God Endowed Humans with Free Will?

[Veritas Aequitas]

If a supposed omni-compassionate with omnipotence can create such a perfect fine-tuned universe, then such a GOD would have no problem creating humans WITHOUT the possibility of committing evil acts without any negative consequences at all.

if god wanted nuthin' but bio-automation -- robots -- then that's what he woulda created

seems to me, since man is not a robot but instead is a free will, god wanted man to be free

the bitch of it is: bein' free means bein' free to be wrong, to do wrong

obviously god thought the benefits of bein' a free will outweigh the liabilities

Note this argument;

• 1. The supposed God is omnipotent and omni-Good.
  
  2. Yes GOD wanted man to be free for whatever the reason.
  
  3. But because God is omni-Good, it is only natural that God would not create humans with free will to commit evil [contra Good].
  
  4. Thus in the planning stage [the blueprints] before God created humans, it is only logical natural God would create humans without the ability to commit evil [as defined].

But the reality is there are humans committing terrible evil and violent since humans first emerged.

Therefore the GOD in 1-4 NEVER existed as real in the first place.
Otherwise if GOD in 1-4 above existed, there would not be any evil and violence created by humans.

seems to me, since man is not a robot but instead is a free will, god wanted man to be free

Yes, it is evident human are not robots and has limited free will, but there is no solid reasons that humans were created by a supposedly omnipotent and omni-Good God.

[Age]

If a supposed omni-compassionate with omnipotence can create such a perfect fine-tuned universe, then such a GOD would have no problem creating humans WITHOUT the possibility of committing evil acts without any negative consequences at all.

if god wanted nuthin' but bio-automation -- robots -- then that's what he woulda created

seems to me, since man is not a robot but instead is a free will, god wanted man to be free

the bitch of it is: bein' free means bein' free to be wrong, to do wrong

obviously god thought the benefits of bein' a free will outweigh the liabilities

Note this argument;

• 1. The supposed God is omnipotent and omni-Good.
  
  2. Yes GOD wanted man to be free for whatever the reason.
  
  3. But because God is omni-Good, it is only natural that God would not create humans with free will to commit evil [contra Good].
  
  4. Thus in the planning stage [the blueprints] before God created humans, it is only logical natural God would create humans without the ability to commit evil [as defined].

But the reality is there are humans committing terrible evil and violent since humans first emerged.

Therefore the GOD in 1-4 NEVER existed as real in the first place.
Otherwise if GOD in 1-4 above existed, there would not be any evil and violence created by humans.

seems to me, since man is not a robot but instead is a free will, god wanted man to be free

Yes, it is evident human are not robots and has limited free will, but there is no solid reasons that humans were created by a supposedly omnipotent and omni-Good God.

Just ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of a human being who is completely and utterly BLINDED by their currently held and well maintained BELIEFS.

[henry quirk]

1. The supposed God is omnipotent and omni-Good.

not my god

as a deist, I see the Creator as perfect, not omnipotent or all good, or even all knowing

[attofishpi]

Note this argument;

• 1. The supposed God is omnipotent and omni-Good.
  
  2. Yes GOD wanted man to be free for whatever the reason.
  
  3. But because God is omni-Good, it is only natural that God would not create humans with free will to commit evil [contra Good].
  
  4. Thus in the planning stage [the blueprints] before God created humans, it is only logical natural God would create humans without the ability to commit evil [as defined].

Where the **** do you get this shit from?

[Immanuel Can]

Since your supposed God is intrinsically omni-GOOD, omni-compassionate, omnibenevolent, omni-empathy and omni-morally-Good

These are terms you chose: I feel no obligation to make a case you have chosen to arrange for me, which is not what I would say. "Omni-empathy"? "Omni-benevolent?" Who would even say that? And you've got "good" twice in your list.

For example, where is God's righteousness, in that list? Where is His commitment to truth? Where is His power? Where is His wisdom? Where is His Creatorial role? Where is his justice? All these are normally claimed by Theists, in regard to the character of God.

You've left them all off, and represented a "god" with only one dimension: that of a sort of cosmic grandparent slipping into dotage -- "good," "empathetic," "benevolent," hovering over humanity for the exclusive purpose of doing them some sort of service, but not capable of having purposes the creatures cannot readily understand, or which do not serve their obvious self-interests.

But God is wiser than men. His reasons for allowing suffering or evil, if such He does, are obviously going to be much more complex and profound than a mere commitment to "empathy" or pallid human conceptions of what it might look like to be "benevolent," and certainly much more purposeful and nuanced than your depiction of His nature would imply.

But this is not because He lacks potency; it's rather because He never has to nor wants to act in contradiction of his own nature; and being all-powerful, He is never compelled to do so.

