RE: Answers needed
June 27, 2015 at 3:44 am
(This post was last modified: June 27, 2015 at 4:23 am by Louis Chérubin.)
(June 26, 2015 at 2:00 pm)Pyrrho Wrote:(June 25, 2015 at 10:53 pm)Louis Chérubin Wrote: ...
4. People suffer because of sin (which came because God created man with a free will, the best possible creation)
...
First of all, much of what is wrong with the world has nothing to do with humans having free will. Think of all of the diseases, earthquakes, etc. So free will does not explain away evil.
Second, it is not entirely clear that we have free will, nor is it entirely clear that having free will is a good thing. I will set this aside for the moment, but it needs to be established for it to be reasonable to believe your story. (That would involve explaining what, exactly, "free will" is.)
Third, is there free will in heaven? If so, does that mean that evil will exist in heaven? If so, how is heaven different from life now? And if there is free will in heaven, without evil, then having free will does not explain the existence of evil here and now. And if there is no free will in heaven, then it must be better to not have free will, since heaven is better than here. Isn't it?
Fourth, imagine that you and I are having a picnic together in a large park. We are conversing agreeably, having some wine and good food. In the distance, we observe a group of people attacking another person, raping and beating the person. You say, "hey, we should do something" like call the police on your cell phone, go get help, go and directly help the person, whatever. I say, "no, we can't do that! We can't interfere with their free will!" Now, if that really happened, what would you say of me? Would you regard me as moral or immoral? Well, I would be doing what God does. So are you saying it is right to not help others? Furthermore, we can see that this does not work anyway as an excuse, because us interfering would not affect whether they have free will or not. We would only be affecting the outcome, not their ability to make choices. Likewise, God interfering with outcomes would not affect anyone's free will at all. They could still will to rape and beat and kill, without succeeding. So this "free will" excuse really excuses nothing whatsoever.
I guess I left out some important info in favour of succinctness. These points corresponds to your above paragraphs.
1. If you read Genesis you'll find that man's sin brought a curse on nature (supposedly). Therefore, his free choice to sin brought the natural evil. Also (this is going to sound wacky), man, in a state of rebellion against God (free will), technically deserves nothing but hell. Thus, anything before death, even the horrors of nature, is better than what he deserves (that's what's called grace).
2. Free will is the power to act apart from natural constraints. According to naturalism, it is simply an illusion. However, any practical naturalist epistemology requires the assumption that man can reason. If you make the assumption that one part of man's consciousness is trustworthy (which is against pure naturalistic logic), it seems logical to me to make the assumption that free will also is. This seems most consistent to me personally.
3. Free will in heaven? Free will isn't the cause of sin, it simply allows it. The Bible says that heaven will in the future be composed only of followers of God. Those who have chosen to continue their rebellion against God will be elsewhere. . . .
4. I never said that God doesn't interfere with the outcomes of free will. My favourite book (take a guess) gives some examples of this. However, God has perfect right (being the creator and offended party) to judge man however he wills, including by using other men. The punishment of the ancient Israelites through contemporary Middle Eastern powers is a perfect example. I am not in the place of God, though, so I'm sorry to say I would have to interrupt our picnic.
I hope this helps clarify my worldview.