This is something which is very difficult to wrap one's head around because we are only accustomed to the universe we live in. But if we are to use your analogy, you could be in a video game where there are infinitely many choices but the evil ones are still in some ways precluded. Let's say you could do anything but kill another person, the laws of physics could be changed (like in a game) to somehow not allow this. There are still infinite choices. Even better, if you're trying could know whether or not you attempted to kill someone, but prevent them from actually getting killed. But regardless, there are infinitely many ways the universe could have been created. If we were created without the need to eat other organisms to survive, to need to compete over finite resources etc, much of what we see as evil would not exist. Further still, humans would still find interest in all sorts of things and all sorts of pursuits in the absence of evil, there would still be an expression of self and free will. If we accept that the universe could be structured in a way that still allows humans to act in infinite ways but avoids evil being possible, the question becomes, "why is evil necessary?". The typical answer posited is "because it's a test".

This goes back to my analogy about how I cannot actually fly, because there are physical limitations. No matter how much I may will it, I cannot break these laws. One might ssk why aren't they more restrictive of evil? But if one accepts that this existence is a test there are other questions to ask: why aren't the laws of physics, or any other universal law we're governed by, then even more tolerant of evil? If the point of all this is to show whether or not I'm evil, wouldn't it be better for my physical limitations to not exist? What if I were very powerful, would I abuse it? If I were extremely attractive would I be a womanizer? Because I'm not I get to slip by as good? Why, if we need to go through this evil to be tested, are we not all being tested at the limits? Why do some face great temptation and falter while others who would likely falter facing the same temptation never face it?

Also I very much appreciate the way you engaged with this I don't see it as ganging up at all, I realize my viewpoint is in the minority. I appreciate that you're really attempting to understand, even if we don't end up seeing eye to eye

This is something which is very difficult to wrap one's head around because we are only accustomed to the universe we live in. But if we are to use your analogy, you could be in a video game where there are infinitely many choices but the evil ones are still in some ways precluded. Let's say you could do anything but kill another person, the laws of physics could be changed (like in a game) to somehow not allow this. There are still infinite choices. Even better, if you're trying could know whether or not you attempted to kill someone, but prevent them from actually getting killed. But regardless, there are infinitely many ways the universe could have been created. If we were created without the need to eat other organisms to survive, to need to compete over finite resources etc, much of what we see as evil would not exist. Further still, humans would still find interest in all sorts of things and all sorts of pursuits in the absence of evil, there would still be an expression of self and free will. If we accept that the universe could be structured in a way that still allows humans to act in infinite ways but avoids evil being possible, the question becomes, "why is evil necessary?". The typical answer posited is "because it's a test".

This goes back to my analogy about how I cannot actually fly, because there are physical limitations. No matter how much I may will it, I cannot break these laws. One might ssk why aren't they more restrictive of evil? But if one accepts that this existence is a test there are other questions to ask: why aren't the laws of physics, or any other universal law we're governed by, then even more tolerant of evil? If the point of all this is to show whether or not I'm evil, wouldn't it be better for my physical limitations to not exist? What if I were very powerful, would I abuse it? If I were extremely attractive would I be a womanizer? Because I'm not I get to slip by as good? Why, if we need to go through this evil to be tested, are we not all being tested at the limits? Why do some face great temptation and falter while others who would likely falter facing the same temptation never face it?

Also I very much appreciate the way you engaged with this I don't see it as hanging up at all, I realize my viewpoint is in the minority. I appreciate that you're really attempting to understand, even if we don't end up seeing eye to eye