Humans have no free will, god is fully responsible for all suffering.

[bennettmbiggers]

For the sake of argument let's grant two things:
1. Humans have immortal souls
2. God possess free will

If that's the case I dare to say god is fully responsible for whatever suffering that ever took place.

First of all I simply can't imagine how free will is supposed to work. The problem is very simple. Stage is always set before you're born. Even if you have immortal soul it does not change tha fact, that from the very beginning of your life you're being formed by your vicinity. How your brain develops fully depends on how your parents feed you, whether you live in clear neigborhood, whether recombination during your conception was fortunate enough etc. The moment you're aware enough to take your own actions you're already set in specific way by your environment. You were programmed for years, so now that you become conscious you just execute your programme. You may say that well, now that you're conscious you have choice but I don't think so. I see your choices as results of countless different factors that have occured until this point of your life. One drop of rain few years ago might have lower your body temperture low enough so you got cold. This cold caused you to skip your classess. It caused you to fail your test. It caused you to get worse job, this caused you to become communist, and then stallinist... That's just one smal factor, I think in some sense every particle influences us to some extent. Your current state of mind is result of previous one, and that is result of previous, and so on until before you were born. So we can't be free on two levels. Our start is fully independent from us. And even when we grow up we're still just responding to our environment.

I really don't see any space to swing a free will. To be honest I can't imagine how it may work. Thoughts just apper in our heads. For free will to exist, you would have to be able to consciously think of things you want to think of before you actualy think of them... It's not gonna work.

I can somehow imagine god having free will due to the fact there was never anything before to program him, however that means god is 100% responsible for absolutely all suffer. We may not have free will but we are conscious and we feel pain, so if god is going to torture us forever in hell it means he deliberately created us knowing we have zero chance to choose differently, yet he just wants us to suffer. Not a very loving god I think.

I am very curious as to why you do not think humans have any choice. In your post, you propose a scenario that aims to prove that humans lack choice, however, I am unconvinced that it really does establish such a claim. Sure, I will grant that choices made are the results of different factors, but I don’t think such a reality implies that outcome A and outcome B cannot be two truly possible outcomes. Couldn’t the same set of factors lead to two distinct outcomes? I will use your example. Suppose a rain drop did fall on me a few years ago and I got a cold. That is physiological and mostly out of my conscious control. I grant that I don’t have much choice in regards to catching the cold. However, I do have the choice to drink lots of water, take the appropriate medicine, and tough it out at school for a day or two so as to not miss my important classes. My classes are valuable to me, so I choose to attend, despite the fact that I was stuffed up and didn’t feel great. Ultimately, the choice is mine— the choice of how I respond to my environment. Certainly, in regards to going to school, I either go or I don’t. There is simply no way around it. And it is an “either, or” situation. A cold presents an option in regards to attendance at school; a cold does not force me to stay home, it simply gives me more incentive (perhaps) to stay home and get well. In your thought experiment, life happens, and I am simply no more than a consequence of my environment. Unfortunately, this is no way of observing reality from a rational point of view, from my perspective. I must ask, if there is no free will, then why does anyone experience any kind of consequence for their actions— they shouldn’t if they truly had no say in the matter! If free will is eliminated, it makes absolutely no sense that anyone be held accountable for their actions— after all, they did not choose them, right? No, I strongly disagree. Perhaps, you might disagree with me and insist that the world operates from a flawed understanding, that there genuinely is no such thing as moral responsibility. Yet, what happens when the argument becomes personal? Suppose your home has been broken in to, that your space has been invaded, and things you cared about have been taken from you. Does it not follow that you will hope to find the perpetrator? Does it not follow that you will desire to hold the thief morally responsible for his or her actions? If there is no free will, then the perpetrator couldn’t have done otherwise; if there is no free will, you will have no reason to be upset or even hold the thief accountable for his or her actions! But this is of course not the way the world works, because we do have choice. I will grant that humans don’t have maximal autonomy, but it ought to be clear that a certain level of freedom is required for any kind of moral responsibility. It might be uncomfortable to deal with the reality that we have little to nothing to do with our past, our genes, our character, our place of birth, and so on (our stage— as you have referred to it as), but from the argument for moral responsibility alone, it must be clear that freedom is essential.
1. If there is no free will, then there is no case for moral responsibility
2. There is a case for moral responsibility, therefore free will

[jayceeii]

For the sake of argument let's grant two things:
1. Humans have immortal souls
2. God possess free will

If that's the case I dare to say god is fully responsible for whatever suffering that ever took place.

First of all I simply can't imagine how free will is supposed to work. The problem is very simple. Stage is always set before you're born. Even if you have immortal soul it does not change tha fact, that from the very beginning of your life you're being formed by your vicinity. How your brain develops fully depends on how your parents feed you, whether you live in clear neigborhood, whether recombination during your conception was fortunate enough etc. The moment you're aware enough to take your own actions you're already set in specific way by your environment. You were programmed for years, so now that you become conscious you just execute your programme. You may say that well, now that you're conscious you have choice but I don't think so. I see your choices as results of countless different factors that have occured until this point of your life. One drop of rain few years ago might have lower your body temperture low enough so you got cold. This cold caused you to skip your classess. It caused you to fail your test. It caused you to get worse job, this caused you to become communist, and then stallinist... That's just one smal factor, I think in some sense every particle influences us to some extent. Your current state of mind is result of previous one, and that is result of previous, and so on until before you were born. So we can't be free on two levels. Our start is fully independent from us. And even when we grow up we're still just responding to our environment.

