u/FailNo6036 — reddlx

What he's trying to do here is provide arguments for and against the existence of God. But he doesn't realize that he's inadvertently arguing that the earth is a prison planet.

He proves that there must be an immaterial first cause to the universe through multiple causal arguments. So something supernatural must exist.
To show the other side and argue against the existence of God, he shows that natural selection is a brutal competition where there was billions of years of suffering, with entire species getting wiped out. Meaningless suffering.

What he doesn't consider, but actually reconciles all his arguments, is that there is a God but this God is not loving. Instead, this God is at best indifferent and at worst malevolent.

According to many forms of Buddhism and many posts in this subreddit, you can reincarnate as any person across time. That is partly what causes suffering - even if we turn the current world into a paradise, we can apparently reincarnate as a medieval peasant.

But doesn't that make it impossible to escape? Assuming the medieval peasant never came across any spiritual knowledge in their lifetime and we live their exact same life. And if we live a different life than what the medieval peasant (or king) originally lived using our own free will, wouldn't that cause a butterfly effect that changes history?

The concept of reincarnation across time and free will combined create a paradox that doesn't make sense to me.