[aspasia]

If you had an adult son who was ruining his life doing drugs and you had the power to wave a magic wand and stop him from doing that you wouldn’t do it? You’d let him wreck his life and probably kill himself and just watch him, when you could easily save him? Really?

It's an interesting question. The only chink in the argument is a presupposition that one has a right to being saved from your chosen destruction. Maybe a tough one, even between humans, because it pits the potential fault or guilt of the parent against the real fault of the son.

[aquila48]

“The only chink in the argument is a presupposition that one has a right to being saved from your chosen destruction.”

If by “right” you mean “deserve”, in other words, “do you deserve to be saved from the consequences of your choices?” then consider this.

Do you think anyone would choose to do something that would make him miserable and even kill him if he knew that would be the results (consequence) of his choice?

The reason people make poor choices (choices with bad consequences) is because they’re incapable of seeing and appreciating those bad consequences. It’s like a two year old running into the street to get the ball unaware that that choice might kill him.

Does he deserve to be saved by a loving father that knows better?

[Worldtraveler once upon a time]

--- "It's an interesting question."

"If" and "a magic wand" are hypotheticals, interesting on one level and millennia old on another.

Stepping away from theological foci, here's a favorite cartoon in my estimation, addressing science's "magic."

I used to attend some of the public lectures at Cal Tech in Pasadena, when they were made available. "Back in the day." As to various iterations of using science -- particularly theoretical physics -- to address first cause ( of which there are a number ), there is ALWAYS a little "magic" hidden in them. Noticing that tends to annoy. Because each mere mortal will always defend our views, and so often by attacking another's.