::: remembers a three-years-past run-in with Gaudere on this same subject, and hence remains silent ::: 
No divine action, short of directly manipulating the workings of our brains, could remove “free will”, as we can never really be 100% certain of anything.
More to the point, the concepts of “free will” and “causality” are mutually exclusive. We’ll never be able to understand ourselves completely, nor will we be able to predict the future, so the personal illusion of free will remains, but it’s only an illusion.
What makes you all so sure you have free will? I am not saying you don’t, I am just wondering what sort of mental gymnastics you go through to prove it. If you deny the existence of spiritual beings, such as God, aren’t you being silly to accept even tacitly the existence of spiritual beings such as yourself? And if you have no spiritual element, then you as a person are simply the concatenation, and interrelations of chemical reactions.
How does chemical soup have free will?
To me it seems obvious that divine will is the only sort of free will that can exist. And God gave you that free will. He has chosen not to draw you to Himself by direct action, and I suppose that we can assume all sorts of reasons that He might have for not doing so. Of course, we are simply building constructs in our imaginations when we do that. His reasons are not necessarily bound by human logic and understanding.
So, in answer to the OP’s question, I don’t rely on logic when contemplating the existence of God, or in perceiving his will, or the importance of any absence of action on His part. I put the logic back into my mental tool bin, and use it when I think about evolution, cosmological physics, or Chess.
Tris
Raising the dead might work for some of the serious holdouts. 
Well…
I find that passage intriguing not just because it’s from the Bible, but it’s from the Parable of the Rich Man and the Beggar, in which the Beggar is the only person in any of Jesus’s parables to be given an actual name – and that name is Lazarus.
Gaudere:
Consciously, they (I should say “we”, including myself in their number) are not unsure. However, when confronting temptation, there’s always a degree of cognitive dissonance. This is true whether the nature of that temptation is religious or not (e.g., a dieter’s tematation to cheat on his diet even though he knows exactly what the consequence will be). A revealed G-d would, at least to a great degree, remove that very powerful factor.
As a matter of fact, that is the case: those figures were much less subject to physical tempation to sin because that cognitive dissonance is missing. Note how the Bible describes the sin of Moses and Aaron (Numbers 20:24, bolding mine, obviously): “Aaron will be gathered to his people. He will not enter the land I give the Israelites, because both of you rebelled against my command at the waters of Meribah.” and as for the Israelites’ sins (Deuteronomy 9: 23-24): But you rebelled against the command of the LORD your God. You did not trust him or obey him. You have been rebellious against the LORD ever since I have known you.
Not really…it’s a dilemma of faith and trust.
Revtim:
Why not? It’s still an exercise of one’s free will to overcome physical temptation for the sake of some intangible future benefit.
Chaim:
I don’t understand why you make a division between morality and cost-benefit analysis.
Could you explain why you think the two are distinct?
morality: sticking to a principle (in this context, obedience to G-d) due to a faith that it is the right thing to do. Can only come from free will.
cost-benefit analysis: doing what is clearly ultimately in one’s own self-interest. Can be based on simple animal instinct.
Chaim Mattis Keller
Ah.
So if a decision isn’t based on faith, it can’t be moral?
Yes…but bear in mind that I do not limit that to religious faith. It could also mean faith in one’s own convictions. As long as the decision is not clearly an exercise of self-interest, it is a moral decision.
Chaim Mattis Keller
I see no reason why I couldn’t have a principle of self-interest that I accept on faith. (After all, I doubt most people could explain logically why they’re concerned about themselves – the basic principle is obeying what you feel is right, which is what people usually do.)
You are, of course, free to feel whatever you like, but I’ve gotta admit: I find your definition of morality somewhat disturbing.
Wouldn’t free will be more effective if we could make an informed choice? If you’re version of “God” were indeed perfect and all knowing, then he would know exactly what it would take to convince me of his existence. The fact that such evidence of the supernatural is nowhere is sight leads me to make the decision I have made concerning his possible existence.
Given further evidence, I am perfectly willing to change my decision.
I think the irony in all this christian talk of free will is that in order to asert that it exists they have to ignore more than a few bible verses where god (presumably) states that we don’t have it.