I really don't see any space to swing a free will. To be honest I can't imagine how it may work. Thoughts just apper in our heads. For free will to exist, you would have to be able to consciously think of things you want to think of before you actualy think of them... It's not gonna work.

I can somehow imagine god having free will due to the fact there was never anything before to program him, however that means god is 100% responsible for absolutely all suffer. We may not have free will but we are conscious and we feel pain, so if god is going to torture us forever in hell it means he deliberately created us knowing we have zero chance to choose differently, yet he just wants us to suffer. Not a very loving god I think.

I am very curious as to why you do not think humans have any choice. In your post, you propose a scenario that aims to prove that humans lack choice, however, I am unconvinced that it really does establish such a claim. Sure, I will grant that choices made are the results of different factors, but I don’t think such a reality implies that outcome A and outcome B cannot be two truly possible outcomes. Couldn’t the same set of factors lead to two distinct outcomes? I will use your example. Suppose a rain drop did fall on me a few years ago and I got a cold. That is physiological and mostly out of my conscious control. I grant that I don’t have much choice in regards to catching the cold. However, I do have the choice to drink lots of water, take the appropriate medicine, and tough it out at school for a day or two so as to not miss my important classes. My classes are valuable to me, so I choose to attend, despite the fact that I was stuffed up and didn’t feel great. Ultimately, the choice is mine— the choice of how I respond to my environment. Certainly, in regards to going to school, I either go or I don’t. There is simply no way around it. And it is an “either, or” situation. A cold presents an option in regards to attendance at school; a cold does not force me to stay home, it simply gives me more incentive (perhaps) to stay home and get well. In your thought experiment, life happens, and I am simply no more than a consequence of my environment. Unfortunately, this is no way of observing reality from a rational point of view, from my perspective. I must ask, if there is no free will, then why does anyone experience any kind of consequence for their actions— they shouldn’t if they truly had no say in the matter! If free will is eliminated, it makes absolutely no sense that anyone be held accountable for their actions— after all, they did not choose them, right? No, I strongly disagree. Perhaps, you might disagree with me and insist that the world operates from a flawed understanding, that there genuinely is no such thing as moral responsibility. Yet, what happens when the argument becomes personal? Suppose your home has been broken in to, that your space has been invaded, and things you cared about have been taken from you. Does it not follow that you will hope to find the perpetrator? Does it not follow that you will desire to hold the thief morally responsible for his or her actions? If there is no free will, then the perpetrator couldn’t have done otherwise; if there is no free will, you will have no reason to be upset or even hold the thief accountable for his or her actions! But this is of course not the way the world works, because we do have choice. I will grant that humans don’t have maximal autonomy, but it ought to be clear that a certain level of freedom is required for any kind of moral responsibility. It might be uncomfortable to deal with the reality that we have little to nothing to do with our past, our genes, our character, our place of birth, and so on (our stage— as you have referred to it as), but from the argument for moral responsibility alone, it must be clear that freedom is essential.
1. If there is no free will, then there is no case for moral responsibility
2. There is a case for moral responsibility, therefore free will

The moral responsibility humans feel is from sense entanglement, not from objective virtue. Jesus said, “Turn the other cheek,” and this overturns the creaturely idea that vengeance has a real effect. You expressed a desire to “get even” with a thief here, but objectively speaking the real effect from punishment is to prevent further crimes, not to adjust some cosmic balance or to purify the souls of evildoers. Humans reason that if they’ve been caused pain, things will be “even” when the perpetrator feels a similar amount of pain. Instead the perpetrator, in actual spiritual dynamics, will not make a connection between his violent act and the punishment. He won’t be reformed, though he may learn the society will crash against him if he tries it again. Human minds are limited to the material realm and its interactions. They do not see what really occurs in the soul.

There is a higher morality, which springs from a direct perception of pure spirit. In this higher morality, the things that bring deep joy or deep sorrow are rightly assessed, and actions are guided by the principle that when all act for the joy of others all can be joyful. That the human plane does not work this way is immediately obvious when poverty is seen. Were humans authentically sorrowing with the sorrow of the neighbor, they’d move  swiftly to end poverty forever. As the Bible reminds us in several places, humans are the reverse of this, rejoicing in the neighbor’s sorrow, for instance as the rich take more than the others can have and find their joys in gloating about this. Any Christian church could eliminate poverty within its four walls were the people loving the neighbor as themselves. Anyone joining a Christian church should be able to think, “At last my money woes are over, these people are loving and will make sure that I always have all the things I need.” Instead we find the Christians praying to God for help, since the neighbor never would.

Only those who can dwell in the higher morality can be called free, and the rest are bound to the sense plane. The types of freedoms experienced in the lower morality are not true freedoms, because they are choosing between evils, which is to say following selfish desire whatever the case. I’m talking about spiritual freedom here, not the freedom to choose different items on a menu at an Italian restaurant. So far on Earth those who are capable of dwelling in the higher morality have not faced one another, each rather ridiculously supposing those surrounding them are exactly as they are. This is where Tom Hanks’ ideas of cognoscenti come into play, who could build Heaven on Earth if they try.