That is my point, your supposed God will logically not act in contradiction of his own nature.

But you've got his nature wrong. You've listed only the features you, yourself choose to assign to Him, and none that don't serve your purposes. No Theist I know would agree with your list, beyond that God is "good." Those other terms, you just made up yourself.

Therefore when God began to create humans, logically and it follows that God would have imbued human nature with Good and no possibility of evil.

This is time #6, and the last time I'll bother to try to explain it to you: your key problem is as follows:

How do you know that God can have no sufficient reason for the allowing of some evil.

[RCSaunders]

How do you know that God can have no sufficient reason for the allowing of some evil.

Sin of omission!

[Immanuel Can]

Sin of omission!

Eh?

[RCSaunders]

Sin of omission!

Eh?

Prov. 3:27 "Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand to do it."

How do you know that God can have no sufficient reason for the allowing of some evil.

If God had the power to prevent some from eternal suffering and didn't use it, He is guilty of the sin of omission.

[Sculptor]

I believe the 'Problem of Evil' is a silver bullet that will kill off the argument 'God exists as real'.

However as a defense mechanism to maintain consonance from dissonance, theists will come up with all sorts of twists and turns to deflect and eel their way through, example below;

Because your supposed God is omnipotent to the extent he is capable of creating the fine-tuning of the universe to perfect precision,
then GOD should be able to enable fine-tuning to the humans he created
such that there is no possibility of abortion, murder, torturing babies for pleasure or other evil acts.

All this is true, but begs the question completely.
"The question is not COULD God do these things," but rather
"What are the logical consequences if He were to do so?"
In the same way, we could ask "Could God have not created any humans in the first place, and the answer is obviously, "Yes."

But that's a totally uninteresting question here: the important one, is
"Since human beings exist as free will beings, what are the implications of that?"

If a supposed omni-compassionate with omnipotence can create such a perfect fine-tuned universe, then such a GOD would have no problem creating humans WITHOUT the possibility of committing evil acts without any negative consequences at all.

Instead of addressing the logical possibility of the above, IC twisted, turned and deflected to asking and implying the following,

• Since human beings exist as free will beings, ..
  (it is assumed GOD exists and created humans with absolute free will)
  Humans has the free will to commit evil,
  As such, God has nothing to do with humans' free choices to do evil,
  Thus, the Problem of Evil [contradiction] do not apply,
  Therefore, God exists.

The above deflection is based on speculation.
What is needed is we should ground our argument on facts, i.e.

What is more critical question is this;

• 1. Humans exists [empirical fact].
  
  2. Humans are endowed with an existential crisis, a cognitive dissonance [psychological fact]

No they are not. SOME humans might give themselves a crisis, but most just get on with it. As for cognitive dissonance - speak for yourself!!

3. Humans [theists] conjured [ASSUME] an all-powerful GOD [illusory] as a consonance to resolve the dissonance. [speculation]

4. To maintain the consonance, theists speculate humans are given absolute free will. [speculation]

5. Thus there is no problem of evil, i.e. God exists as real.
[/list]

Non sequitur.

As such your conclusion begs the question, i.e. you merely assume [3] God exists in giving absolute freewill to humans [4].

If we resolve the fact of the existential crisis and cognitive dissonance [2] like Buddhism and other non-theistic spirituality and philosophies, there would be no need for a belief in a God [an illusion] and wrestling with the Problem of Evil.

What makes you think the delusion of Buddhism has any answers here?

[Immanuel Can]

If God had the power to prevent some from eternal suffering and didn't use it, He is guilty of the sin of omission.

Well, He DID exercise that power, but we would not have it. As it says in John 1: "He came to those who were His own, and those who were His own would not receive Him; but to as many as did receive Him, to those He gave the right to be called 'The Children of God,' even to those who believe on His name."

[RCSaunders]

If God had the power to prevent some from eternal suffering and didn't use it, He is guilty of the sin of omission.

Well, He DID exercise that power, but we would not have it. As it says in John 1: "He came to those who were His own, and those who were His own would not receive Him; but to as many as did receive Him, to those He gave the right to be called 'The Children of God,' even to those who believe on His name."

But I thought you believed sin was evil. If God allowed sin, he allowed evil, when he could have prevented it. Any gangster can agree to clean up his mess after he's committed the crime but it doesn't cancel the crime.

After Hitler had all those Jews killed, would he have been OK if he could bring some of them back? If what you believe were true, that's all God would have done. He managed to save some--the rest slipped through his omnipotent, but clumsy, fingers.

