>Teearnee<
, in defending God, you've brought into the debate yet another utterly unfounded, metaphysical proposition: the Devil exists. The burden of proof extends to yet another metaphysical a priori claim.
1. We aren't robots.
2. Therefore we have free-will.
It doesn't take a genius to think of one counter-example in less than 0.1 seconds. Let's take rocks. Applying the first line of reasoning, it is safe to say that rocks are not robots, yet we find that this does not lead us to our conclusion of free-will. Rocks are not robots, yet they do NOT (I also like using capitals for individual words in a sentence) have free-will. You may not have heard this before, but if God is indeed omniscient, God cannot have free-will; not even the illusion of it! Now, if God does not have free-will, we do not. Unless you're willing to match wits in a debate of modality, this is where we draw conclusion: that orthodox (literal and simplistic) interpretations of the Bible produce a contradiction. I suggest not interpreting everything in the Bible as literal. Parables, metaphor, analogy--these things are devices used in the written composition of the Bible. It's not all literal!