The Problem of Evil

so unless you know 100% of the information involved in any given decision, you can not freely make the decision? or that decision is not known as the "free will" concept?

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

Everything is probable to a given degree of accuracy. So, God is either all-knowing or is relegated to probability like the rest of us mortals. If he is relegated to probability like we mortals are, then we mortals are allowed to have free will. If God is all-knowing, then we mortals cannot possibly have free will.

I read the site. It has a theistic bent that gives philosophy a bad rap because it's not philosophy, but propoganda using theistic rhetoric.

so using scripture to support one's belief in a god contained therein is futile? since there is so many interpretations all ending up at a similar yet contradictory conclusion, all derived from the same source, i'll agree.

i guess the only thing left to say is something you have already-

anything "known of god" is relative to the observer.

both supporting or invalidating claims are "right"

any "truth" is only as true as it relates to oneself?

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

Assume I have moral choice. That moral choice is restricted by certain variables like my ability to understand language and concepts. How developed is my brain, my awareness, my social structure, my education system, for me to comprehend the complexities of the different moralities? How, then, can I assert that human will is uniform when the variables affecting human will aren't even uniform?

you would be incapable of making such an assertion/
at least one that was "right" on all counts.

the only similarity is the ability to choose what you feel you should, as a result of the varrying factors that go into your consideration of different choices/

since it would be next to impossible to document all the "variables",
religion, i assume, takes it to the simplest approach... everything is in a right or wrong category.

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

Actually, the mystical truth can only be a first-person truth, which can only be known by another if the other relinquishes rationality. However, anything argued logically or empirically can be attained by logic or by experience.

that latter is self substantiating.

but the bible (and other religious doccuments) attempts to take mysticism and logically or empirically argue for it as being "self-evident" truths- connecting the "things which are not seen" to the things which can be/

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

It is one thing to logically argue something like God, that may or may not be, and another thing altogether to argue that God absolutely is.

since the god of the bible is said to be explained in the confines of human understanding...

and there is soo much of him left unexplained that in turn raises logical questions as to the bible's legitimacy...

(is that the reason why) they say god is beyond "human understanding"?

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

Free will is easier to argue against because their are certain unalterable empirical truths that tend to disprove the free will arguments. Theists must revert back to fallacious mystical arguments to prove free will, and since those arguments are fallacies anyway, those arguments fall short.

WAIT< FREEDOM TO CHOOSE WHAT IT IS YOU DO DOES NOT EXIST?

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

What are the objective consequences of free will? Free will implies that our actions are random (or rather, that our actions is dictated by our will, and how is our will determined? if its free then it is random)

However, psychology has shown that it is not the case.

"Durch Nacht und Blut das Licht"

what is a "change of heart", a "last minute decision", or anything of the like?

freedom implies something random- uncontained.

"if our actions are dictated by our will, how is our will determined?"

through each passing choice you decide to make...
what draws you to make a decision is irrelevant if the decision is ultimately yours to make.

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

If God is beyond human understanding, then God is beyond logic. If God is beyond logic, then God is arbitrary and capricious. If God is arbitrary and capricious, then there is no rhime or reason at all for why anything happens in the world. And, if that is so, then there should be less order than there is and the existing mischief should not be analyzed as being either good or evil. However, the world has logical order with some good. Thus, God's power must be within logical reason.