Only he who creates himself out of nothing has a completely free will. — charles ferraro

:fire:

Excelente!

Determinism beaten...that too soundly.

So, free will requires existing with aseity. And that's the manner in which minds exist. Thus, God has free will (something we could know independently, given that God is omnibenevolent and one would not be omnibenevolent unless one was morally responsible for being virtuous - which requires free will - and so too do we.

Does God have free will? Like our own will, God's will is determined. Determined and free. Unless there are more gods. Which is the case. Ultimate coclusion: They, like us, have determined will and, dependent on their relation to each other, that will is free or bound. As it is for us. We were created in that image.

Only he who creates himself out of nothing has a completely free will. — charles ferraro

Unless she's holding him back.

And that's the manner in which minds exist. — Bartricks

The mind and matter are just necessities for bodily existence. The Holy Trinity is in fact the Holy Unity surrounded by the unholy dual.

Again, no arguments, just squawks.

My arguments start from squawks. Your arguments are vacuous, containing no flesh. Only by assuming a holy triad squawk an argument makes sense. The argument is just an overvalued aid but I can see why it makes sense to you. It's all you value. You like having arguments. I prefer talking.

You like having arguments. I prefer talking. — EugeneW

Then you need to find a talking forum, not a philosophy forum. Philosophers use reasoned argument to try and figure out what's what. They don't just squawk. Isn't twitter designed for people like you? That is, people who have nothing substantial to say but still want to tell everyone else about their inane thoughts?

Philosophers use reasoned argument to try and figure out what's what — Bartricks

A typical empty-head answer of a typical empty head person living in a typical empty head world making argument sound important because he/she thinks philosophy is all about boring arguments. Though "thinks" is too much an appraisal for automated, vapid, and vacuous processes you involve yourself in. You're not doing philosophy. You are wallowing in unreachable dreams of omnipotence while in fact being omni-impotent. Dream on brother/sister...

I have the impression guys that you are using a definition of a god that is far too alien from mainstream thought of what God is...
God by definition is Omnipotent, Omnibenevolent, Omniscient, Omnitemporal, Omnipresent and Perfect... if God by definition must necessarily be perfect... then he cannot make free choices... as he/she can only choose perfection

I have the impression guys that you are using a definition of a god that is far too alien from mainstream thought of what God is...
God by definition is Omnipotent, Omnibenevolent, Omniscient, Omnitemporal, Omnipresent and Perfect.. — Arfel

There is more than one definition of gods. In ancient Greece there were a lot of them living on a mountain. Why are they part of mythology and God not? Some old philosophers weren't happy with that ancient pan and replaced it with a mono containing them all, and the world is stuck with him. Why should we stick to that old definition which came after the old definition?

"Why should we stick to that old definition which came after the old definition?"
- Haglund

Well because if we use different definitions than what is commonly attributed to the major faiths, then it won't address the arguments for what a God is base on the majority adherents in the world... it's like arguing for the ability of Superman by arguing for a "superman" in a circus...

.