Is God omnipotent and controls everything?

[Swag365]

I asked a question based on your statement.

I decline to answer the question. If you have a point to make, you can state it positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

 

[Hammster]

I decline to answer the question. If you have a point to make, you can state it positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

I’ve been making my point. I’m not afraid to put it out there for scrutiny. I can defend it. Not everyone can.

 

[Swag365]

I’ve been making my point. I’m not afraid to put it out there for scrutiny. I can defend it. Not everyone can.

I have defended the Catholic position with respect to that question many times on these forums. I decline to do that here.

And I decline to answer questions from someone (you) who asks me questions, but does not answer the questions that I put to him. Some people may be inclined to participate in that venture. I am not one of them.

If you have a point to make with respect to my post at #158, you can state your point positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

 

[Hammster]

I have defended the Catholic position with respect to that question many times on these forums. I decline to do that here.

And I decline to answer questions from someone (you) who asks me questions, but does not answer the questions that I put to him. Some people may be inclined to participate in that venture. I am not one of them.

If you have a point to make with respect to my post at #158, you can state your point positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

That’s just dodging my question.

 

[Swag365]

That’s just dodging my question.

Just as you dodged mine.

If you have a point to make with respect to my post at #158, you can state your point positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

 

[Hammster]

Just as you dodged mine.

If you have a point to make with respect to my post at #158, you can state your point positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

Thanks for admitting the dodge. I didn’t didn’t post 158. I acknowledged that you made a point by asking a qualifying question. You refuse to answer. So I guess we are at an impasse.

 

[Swag365]

Thanks for admitting the dodge. I didn’t didn’t post 158. I acknowledged that you made a point by asking a qualifying question. You refuse to answer. So I guess we are at an impasse.

If you would like to know Catholic theology I would refer you to session 6 of the Council of Trent and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, made with Lutherans.

I do not view your question as a qualifying question. We were discussing a particular aspect of your (Reformed) theology - not what my Church teaches (and not what I personally hold) with respect to the matter. You can create a separate thread on what my Church teaches if you like, just like you asked me to do when I asked you to defend your position previously, and you refused to do so.

 

[Hammster]

If you would like to know Catholic theology I would refer you to session 6 of the Council of Trent and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, made with Lutherans.

I do not view your question as a qualifying question. We were discussing a particular aspect of your (Reformed) theology - not what my Church teaches (and not what I personally hold) with respect to the matter. You can create a separate thread on what my Church teaches if you like, just like you asked me to do when I asked you to defend your position previously, and you refused to do so.

Actually, we were discussing theology. And like you said, you dodged.

 

[Swag365]

Actually, we were discussing theology. And like you said, you dodged.

If you have a point to make with respect to my post at #158, you can state your point positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

 

[Hammster]

It does not agree with Scripture. You wrote that Jesus took our punishment. Our punishment is eternal damnation in hell. Our Lord did not suffer eternal damnation in hell. So even if we assume for the sake of argument that what you wrote is true, it self-contradicts.

Let’s say for sake of argument that you are correct and my view is self-contradictory. You’ll need to show me the truth and explain why believers aren’t punished.

 

[Swag365]

Let’s say for sake of argument that you are correct and my view is self-contradictory. You’ll need to show me the truth and explain why believers aren’t punished.

No, I do not have to prove A (for example, Catholic theology) to refute B (for example, Reformed theology).

It is not as if I am here to convince you personally that your theology is wrong.

If you have a point to make with respect to my post at #158, you can state your point positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

 

[Hammster]

No, I do not have to prove A (for example, Catholic theology) to refute B (for example, Reformed theology).

It is not as if I am here to convince you personally that your theology is wrong.

If you have a point to make with respect to my post at #158, you can state your point positively. Otherwise we are done for now.

I gave you a clear opportunity to not dodge. I guess you’re done.

 

[Swag365]

I gave you a clear opportunity to not dodge. I guess you’re done.

I refuted what you wrote by demonstrating that it is self-contradictory. You have no substantive response to my refutation. If you had a substantive response, you would have posted it. But you have nothing. That makes "you" done.

 

[Hammster]

I refuted what you wrote by demonstrating that it is self-contradictory. You have no substantive response to my refutation. If you had a substantive response, you would have posted it. But you have nothing. That makes "you" done.

And I said that I agreed for the sake of argument. And then I basically asked for your understanding. You’ve spent more time telling me that you won’t respond then it would have taken to respond. So it’s seeking more and more less likely that you can.

 

[Swag365]

And then I basically asked for your understanding. You’ve spent more time telling me that you won’t respond then it would have taken to respond. So it’s seeking more and more less likely that you can.

I do not care that you think I cannot defend the Catholic position. I gave you my reasons for refusing to answer your question. If you don't like those reasons, too bad.

 

[Hammster]

I do not care that you think I cannot defend the Catholic position. I gave you my reasons for refusing to answer your question. If you don't like those reasons, too bad.

I read what you said.