[Immanuel Can]

If God had the power to prevent some from eternal suffering and didn't use it, He is guilty of the sin of omission.

Well, He DID exercise that power, but we would not have it. As it says in John 1: "He came to those who were His own, and those who were His own would not receive Him; but to as many as did receive Him, to those He gave the right to be called 'The Children of God,' even to those who believe on His name."

But I thought you believed sin was evil. If God allowed sin, he allowed evil, when he could have prevented it.

That's the important question: Could God have sufficient reason, such that allowing some evil to exist would actually be better than for Him to predetermine everything to be superficially "good"?

Leibniz thought He could. Lewis thought He could. I think he could. So do many other Theists.

Any gangster can agree to clean up his mess after he's committed the crime but it doesn't cancel the crime.

Actually, many crimes are like spilling a pail of viscous liquid; very easy to do, but afterward, impossible to really clean up.

Sin's like that: very easy to perpetrate, but often impossible to pay for or to correct, once we've done it. You don't have to have lived very long until you discover the truth of that.

However, the gangster does the crime. His parents aren't responsible for his crime. His society isn't even responsible. It's on him: he chose the deed, and he did it. He's an adult. He chose. He does the time.

You might suppose, then, that it would be better if his parents had never had him, or his society had killed him...after all, he turned out to be a gangster.

But if that policy were followed, imagine what would ensue...we kill all our babies, so that none of them turn out to be gangsters...?

[RCSaunders]

That's the important question: Could God have sufficient reason, such that allowing some evil to exist would actually be better than for Him to predetermine everything to be superficially "good"?

Take out the word, "superficially," and you almost have it right. Better yet, "Could God have created a universe in which there was no evil and all the good that is possible?"

Is there sin in heaven?

[Immanuel Can]

Better yet, "Could God have created a universe in which there was no evil and all the good that is possible?"

Well, no. Not because God lacks power, but because, as C.S. Lewis pointed out, if there was no evil, neither would there be free will. All would be predetermined only to produce the singular "correct" result.

Is a universe with human beings that have free will a better universe than one in which humans are only robots? If the answer to that is, "Yes," -- and I think it very plausibly is...indeed, it seems certain to me that it is -- then God could not have made a universe in which everything was predetermined to be correct, and have it be as overall good as if it had free-will-possessing beings in it.

[attofishpi]

Better yet, "Could God have created a universe in which there was no evil and all the good that is possible?"

Well, no. Not because God lacks power, but because, as C.S. Lewis pointed out, if there was no evil, neither would there be free will. All would be predetermined only to produce the singular "correct" result.

Is a universe with human beings that have free will a better universe than one in which humans are only robots? If the answer to that is, "Yes," -- and I think it very plausibly is...indeed, it seems certain to me that it is -- then God could not have made a universe in which everything was predetermined to be correct, and have it be as overall good as if it had free-will-possessing beings in it.

Well said. Further to this, people, even most theists underestimate the sheer power of this entity - they don't understand even that it was not just a creation (our reality), but that is an ongoing construct.

I have seen a human morph - in 3 stages - into 3 different humans - in 1997 after delving into the English LAN_gauge as 'persuaded' by this entity that was finally introducing how IT operates.
This came about after I wrote the last sentence of the 'Lords prayer' backwards (naughty to dumb arse pastors ROT_SAP)
Live Morf Su Reviled - - - Deliver Us From Evil --- (Live Morph Soon Revealed)

In 2017 - God operated via a very intelligent friend of mine - one of THE most hellish experiences I have had when we both went to see the film Dunkirk. I will explain what happened one day when I bother to start a thread to explain the attributes of God.

My point is, beyond our minds - what we perceive is happening to innocents - is not necessarily happening to those 'souls' (they are already in another 'dimension', but the perpetrator IS getting his\her 'evil' kicks out of it - a morph remains in their dimension.

(VERY hard for anyone without this degree of gnosis to believe. Indeed there have been times where I have considered that 90% of real_IT_Y is FAKE)

We could ask ourselves, Y God would not make its existence totally clear - such that nobody would be such a fool as to harm an innocent.. (of course some fools are beyond any saving of grace)
I think if we look at all the life around us, and ask ourselves the quest_ion - Why was I born a human? Why am I not a dog or a fish, pigeon etc..?

Well, maybe to God - ALL entities have the right to access the life of a human - so it could be some cosmic divine juggling game - where that evil perpetrator that harmed (or so he thought) an innocent - is NO LONGER worthy of reincarnating MAN. 666.

Just some food for thought - but I assure you - this world - our reality - is as virtual as a computer game - what runs it is INSTANT, God invoked it's own technology for the job, instant as an AI working at the binary sub-atomic level.