(January 31, 2018 at 10:17 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:(January 31, 2018 at 7:42 pm)SteveII Wrote: No, I am sure the are near infinite worlds he could have created. You would have to show that the world that he did choose to create was not the one with the most overall good given that humans have free will. No rationalization needed. No counter argument will hold up.
Well, no. I’m not going to just give free will to the argument. That’s my whole point. But you’re right; there are a near infinite number of worlds he could have created. The onus is on you to demonstrate your premise that a world with free will, that inevitably results in billions of souls suffering in eternal spiritual agony, is better than any other alternative, including worlds without free will. So far, the strongest you’ve offered is that, “it seems” to be that way. Better for who? And why?
Free will is absolutely central to almost all Christian doctrine. You don't get to withhold it in a discussion about Christian doctrine. It is a given.
No, the onus is not on me to prove that given free will, this is the best possible world because proof is literally impossible to have. All I need to say is that, given the character and attributes of God, it is reasonable to assume that, given free will, this is the best possible world. Offer defeaters if you think the premise is wrong.
Quote:But, coming back to reality, of course you have no possible way of demonstrating such a premise without first demonstrating that the proposed creator exists in the first place. Otherwise, all of this is nothing more than a philosophical “Choose Your Own Adventure”.
Do you really think this is a point that needs to be made in a discussion about a very specific Christian doctrine? It is actually a discussion stopping device usually pulled out when all the objections have been knocked down.
