The definitive refutation of the free will argument
If in Heaven , one can use free will but never commit misdeeds, then without special pleading,why not just Heaven in the first place.Loving parents try to put their children in safe places, not putting them in unsafe ones to test them for a better life later.God ,therefore, shows no love! It is theists such as John Hick who require paradise in the end.He commits the strawman and the all or nothing fallacies in stating that we atheists demand paradise. We just call his bluff.Nelson Pike in "God and Evil," adumbrates on the idea that we would be robots if we could not do wrong, but that applies to Heaven also.And so , he special pleads.God has no need to set up an epistemic distance to test us to come to love Him as no rational being would care for worship in the first place.So,that is a rationalization on the part of Hick and others. Another rationalization of his and others is soul-making.How absurd! What about the fifty millions who lost their lives and thus, their free will so that one man could exercise his! So why not just Heaven ? It won't do to answer that there it is different as that beg the question. Theists just posit one rationalization after another to absolve their monster ! This is the Meslier - Martin argument that I put forth as the argument against the use of free will in theodicies. That is Fr. Meslier and Michael Martin .
morgan L lamberth Fr. Griggs rests in his Socratic ignorance and humble naturalism. Logic is the bane of theists.
" God is in a worse position than the scarecow who had a body to which a mind could enter whilst He has neither. He is that married bachelor. No wonder He is ineffable!" Ignostic Morgan"
"Life is its own validation and reward and ultimate meaning." Inquiring Lynn
Please support mental health and take the stigma off metnal illnes!