Stuff like this:
Deuteronomy 2:30-34
But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the Lord thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand… And the Lord our God delivered him before us: and we smote him, and his sons and all his people. And we took his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones…
Joshua 11: 18-20
Joshua made war a long time with all their kings. There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, save the Hivites the in habitants of Gibeon: all other they took battle. For it was of the Lord to hardent their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that he might destroy them utterly…
and another favorite:
What can we say? Was god being unfair? Of course not! For god said to Moses, “I will show mercy to anyone I choose, and I will show compassion to anyone I choose.” So receiving god’s promise is not up to us. We can’t get it by choosing it or working hard for it. God will show his mercy to anyone he chooses.
For the scriptures say that god told Pharoah, “ I have appointed you for the very purpose of displaying my power in you, and so that my fame might spread throughout the earth,” So you see, god shows mercy to some and just because he wants to, and he chooses to make some people refuse to listen.
Well then, you might say, “Why does god blame people for not listening? Haven’t they simply done what he made them do?
No don’t say that. Who are you, a mere human being, to criticize god? Should the thing that was created say to the one who made it, “Why have you made me like this?” (Romans 9: 14-20 NLT)
or
In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will. (Ephesians 1:11)
2 Thessalonians 2:11-13
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.
There is more but its late.
What’s more ironic is all the christians want to maintain that this god of theirs is perfectly moral. Cause if you ask me, forcing someone to a bad thing and then killing not only them but also killing their families and then torturing them forever isn’t moral but rather pretty fucked up.
But what the hell it’s your religion.
cr
Well, if we’re going to start pulling out Bible verses, let’s not forget about these:
“Have you seen what she did, that faithless one, Israel, how she went up on every high hill and under every green tree, and played the whore there? And I thought, ‘After she has done all this she will return to me;’ but she did not return…” (Jeremiah 3:6-7)
“I thought how I would set you among my children, and give you a pleasant land, the most beautiful heritage of all the nations. And I thought you would call me, My Father, and would not turn from following me. Instead, as a faithless wife leaves her husband, so you have been faithless to me, O house of Israel.” (Jeremiah 3:19-20)
“When Pharaoh let the people go, God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although that was nearer; for God thought, ‘If the people face war, they may change their minds and return to Egypt.’” (Exodus 13:17)
“I regret that I made Saul king, for he has turned back from following me…” (I Samuel 15:11)
“When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil ways, God changed his mind about the calamity that he had said he would bring upon them; and he did not do it.” (Jonah 3:10)
“I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse: therefore choose life so that you may live.” (Deuteronomy 30:19)
Badchad wrote:
Whoever said that God did or said those things is ignorant or lying.
Czarcasm wrote:
That presumes many things: one, that you are hopelessly ignorant of good and evil; two, that God ties your knowledge of His existence with your morality; three, that any evidence you personally have not seen does not exist; and four, that your moral journey is finished. You remind me of the Soviet cosmonaut who concluded that God did not exist when he failed to see Him in space.
Vorlon wrote:
Nicely said. I agree with you completely.
A booming voice from the sky? Cheap audio tricks. Rearrange the stars? A rogue galaxy cluster comprised of hundreds of billions of supermassive black holes. Raise the dead? They weren’t really dead. Broadcast something on television 24 hours a day? He already does.
How do you know what God has or has not said or done?
For all you know, God ordered the ancient Israelites to watch Bewitched three times a day and glue latex horns to the backs of their hands…
How do you know what I know?
Well, I know that you’re not very good at translating formal logical constructions back into English. I also know that you make frequent assertions about a divinity, but never get around to explaining the reasoning that lead you to your conclusions.
Since I greatly doubt that you can provide an explanation as to why God would or would not have said or done any particular thing, I can reasonably reach the conclusion that you don’t possess the knowledge you claim to have.
Actually, Vorlon, I’ve exposited my experiences with God to a fare-thee-well. I’ve written detailed accounts for three years of my moral journey from atheism to my conversion and beyond. Your not having seen them constitutes nothing of significance with respect to any inferential integrity. You’re simply ignorant about me.
I know that God did not say or do those things because I know two pertinent things: 1) Who God is, and 2) contradictions do not exist.
You want a miracle? Look back up a couple of posts, and see where you and I agreed. That was a miracle. 
I’ve seen you make dozens of assertions in many different threads, but I’ve never seen you offer the arguments you clearly have in mind, or even a link to them.
In short: Cites, please. Your not having presented them when you make your claims says a great deal about your inferential integrity.
I don’t want a miracle, I want a Great Debate. Y’know, reasoning, explanations, all that. (Although from you, that would indeed be a miracle.)