You do not have any free will if you believe in god unless you believe in evil and hate

Hello! I'm happy to participate in such an interesting and important debate. I hope we both can understand each others views and come to a valid conclusion at the end. Having said that, there are TWO major red flag with my opponent's argument: 1. There's clear biased in his whole argument. Sure, there are some heartfelt arguments towards their stance on Free Will, but nothing of substance. 2. They provide NO evidence to support their claim; I'll not be merely persuaded by ethos or pathos. With this in mind, I will also be ignoring the YouTube videos, with the exception of one statement made in the last video, but I'll be addressing that later. For years, Atheist's have accused Christian apologetic's of believing in such an immoral prophecy God has put forth; which is, Free Will. The Atheist community faces faulty accusations and problems within their own arguments, causing confusion on all sides of the discussion. I, on the other hand, will be representing the philosophical view on Free Will. My opponent has based their position on one question: 1. How can God allow evil and suffering in the world? For the sake of brevity I will consider two contentions: 1. Kant's view 2. Utilitarian view (as exemplified by John Stuart Mill) Kant famously takes the view that "A good will is good not because of what it performs or effects, not by its aptness for the attainment of some proposed end, but simply by virtue of the volition" that is, it is good in itself, and considered by itself is to be esteemed much higher than all that can be brought about by it in favor of any inclination "Its usefulness or fruitlessness can neither add to nor take away anything from this value." For Kant, what makes a willing (decision) good or evil is contained in the act of willing itself. Hence, there would be no need to consider the consequences of an action stemming from a decision when determining the morality of the choice. An interesting illustration of this view can be found in Bioware's Star Wars the Old Republic game. Players are often given a chance to select between light side (good) and dark side (evil) options, thus earning light side or dark side points which determine the moral alignment of the character. For example, a player might have to choose to kill or spare a defeated opponent. Conveniently, the choices are labeled with symbols indicating whether a choice is light side or dark side which would be very useful in real life. If Kant's view is correct, then God could allow the freedom of the will while also preventing evil choices from having any harmful consequences. For example, a person could freely chose to rape a woman and the moral choice would presumably be duly noted by God (in anticipation of judgment day). God could then simply prevent the rape from ever occurring the rapist could, for example, stumble and fall while lunging towards his intended victim. As another example, a person could freely will the decision to murder someone, yet find that her gun fails to fire when aimed at the intended victim. In short, people could be free to make moral choices while at the same time being unable to actually bring those evil intentions into actuality. Thus, God could allow free will while also preventing anyone from being harmed. It might be objected that God could not do this on the grounds that people would soon figure out that they could never actualize their evil decisions and hence people would (in general) stop making evil choices. That is, there would be a rather effective deterrent to evil choices, namely that they could never bear fruit and this would rob people of their free will. For example, those who would otherwise decide to rape if they could engage in rape would not do that because they would know that their attempts to act on their decisions would be thwarted. The obvious reply is that free will does not mean that person gets what s/he wills it merely means that the person is free to will. As such, people who want to rape could still will to rape and do so freely. They just would not be able to harm anyone. It is, of course, obvious that this is not how the world works people are able to do all sorts of misdeeds. However, since God could make the world work this way, this would suggest various possibilities such as God not existing or that God is not a Kantian. This leads me to the discussion of the utilitarian option. On the stock utilitarian approach, the morality of an action depends on the consequences of said action. As Mill put it, "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." As such, the morality of a willing would not be determined by the willing but by the consequences of the action brought about by the willing in question. If this is correct, then God would need to allow the consequences of the willing to occur in order for the willing to be good or evil (or neutral). After all, if the willing had no consequences then it would have no moral significance on a consequentialist view like utilitarianism. So, for example, if a person freely wills to rape a woman, then God must not intervene. Otherwise He would be interfering with what determines the ethics of the willing. As such, if God did not allow the rapist to act upon his willing, then the decision to rape would not be an evil decision. If it is assumed that free will is essential to God being able to judge people for their deeds and misdeeds, then He would have to allow misdeeds to bear fruit so that they would be, in fact, misdeeds. On the usual view, He then punishes or rewards people after they die. "You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh ; rather, serve one another humbly in love." - Galatians 5:13 "Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own." - John 7:17 "Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." - Romans 13:2 Sources: 1. http://ethics.sandiego.edu... ---> Kant's view 2. http://www.mesacc.edu... ---> Other stuff about Kan't view 3. http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com... ---> God, rape & Free Will 4. https://www.biblestudytools.com... ---> Bible verses