Dear JP,

«Thanks for your attempts to explain your position Yuyutsu. However, to be completely honest, I don't feel like I have any clearer understanding of what you are saying. Sorry.»

OK, so let me try again to explain in the most simplest way I can:

Free will is a subjective experience.
Free will neither truly exists in an objective manner, nor is it fake or a lie because we truly feel that we have it.

We therefore ought to make good choices AS IF we have free will.

Dear Paul,

I accept your point of ignorance promoting acceptance. An example is the Cairo population conference.

https://www.prb.org/resources/what-was-cairo-the-promise-and-reality-of-icpd/

From that website:

“A central sticking point is whether abortion can be interpreted as a component of reproductive health and as a universal right. The Cairo conference forged a consensus with carefully crafted language stating that “in no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning,” and that “in circumstances in which abortion is not against the law, such abortion should be safe.” This consensus, however, has not held firm over time.

Debates also continue about the importance of controlling population growth and whether the entire Cairo agenda is feasible. Because large numbers of young people are in or approaching their childbearing ages, world population will continue to grow well into the 21st century. Recent survey data from Bangladesh and Egypt show that average family size hardly declined at all in these countries in the second half of the 1990s.

These findings were surprising given that the drop from 5 or 6 children to 3.5 children on average occurred fairly rapidly between the 1970s and 1990s. It is possible that the two-child average is still a long way off, or will never be reached, in some societies.
And while advancing women’s health and rights may well contribute to the transition to smaller families, the goal may also require long-term efforts in the poorest societies. After all, women in the poorest societies suffer the greatest health problems and have the most limited opportunities.”

The reality appears to be that representatives of the Vatican made a deal with representatives of the Muslim countries. The Muslims would not support abortion if the Catholics would not support education for women.

Yuyutsu – if, as you assert, free will does not “truly exist in an objective manner” then it is literally impossible for us to “make good choices AS IF we have free will”.

If we have no free will then everything is determined – either by the mindless laws of physics acting on matter, or by God. If it is the laws of physics or God causing us to act as we do, then by definition we are not the ones controlling our choices.

Just because we may feel like we have free will makes not make the slightest difference. It is only if we actually do have free will that we can genuinely make choices.

So, if you don’t believe you have free will, what do you believe is actually controlling you? I presume you will say God, but then again, maybe not, since you have most emphatically written: “God does not exist - neither in the human mind nor anywhere else”.

You continue to leave me puzzled.

Dear JP,

As in your own words: «It is only if we actually do have free will that we can genuinely make choices.»

We as humans do make choices, that cannot be denied, only that on a deeper look, these are not genuine choices.

Since God's will always prevails, how could human will possibly override it?

However, genuine or otherwise, the consequences are going to come...
and so long as you believe that your human choices are genuine, so the consequences too will feel genuine.

---
This was my simple answer, but now I go a step deeper:

You asserted:
«If it is the laws of physics or God causing us to act as we do, then by definition we are not the ones controlling our choices.»

Indeed, it is by God alone, also (but perhaps not exclusively) through God's laws of physics, that the human body/mind acts.

However, your "by definition" conclusion comes about due to your incorrect definition, where you mistakenly define yourself as a human body/mind who is separate from God, thus helplessly subject not only to God but even to the laws of physics.

Once you understand that there can be nothing but God, thus you too are God, it will be clear to you that nothing can control you and it is by you that all is controlled: it is by You that the world is created (including its laws of physics); it is by You that the world and all the bodies within it are run; it is by You that the world will eventually be dissolved.

I don't understand why some want to treat atheism and organised religion as if those two things are in a contest.
The truth, and hence True Atheism, has no rivals.
When you follow truth, there is nothing else to consider.
Only the truth matters.

The world is what it is.
Where religious 'beliefs' run contrary to reality, then those 'beliefs' are ineffective.
They cannot and will not change anything that is fundamental in this world.
Some pursue their false ideals, but every move they make must come to nought.
They might think they are succeeding, but that is only a story they tell themselves.
Everything that is fundamental continues, unchanged, around them.

We need to be mindful that those who ignore truth are human beings too.
We can be sad for them, and bemoan their befuddled state.
We do this because we understand they know no better.
But they must be the ones to lift themselves out of their senseless condition.
They must face up to reality.

Yuyutsu – you make a lot of assertions but provide little, if anything, to back those assertions up.

Please tell me, why should anybody believe any of what you say is true?

As I have said before, if God is everything then God must be both good and evil.

Why is nothing as it appears? Why should everything have to be reinterpreted through your assertions?

Ipso Fatso – I think everyone would agree with you that “only the truth matters”.

The important questions are though: what is the truth? how do we determine what the truth is?

You simply seem to assume that atheism is The Truth and that asssumption is all that is needed. As I have tried to show, those who don’t accept atheism do so for reasons. You have largely not engaged with the things I have raised.

Anyway, it was kind of you to acknowledge that, as one who “ignores the truth” of atheism, I am still a human being!