>>520776999
First, I’m not rejecting the idea that heaven offers infinite choices of good, or that our eternal existence will be filled with joyful, free choices in God's presence. But my point is that true freedom, the freedom to love and choose good, presupposes the possibility of evil. If there’s no real contrast, no real choice, then we’re just passive participants in a preordained script. I’m talking about real, meaningful freedom that comes from understanding both sides of the spectrum, which is why I emphasized that the memory of evil must exist as a contrast in heaven. Only that way can you understand the true value of goodness. That’s not a rejection of God’s goodness; it’s recognizing the necessary conditions for genuine moral freedom.
As for philosophy, it’s clear that you see it as a danger to pure faith. But the idea that anything extra-biblical "sullies" our understanding of scripture is retarded. The Bible wasn’t written in a vacuum. It was influenced by the cultures and philosophies of its time, and many of the early Church Fathers were deeply involved in philosophical thought. They didn’t discard it; they integrated it into their faith, which strengthened their understanding of it. Faith and reason aren’t enemies, they’re complementary. There’s a reason God gave us intellect, to better understand His creation and His will. I believe that true wisdom comes from engaging with the world honestly and deeply, examining the questions of faith without fear. You can reject error without rejecting reason. I don’t want a "blind faith" that doesn’t ask tough questions. I want a faith that is strengthened by understanding.