectly imperfect.

[@davem.2191]

God is a sadist.