> Omniscience: A coin is flipped, and comes up tails. The god you describe would know that it would do that, and what would result from that outcome. A truly omniscient god, though, would know what would be the result of the coin coming up heads, even though it doesn't happen.
>
> Omnipotence: Randomness doesn't really exist at all. A truly omnipotent god can control the outcome of "random" events to suit his purpose.

Then said events aren't really random, though they may seem that way to humans. I can accept both these revised definitions, with one caveat: just because god can control random events doesn't mean he does. As such, it's possible randomness does exist, but he could cause any quantum interaction to behave in a manner of his choosing.

> Ok, to an extent. Interference does exist in the Christian viewpoint,

Yeah, but I don't think it's wholly relevant to my analogy. I can accept that god can tweak his simulation as he pleases, but it seems to me he doesn't *need* to if he doesn't want to.

> > This is important. Is there some intrinsic nature of these souls that guides their interactions? Hrm. I don't know, and this where I have to ask a question of those who believe in souls and free will: if souls have the ability to make decisions that aren't influenced only by physical factors, what is the nature of this ability? Where does it come from? How is it used?
>
> It's called free will.

Please describe to me exactly what you mean by free will. The ability to make decisions without the aid of past experiences (memory) and current physical brain conditions?

> If decisions are influenced only by other factors, how can they be controlled?

I don't know what this means. Controlled by whom? If actions are influenced only by factors external to the actor, then the actions can be controlled by anyone with control over the external factors.

> > The second view is a hypothetical view that I created only because I was unable to come up with any other explanation for the Christian viewpoint. In this simulation, souls have some sort of intrinsic nature that they can rely on to aid them in their decisions. This intrinsic nature is set by god.
>
> Yep.
>
> Again, though, this removes "true" free will from the souls, since they have no control over the only tools they have for making decisions.

Okay, then, if souls have an intrinsic nature set by god, I agree with your conclusion that it removes "true" free will from them.

> Why? If someone gives you a hammer, does he control how you use it? In the same way, God gives free will, but doesn't control how it's used.

See, I don't think this analogy flows with what you wrote in the paragraph above. If the souls don't have control over the tools they have for decision-making, they don't have control over the hammer. In your sense, they were given a hammer, and also a bunch of programming on how they could use it. They are, in essence, automatons.

> However, God doesn't choose for us to do a as a result of A, we do. He simply knows what we're going to decide ahead of time and uses that knowledge to achieve his purpose.

But god has also controlled how we are able to make decisions, so, in essence, he controls how we will make those decisions.

Consider this argument:

(1) Given: God creates and controls physical laws.
(2) Given: God creates and controls the intrinsic nature of souls.
(3) Given: Souls have only physical factors (experiences and makeup of their bodies) and their intrinsic nature to control their decision making process.
(4) Therefore: God creates and controls the decision making processes of souls [from (1), (2) and (3)].

Is this faulty reasoning?

Stephen