HOW THE LIMIT ON UNIVERSAL POPULATION SHOWS FREE WILL DEFENCE WRONG

 
How about this?

Love is good for it is selfless.

The more love the better.

Love is only possible for free agents.

Therefore the more free agents the better.

Believers in a perfect God cannot accept the argument though it is plainly right if love is based on free will. They say that God does not need to create and had every right not to make anybody (the teaching of the evil Bible at Romans 11:33-36). If more love were better than just him loving himself or God the Son and God the Holy Spirit as a Trinitarian would say, then God would be morally bound to make people to love him and make an infinite pile of people to boot. When a baby is born that proves that God does not exist for it will not be able to love him for seven years at least. The argument forbids any refusing to have as many babies as possible. It would have little girls being artificially inseminated and everybody on fertility drugs in the hope that three or four babies will be born every time. If babies ought to be born for the sake of God then women have no right to refuse to have them and must be forced. It would be a sin to marry an infertile person.

Christians might say that God has made a limited number of human persons but has created an infinity of angels so the argument is wrong. But we have no reason to believe that God has done that. We need evidence not speculation that the argument is wrong. And even if God has done that the fact remains that religion says he would be as good as ever if he made nobody which is totally incoherent for it has to be either better or worse to create new life. If God would be good even then they have no business trying to fob us off with answers like, "Maybe the universe is infinitely populated".
 
The believers say that God + 0 means as much love exists as God + an infinity of loving creatures. This makes no sense. It denies that the love you experience in your heart is yours and says it is God's.
 
God then did not make us so that we might love. Would it be right to make beings to suffer when it isn't going to add anything to love or make anything better.
 
 
BOOKS CONSULTED
 
AN INTELLIGENT PERSONS GUIDE TO CATHOLICISM, Alban McCoy, Continuum, London and New York, 1997
AN INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS, John Hospers, Routledge, London, 1992
APOLOGETICS AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, MH Gill & Co, Dublin, 1954
ARGUING WITH GOD, Hugh Sylvester IVP, London, 1971
CONTROVERSY: THE HUMANIST CHRISTIAN ENCOUNTER Hector Hawton, Pemberton Books, London, 1971
EVIL AND THE GOD OF LOVE, John Hicks, Fontana, London, 1977
FREE INQUIRY, Do We have Free Will? Article by Lewis Vaughn and Theodore Schick JR, Spring 1998. Vol 18 No 2, Council for Secular Humanism, Amherst, New York
GOD AND EVIL, Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
MORAL PHILOSOPHY, Joseph Rickaby SJ, Stonyhurst Philosophy Series, Longmans, Green and Co, London, 1912
PHILOSOPHICAL DICTIONARY, Voltaire, Translated by Theodore Besterman, Penguin, London, 1972
RELIGION IS REASONABLE, Thomas Corbishley SJ, Burns & Oates, London, 1960
THE BIG QUESTIONS, Simon Blackburn, Quercus Books, London, 2009
THE CASE AGAINST GOD, Gerald Priestland, Collins, Fount Paperbacks, London, 1984
THE LIFE OF ALL LIVING, Fulton J Sheen, Image Books, New York, 1979
THE PUZZLE OF GOD, Peter Vardy, Collins, London, 1990
THE REALITY OF GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF EVIL, Brian Davies, Continuum, London-New York, 2006
THE TEACHING OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, Ed. Canon George D Smith, Ph.D. Burns and Oates and Washbourne, London, 1952
THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905
UNBLIND FAITH, Michael J Langford, SCM, London, 1982
WHY DOES GOD? Domenico Grasso SJ, St Paul's, Bucks, 1970

BIBLE QUOTATIONS FROM:
The Amplified Bible

 
THE WWW
 
www.ffrf.org/fttoday/august97/barker.html
The Free Will Argument for the Non-Existence of God by Dan Barker