The free will argument demonstrates that christians don't understand free will.

[Esquilax]

Clever. Except you moved the goal post without addressing your unsupported premise that a god worthy of the name could fully conceive and create the fullness of reality free from suffering.

How is that moving the goalposts? The traditional view of heaven is that it's a place that's free of suffering without sacrificing free will, which is a position that necessitates that we be able to do everything that we can on earth there, at the very least.

Besides, a god "worthy of the name" would be a god, which, as we can see from the bible, is a being capable of influencing human behavior and thought; the removal of human-made suffering should be trivial, given that according to your own holy book he has all the abilities to accomplish this.

You avoid defending that premise by suggesting that heaven is equally inconceivable.

That's not what I was saying. I was saying that within the bounds of your theology you already have an answer to your question, and that answer is yes, god can create a world free of suffering, because he already has.

Such is not the case, since heaven is a subset of the total reality and even at that may not be entirely perfect according to your impossibly high standard for what constitutes perfection.

Impossibly high standard? Perfection, by definition, would be devoid of negative aspects; suffering is a negative aspect, even god sees that since he uses it as a punishment, and therefore it's a fairly trivial claim that a perfect place would not have this particular negative aspect.

Hell, I don't get stabbed in the lungs in my house, and yet you're telling me that asking god to ensure the same in his own domain is an impossibly high standard?

For that matter, what is it that you expect? I suppose God could have just created a giant flawless crystal sphere and stopped at that. Or maybe He could have given us over to all be Lotus Eaters, living in pleasure and doing nothing useful or growing as people.

He could, with a thought, prevent the negative consequences of every action that would lead to suffering, without impacting the free will of the person attempting that action: guns jam when fired in anger, rapists become flaccid around their victims... they would still have the choice to perform those actions, just without the suffering. Free will doesn't guarantee success, after all.