Free will means being responsible for the bad or good actions or any actions you perform. You caused them.
God allegedly gave all mankind free will.
Did he give it solely for his own sake?
He then gave it so that we might love him alone. Believers say you should serve others for his sake ie because he wants you to. That is just putting your love for God into practice.
Did he give it mainly for his own sake?
Fits the notion that God comes first but is not to be the only one you love. That absurd doctrine contradicts the view that all things are created by God out of boundless love. It is idolatry.
Did he give it for our sake and his own?
Is even more idolatrous than the previous and absurdly implies that you can God can be equally valuable. You cannot be for you cannot create the universe. If you are that important does it really matter much if you never think of God?
Did he give it for our sake only? This has two sub questions.
Did he give it so that we might do good?
Did he give it because we like to be free?
Or was it both reasons?
Was it so that we might be free to do good or evil? That would mean it was given for its own sake.

That view implies that God gives free will and has no concern about any harm done as a result.
Was it that we might use it to do good? It was given that we might use it well.

So God intended us to do good and gave us free will so that we might freely cause good.
Was it given so that God might reward us for goodness and punish us for badness?

Is free will given for our benefit, to make life worse for us or is it neutral, neither bad or good, important or unimportant?

If it is evil then God is evil.

It can be neutral as in causing as much evil or harm as good. But the problem is that God has to control it to make it neutral and that is a sin when he could make it good instead.

So free will has to be good. But for who?

Is it good for us? No for we would be better off having no free will but under the illusion that we are free. A sensation of endless of endless pleasure like a perpetual orgasm or something could be implanted in us. If there is no free will, then there is no reason why we should have it to make ourselves happy with it. Instead of working for our happiness we should just have it by default. If happiness is more important than free will then free will should not exist. If it is not then the Christians who say free will is worth the awful suffering in the world are just plain nasty.

The notion that God gives you free will even when it gives you the potential to murder another person contradicts the fact that free will is only of any use if you are alive. You can't be dead and use your free will. So life matters more than free will. It is better to be alive and feel free though you are not really free than to have free will that you kill with.

Religion seeks to excuse God for evil by blaming free will. But even if its excuse is believable it does not follow that it really believes it though it says it does. It could be the notorious Stockholm Syndrome at work. The evidence is that most religious people do not take the problem of evil seriously enough or research it. And those that do come up with lies. A believer to whom you refute the free will defence will usually ignore what you say.

If God makes a plan you can dodge it. What does that say? It says that free will matters more than the plan. The Church tells you about God's wonderful plan for you but that is a bait.

No Copyright