Let us go back to "cold" hard logic."Time"

[Edwardo Piet]

2.  We know we have some freedom of will with respect to choices we make.

*runs about waving his arms, and alternates imitating klaxon noises with shouts of 'UNJUSTIFED ASSUMPTION! UNJUSTIFIED ASSUMPTION!'*


Boru

It would be so fun to actually do that.

---

That would depend on the nature of the Being.  If the Abrahamic god created the universe, free will is impossible.

Boru

Not really the conclusion follows from the premise.  If people get traits of what the being is wrong, that is their problem.

Incompatabilist "free will" is impossible with or without a god. Compatabilist free will is trivially true and as empty a concept as "god is the universe". And "god is the universe", is trivially true as well by the way, if you define "god" as "the universe" (oh and "2+2=5" is true if you define "2" as "2.5" and "5" as what it normally means ). But that's what I mean by it being a truly empty concept, in both cases. When compatabilists like Daniel Dennett exclaim "You're a compatabilist in everything but name!" he's basically admitting that all compatabilism is is an empty label. A pantheist could just as easily exclaim to the atheist "You're a pantheist in everything but name!" when the atheist chooses to not refer to the universe as "god".

Take your pick but I'd rather say "there is no free will and there is no god" than say "there is free will and it's what we normally refer to as will and there is a god and it's what we normally refer to as the universe." This is my favorite analogy when it comes to the free will debate.