Ok . Bible verses are n/a. I agree fully.

Like most, you cherry pick.

Regards
DL

Why does this not surprise me.

"Free will, if it exists, means that your will is under your control."

" Free will itself is not under someone's control --"

If you do not see a contradiction in your two sentences then do not bother coming back.

Regards
DL

Nope, no contradiction. This is just plain and simple English. The problem, I believe, is that you are still thinking that 'will' and 'free will' are interchangeable and the same, but they are not. I've already explained how they are different, and those sentences that you find contradictory in fact help to explain it.

I can see 2 ways of resolving this conflict if you are in fact interested:
1) You can post your definitions of 'will' and 'free will' so that we can examine where it is that you are going wrong and not separating the two terms.

2) You can tell us your native language because maybe you aren't seeing the difference since you don't understand the nuances of English. I'm sure that someone else here understands this concept and your language well enough. If English is your language, then we have lots of work to do.

Why do you incorrectly assume that everybody who defends God is a Christian? Have you had a traumatic experience or something?

Here is the definitions I go by.

Main Entry: 1will 
Pronunciation: \wəl, (ə)l, əl, ˈwil\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): past would \wəd, (ə)d, ˈwu̇d\ present singular & plural will
Etymology: Middle English (1st & 3d singular present indicative), from Old English wille (infinitive wyllan); akin to Old High German wili (3d singular present indicative) wills, Latin velle to wish, will
Date: before 12th century
transitive verb : desire, wish <call it what you will>verbal auxiliary 1 —used to express desire, choice, willingness, consent, or in negative constructions refusal <no one would take the job> <if we will all do our best> <will you please stop that racket>
2 —used to express frequent, customary, or habitual action or natural tendency or disposition <will get angry over nothing> <will work one day and loaf the next>
3 —used to express futurity <tomorrow morning I will wake up in this first-class hotel suite — Tennessee Williams>
4 —used to express capability or sufficiency <the back seat will hold three passengers>
5 —used to express probability and often equivalent to the simple verb <that will be the babysitter>
6 a —used to express determination, insistence, persistence, or willfulness <I have made up my mind to go and go I will> b —used to express inevitability <accidents will happen>
7 —used to express a command, exhortation, or injunction <you will do as I say, at once>intransitive verb : to have a wish or desire <whether we will or no>
usage see shall
— if you will : if you wish to call it that <a kind of preoccupation, or obsession if you will — Louis Auchincloss>


This in particular----------to have a wish or desire

Main Entry: free will
Function: noun
Date: 13th century
1 : voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>
2 : freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention

Yep, I understand this in the three of my languages.
It is said that those who speak more than one language have a hard time being understood.

That must be your problem. I hope you know more than one language. If not, you have no excuse.

Regards
DL

Because I tend to lump all who defend the indefensible imaginary God to be of the same ilk. Believers in fantasy and magic.

Regards
DL

Thank you for those definitions. So you see how 'will' and 'free will' are not the same thing, right? Free will speaks to the cause of the will, not the will itself. And so they are not interchangeable.

In fact, you did already understand this as demonstrated below:
You used the correct terms in the correct places, but your conclusion pretends that they mean the same thing. See, you said that God killing negates one's will to live, but you act as if you said that God killing negates one's free will to live (but that phrase would be nonsense as that's not what free will means, even going by the definitions you provided).

What did you exercise to respond?
Your will or your free will?

Why not the other and what difference would I have seen at this end and what difference did it make at your end?

Regards
DL

I exercised my will. If you wonder how that will was chosen, then the answer is that it was my free will (or not if it doesn't exist). Even with free will not existing, will itself will still exist. This is how they're different.

See, let's say free will exists. According to incompatibilists, you can use your free will to choose to eat a steak. Your freely chosen will is to eat the steak. If I steal all the steak, I interfered with your ability to carry out your will. However, I did not interfere with your ability to freely chose that will that you didn't carry out. Free will is intact, but your will is not.

Perhaps we should clear your doubt as to the existence of your free will. You seem unsure about having one.

I have a quick little test to show you you have it.
Care to give it a go?
It is not a trick BTW and I will explain it and you will agree as to the soundness of the test before I apply it.

Regards
DL

I don't doubt the existence of free will. As I mentioned earlier, I just wanted to avoid that part of the debate as it was irrelevant to the discussion at hand, which had to presume the presence of free will.

Also, thinking that you can prove the existence of free will is laughable. You do realize that there is no general consensus on this, and if a proof was available that would be pretty big news. I look forward to showing you where you're going wrong, if you actually believe in your 'proof.'

Strange that you laugh at a test without knowing the details of it. Oh well.

Shall we begin to make you eat your laughter?

A quick question for you.

If you have something, then you can give it up.
If you do not have something then you cannot.

If you have free will, you can give it up.
If you do not have free will you cannot give it up.

Are these true statements?

Have you dithered out the simple test to see if you have free will yet or do I need to take you to the next step?

Regards
DL

Have no worries, I'm still laughing.

Not all of those statements are true. Want to try again? (If you'd like to get specific, we can start with the first one -- things I have but can't give up: my humanness, my gravitational force, my doubt that you can prove free will even though many very intelligent people continue to debate it without asking you to settle the debate for them.)

Also, I disagree that you can give up your free will if you do have it. It just doesn't make sense. Even if you let others make choices for you, you are still freely choosing to listen to them. You have the choice to ignore them at any moment, only you are choosing not to. Care to disagree?

You already have the answers without knowing the questions.

See ya.

Regards
DL

You started with those statements as the premise of your proof. Your premises are false, so how can we continue with the proof?

I don't have any idea why God desires what He does. I don't know why He created humans, angels or cancer cells. God's motives are a complete mystery to me.

He doesn't need our love, but He does desire it. I don't know why He wants me to love Him.

Regards,
CK

and yet you follow, worship, defend, trust, and love this God without a second thought. intriguing.

So, Hitler wasn't evil Got it.

Indeed.

Strange how you can definitively know His desires without knowing why.
Would you open the floodgates of His next genocide of man without knowing why?

Regards.
DL

How can Hitler be evil if he only did what is ok for your God to do?
I see a double standard. Tsk tsk.

Regards
DL

Bleat bleat, do not speak.
Do not question do not ask.

Regards
DL

I definitively know that you don't want others to be Christians or Jews but I don't know why. Is that strange too?

Intent often matters more than actual actions.

And even still, there are things for humans and things for God. For instance, He is not required to love Himself and praise Himself, etc. You can't seriously place the Law and the subjects in the same category. Why haven't you yet complained that the government was kidnapping people when it arrested them?

Eh, because I think that is B S.
Man gave them authority.
Your God gave man dominion and when we exercised it, He genocided our ass.
That is immoral.

Regards
DL