Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Correct. But perhaps "won't" is closer than "can't."So you are saying that God can't make us all Christians without robbing us of our freedom of choice?
He probably could. As it is he works all of our free choices into His master plan. (knowing what those choices are beforehand) But He does not just make us all christians.So why doesn't he just snap his fingers and make us all Christian in a way that does NOT violate our freedom of choice? Remember, you can't say that it's logically impossible, because you've already said that's not an issue for God.
Since he is the OP, he has the right to do that.So you just jump into a conversation that you weren't part of and answer a question for someone else?
That's rather rude, don't you think?
I'm glad you brought that up.Says the guy whose posts are mostly just adding 1 to a number...
Thank you, Dave!Since he is the OP, he has the right to do that.
It is his thread.
Correct. But perhaps "won't" is closer than "can't."
He probably could. As it is he works all of our free choices into His master plan. (knowing what those choices are beforehand) But He does not just make us all christians.
And that is His choice.
Since he is the OP, he has the right to do that.
It is his thread.
When you get your own website, then you can make your own rules.I must have missed that bit where it says, "The OP has the right to answer a question for anyone else. If one user asks for the opinion of another user who is not the OP, then the OP can answer the question, and the OP's answer will thereafter be classified as the opinion of the user who was asked the question."
Wow, it seems you have trouble understanding the flow of a discussion. I asked Dave a question. I don't care if other people have answered that question or not, I specifically wanted to hear DAVE'S views on it.
And I asked Dave why God doesn't just snap his fingers and make everyone a Christian. I can't see what relevance abortion has on the topic. Your post honestly came across as an incoherent rant.
Avoid questions asked of you much????
So you agree then that I have the right to force people not to have abortions?????
Come on, answer the question and you'll perhaps see why it is relevant.....
Yes ... I answered it for someone else ... you.
And, of course, all the readers.
Helpful, actually.
When you're here as long as I have been, you'll come to realize that when a person asks a question, it's FIRST COME FIRST SERVE on getting an answer.
Even if you ask a specific person a specific question.
Whose opinion should I have given you?You gave me the opinion of someone whose opinion I don't care about - your opinion.
Whose opinion should I have given you?
I´d tell him that I have no evidence because there can´t be evidence for creatio ex nihilo - so the absence of evidence for it is evidence for it.1. If God created an apple ex nihilo, what evidence would you give your friend He did this?
Are you an omnipotent being that is not bound by logic? No? Then it's nowhere near the same thing, is it? Is this the limit of your argument?
I´d tell him that I have no evidence because there can´t be evidence for creatio ex nihilo - so the absence of evidence for it is evidence for it.
Yeah, asking that question (in order to give evidence) is even more stupid than my approach.I would simply ask them if they have ever seen an apple produce anything naturally other than an apple?
I have observed how apples come about. They grow on trees.Or have they observed natural forces create apples out of molecules lying around?
Since you want to go the ad-hominem route..... what was stupid was not being able to comprehend that making them understand apples can only come from pre-existing apples and that evolutionists also rely on absent evidence - since none have been observed to come from any other source, leads to the support of your answer.Yeah, asking that question (in order to give evidence) is even more stupid than my approach.
And we have a winner, folks!I´d tell him that I have no evidence because there can´t be evidence for creatio ex nihilo -
I´d tell him that I have no evidence because there can´t be evidence for creatio ex nihilo - so the absence of evidence for it is evidence for it.
Not bound by logic? Everything you see around you is evidence of logic to those natural laws that follow logic so well we can write mathematical equations that explain those forces. It is precisely because I "use logic" and you refuse to, that you won't answer the question..... Because logic will defeat you and so you avoid the question.....
So you agree then that I have the right to force people not to have abortions?????
A simple yes or no will suffice......
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?