Freewill and Evil

My friend Charlie (the picture is Al Plantinga, not Charlie -- Charlie's much better looking) has challenged me to defend Plantinga's Freewill Defense (FWD), a possible solution to the logical problem of evil (here is a really brief summary of the FWD), which is a little like asking Kuwait to defend the United States from invasion. So I'm replying to a post on his blog. Anyway, here are some thoughts -- sorry we're already in the middle of this discussion.

(Charlie wants to be sure I agree with the FWD)
Don't worry -- I agree with Plantinga, so this should be good grist for the mill.
OK, I'm thinking carefully about what you're saying, and it is very interesting. I need to re-read the essay myself.

One critical issue seems to be this idea of freedom. Let me introduce another important distinction -- possibility and feasibility. (I didn't make this up, it's a traditional way of understanding possible worlds and middle knowledge.)
Today I had pizza for lunch, which I think was a free choice. Now, there is a possible world in which I had Chinese for lunch today, given the exact same circumstances. It is possible only in the LOGICAL sense. I.e., talking about that world entails no logical contradictions -- saying "Chris was in circumstances C and freely chose Chinese food" does not violate logic. However, since in circumstances C, I actually chose pizza, that is what God foreknew. Therefore, even though the Chinese world was LOGICALLY possible for God, it was not FEASIBLE. In order to create the Chinese world, God would have to cause me to choose Chinese instead. This would no longer be a free choice on my part. With me so far?
OK. What I think Plantinga is saying is that a world in which Eve is in circumstances C and she freely chooses not to eat the fruit is LOGICALLY possible, but not feasible, since God knows that Eve will, in fact, freely eat. He cannot change that fact anymore than he can create a square circle.

So your beef is, why doesn't God just create a different world in which all the choices of all people are always good? I.e., God just needs to make sure all the "good" circumstances are in place to ensure this. This strikes me as an odd scenario.
Why? Let's use an analogy. Suppose I am the dictator of a 3rd world country, and I hold elections. I tell you, "Vote for whomoever you like." But on the ballot, there is only my name. This does not appear to be a genuinely free choice, since you could not have voted for anyone else.

Also, suppose that the whole point of the garden scenario is to give Adam and Eve an opportunity to choose to serve God freely. If God never gave them a genuine opportunity to say "no," then would their decision to serve him be free in any meaningful sense?

I think you have raised an interesting issue here, Charlie. Let's keep talking. Anyone who would like to join in the fray should feel free.