• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The free will argument

leroy

Well-Known Member
Premise 1 if God doesn't exist there wouldn't be creatures with free will

Premise 2 there are creatures with free will

Therefore God exists


So if you are an Atheist, agnostic, non theist etc. Which premise would you deny 1 or 2?


*with free will I simply mean "the hability to descide" for example desciding between eating a healthy salad or a hamburger would be an example of free will.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Premise 1 if God doesn't exist there wouldn't be creatures with free will

Premise 2 there are creatures with free will

Therefore God exists


So if you are an Atheist, agnostic, non theist etc. Which premise would you deny 1 or 2?


*with free will I simply mean "the hability to descide" for example desciding between eating a healthy salad or a hamburger would be an example of free will.

I would deny that choosing between healthy salad and a hamburger has anything to do with free will. So I would deny P2 and that is irrespective of P1. Free will are also claimed by non-religious people.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Premise 1 if God doesn't exist there wouldn't be creatures with free will

Premise 2 there are creatures with free will

Therefore God exists


So if you are an Atheist, agnostic, non theist etc. Which premise would you deny 1 or 2?


*with free will I simply mean "the hability to descide" for example desciding between eating a healthy salad or a hamburger would be an example of free will.


Premise 1 makes no sense except to people who have little idea what free will actually represents

Atheists decide using free will not to worship any god, usually because of complete lack of any evidence for any gods existence.

Atheist will decide using free will what they choose to eat

So how about premise #3

3. If anyone can provide falsifiable evidence for any gods existence and that said god or gods issue free will on order to have people worship them then maybe you will have a point.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Premise 1 if God doesn't exist there wouldn't be creatures with free will.

The existence nor non-existence of free-will cannot be equated to whether God exists or not. There possibly exists a degree of free will naturally.

Therefor the rest does not logically follow.

Premise 2 there are creatures with free will

Therefore God exists


So if you are an Atheist, agnostic, non theist etc. Which premise would you deny 1 or 2?

Yes. the atheist can deny premise one easily. I can do it to as a theist.

*with free will I simply mean "the hability to descide" for example desciding between eating a healthy salad or a hamburger would be an example of free will.

Not a good example to demonstrate free will.
 

night912

Well-Known Member
I would deny that choosing between healthy salad and a hamburger has anything to do with free will. So I would deny P2 and that is irrespective of P1. Free will are also claimed by non-religious people.
So technically, you deny both premises because you denied free will.
 

night912

Well-Known Member
1. Doesn't follow.
2. Unsupported.

Is God omniscient? If so, He knows the future. If He knows the future, the future is predetermined.
QED?o_O
Both are unsupported. Shunyadragon explained it so I'll skip the redundancy.

* residency should be redundancy.
 
Last edited:

Native

Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Premise 1 if God doesn't exist there wouldn't be creatures with free will
Premise 2 there are creatures with free will
Therefore God exists
So in fact "god" gave all creatures a free will to be eaten or to flight away?
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Premise 1 seems quite unlikely. What does the presence of free will have to do with the existence of a God?

Premise 2 is mostly problematic because I have never seen a sensible definition of the term 'free will'.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Premise 1 seems quite unlikely. What does the presence of free will have to do with the existence of a God?

Premise 2 is mostly problematic because I have never seen a sensible definition of the term 'free will'.

You can't see a definition. You can subjectively make sense of it. Learn to describe what you actually do.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
Premise 1 if God doesn't exist there wouldn't be creatures with free will

Premise 2 there are creatures with free will

Therefore God exists


So if you are an Atheist, agnostic, non theist etc. Which premise would you deny 1 or 2?


*with free will I simply mean "the hability to descide" for example desciding between eating a healthy salad or a hamburger would be an example of free will.

Considering that there is no way to examine and evaluate whether creatures have free will or not, I wouldn't come to a conclusion on either premise. Either way, we certainly act and feel as if we make choices and that is all that matters.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Considering that there is no way to examine and evaluate whether creatures have free will or not, I wouldn't come to a conclusion on either premise. Either way, we certainly act and feel as if we make choices and that is all that matters.

Yeah, free will is an illusion, that works if you believe in it. IMHO
 
Top