u/WeeklyWoodpecker9113

Christians often argue that the tree was necessary because God wanted to give Adam and Eve genuine free will the freedom to choose whether to obey Him or not. But this raises a serious question. If a person goes to Heaven after death, do they still have free will? Can they freely choose to do whatever they want, including evil? If the answer is no, then it seems that free will can exist without the possibility of choosing evil. In other words, it is apparently possible to have free will while never choosing to do something morally wrong.

If that is the case, then why was Adam and Eve's test necessary in the first place? Why did God need to give them a choice that could result in sin, suffering, and death in order to preserve their free will? i t seems that there are only a few possibilities. Either people in Heaven do not have complete free will, which would mean that free will is not as essential as Christians claim, or people in Heaven do have complete free will but simply never choose evil. If the latter is possible, then God could have created Adam and Eve with free will while also creating them in such a way that they would freely choose good.

So the question is , if free will can exist without evil in Heaven, why couldn't God have created humanity that way from the beginning? If He could, then the test of Adam and Eve and the enormous consequences that supposedly followed from their choice seems unnecessary, or at least raises a serious philosophical problem for the traditional Christian explanation of free will.

Imagine I leave my little kid alone in an unfinished room with an exposed electrical wire. Before I leave, I tell him, “Don’t touch that wire, you’ll die.” The kid is too young to really understand danger, consequences, or even good and evil. Eventually he touches the wire and dies. Would you blame the kid, or would you blame me for knowingly leaving a deadly hazard within his reach? Now look at Adam and Eve. God puts the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil right in the middle of the garden. He already knows exactly what will happen. He knows Adam and Eve will eat from it, he knows they will fall, and he knows the consequences before any of it happens. But according to the story, Adam and Eve didn't even know good and evil yet. So how can we hold them fully responsible for making a morally wrong decision when they didn't even have the knowledge necessary to properly understand morality? And please don't just answer “free will.” If I give a five-year-old a loaded gun, tell him not to touch it, and then leave it on the table, the fact that he technically had free will doesn't suddenly make me innocent. The important question is who created the situation, who knew what was going to happen, and who had the power to prevent it. God supposedly knew all of it. So if God knew Adam and Eve would fail, knew they didn't yet understand good and evil, and still placed the tree there, why is the responsibility placed entirely on them? If a human parent knowingly did something similar, we'd probably call it negligence. Why does that moral standard suddenly change when we're talking about God?

Imagine I leave my little kid alone in an unfinished room with an exposed electrical wire. Before I leave, I tell him, “Don’t touch that wire, you’ll die.” The kid is too young to really understand danger, consequences, or even good and evil. Eventually he touches the wire and dies. Would you blame the kid, or would you blame me for knowingly leaving a deadly hazard within his reach? Now look at Adam and Eve. God piuts the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil right in the middle of the garden. He already knows exactly what will happen. He knows Adam and Eve will eat from it, he knows they will fall, and he knows the consequences before any of it happens. But according to the story, Adam and Eve didn't even know good and evil yet. So how can we hold them fully responsible for making a morally wrong decision when they didn't even have the knowledge necessary to properly understand morality? And please don't just answer “free will.” If I give a five year old a loaded gun, tevll him not to touch it, and then leave it on the table, the fact that he technically had free will doesn't suddenly make me innocent. The important question is who created the situation, who knew what was going to happen, and who had the power to prevent it. God supposedly knew all of it. So if God knew Adam and Eve would fail, knew they didn't yet understand good and evil, and still placed the tree there, why is the responsibility placed entirely on them? If a human parent knowingly did something similar, we'd probably call it negligence. Why does that moral standard suddenly change when we're talking about God?

I didntt choose to be born. If god created me without my consent, then why should I face the possibility of eternal hell for existing and not being convinced?

hristians often appeal to free will, but I never had the freedom to choose whether I wanted to exist in the first place. If the consequences of that unchosen existence can be infinite punishment, how is that compatible with genuine free choice? iam not trying to be provocative i honestly dont see how those ideas fit together.

Around 20 000 - 25 000 people die every day from hunger or hunger rrelated causes. at the same time, billions of people live with chronic pain(as i know 2 billion), physical pain , severe depression, or other forms of long term suffering. On the other hand, nobody experiences chronical pleasure. happiness is temporary. Every enjoyable moment eventually fades, while suffering can persist for years or even a lifetime. If that iis true, doesnt it make more sense to prioritize reducing suffering rather than trying to maximize pleasure? i willl never understand why people keep having children. To me, its like throwing more wood onto a burning house.

Sources:
https://www.un.org/en/node/26627 https://www.wfp.org/ending-hunger