Many philosophers of theistic religions claim (1) that there are powerful a posteriori arguments for God’s existence that make it rational to believe that He exists and at the same time maintain (2) that God always has the freedom to do otherwise. In this article, I argue that these two positions are inconsistent because the empirical evidence on which the a posteriori arguments for God’s existence rest can be explained better by positing the existence of a God-like being without the freedom to do otherwise.

中文翻译：

---

自然神学与神圣自由

许多有神论宗教的哲学家声称 (1) 有强大的后验论证支持上帝的存在，这使得相信他存在是合理的，同时坚持 (2) 上帝总是有不这样做的自由。在这篇文章中，我认为这两个立场是不一致的，因为可以通过假设一个类似上帝的存在而没有其他自由的存在来更好地解释上帝存在的后验论证所依据的经验证据。