₦airaland Forum

loko50:
If you are a Christian, then I advise you to study the following passages well. The problem is with the interpretation of the Bible:

1 John 5:16 "If any man see his brother sin a sin [which is] not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it."

The sin here, I believe is when a man totally rejects the salvation in the Lord Jesus. God will not overrule the will of the person being prayed for. The prayer of intercession is a powerful prayer. It is an unselfish prayer for others.

It is in the will of God to save all of mankind. The unselfish prayer, prayed by someone who firmly believes, will be answered, if the person being prayed for has not totally turned against God.

In the book of James, we read:

James 5:14-15 "Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:" "And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him."

We see from this, that it is correct to pray for the sins of others to be forgiven. The only time this would not be answered, would be if the person had totally rejected salvation in Jesus Christ. You cannot give a person something that they will not take.

1 John 5:17 "All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death."

We see in the following Scripture in Jesus' own words that sins will be forgiven. The only one that will not, is the sin against the Holy Ghost, which I believe is dying not believing in Jesus Christ.

Matthew 12:31 "Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy [against] the [Holy] Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men."

Its such a pity that Christians don't even understand the bible they read
" a sin that is unto death", in the context it was used is speaking of sins that the punishment is death e.g adultery ,the law given to Moses stipulates death punishment to certain sins,that is what the bible means by "sin that is unto death"

alBHAGDADI:
Do they all receive the same punishment from God here on Earth? No.

What you are saying is that God punishes a pencil thief with the same measurement he gives a mass murderer. In conclusion, what you've said is that an earthly judge who sends a mass murderer to death but a pencil thief to 2 months in jail is a better judge than God.

Yes, all die due to sin, but not all receive the same punishement for sin here on Earth.

For those that say all sinners end up in hell regardless of the kind of sin they commit, note that the sin they sends people to hell fire is the rejection of Jesus Christ.We that we've accepted Jesus are still sinners, but his blood saves us from the condemnation because we accepted it. But those that rejected that saving blood end up in hell.

Smh

Lala why u move this thread to Front page
Abeg ban this bet guy above me

Vulcanheph:
He left since January and he is just making his début today?

Every league doesn't start at the same time

Mine is Goodfellas

If you have not seen this movie which planet are you from

madridguy:
Fanaa

i love that film scatter

alBHAGDADI:
This thread pain atheists and their master's Satanists well well. They can't even counter it.

There is a saying that if u are bathing and a mad man carries your cloth,if you chase after him then both of you are mad

alBHAGDADI:
Howany times do you want to be told that Pentecostal Christians are false believers? Even without being in psychiatric hospital, their actions of speaking gibberish aka tongues, and galling down under demonized anointing is enough to pass them off as mad.

However, the fact that they believe in work based salvation instead of once saved always saved is enough to rule them as non-christians. I clearly pointed that out in the OP. Use my points to know who a Christian is from the numerous false believers.

lol

frosbel2:
Come to London and especially the South East - The Psychiatric hospitals are FULL of Pentecostal Nigerian ( and other African ) Christians.

U stay in London
Greet people in Hackney for me

Danhumprey:
Who else won't like this guy, eh? How can you not like this guy?

I swear,dude cracks me up

Actually christians can be entertaining, and the truth is that this is the way Christianity should be practiced,now that the whole thing is mixed up it is now looking as if it is meaningful but when u see someone who lives strictly based on the bible u would know that Christianity is stupidity

Op is suffering from schizophrenia

Do you think a creator is a logical conclusion to make

No,just like Hahn said, I think its a logical explanation, but not a logical conclusion

You don't have to believe in something to argue it is logical.

What do you think?

If yes, Why?

If No, Why not?

I would say yes,you don't have to believe in something to argue it is logical.
Based on the principle of cause and effect we could say that the universe must have a creator,but applying that too we can also say that the creator must have a creator as well,ending up in infinite regression.
So this means that it is not logical to assume that the principle of cause and effect would always apply and if this is the case then it is possible that the universe defies that principle,hence has no creator,it is also possible that the universe has a creator which is the one defying the principle this time,so is it also possible that the creator of the universe has a creator that created the creator of its creator's creator being the one to go against that logic.
Summary,the universe may have a creator or not,that is the logical conclusion for me
It is also mportant to note that when I use the word "creator" it only means the entity(or entities) that influenced the formation of the universe c'est finis,no more no less added to that.

Ihedinobi3:
As for Pharaoh, I already mentioned and explained him as well as Laban and Jacob and Haman and the Jews in an earlier post. I think you should actually try to read my posts, not scan them to find confirmation of what you expect to see.

So you are very sure that I went to scan your posts on other threads to come up with that question, what if you are wrong,do you know the implication of your accusation ?
You continue to deride me but I am not surprised,mock me all you want but that is not a problem to me,please answer the questions

Ihedinobi3:
Edit: as for Pharaoh, I already mentioned and explained him, Laban and Jacob and Haman and the Jews in an earlier post. I think you should actually try to read my posts, not scan them to find confirmation of what you expect to see.

I think there is an extent to which you can accuse a person,what do you mean by the bolded,I presented a passage of the bible that contradicts your view about God's non interference with free will and you are accusing me going to scan your previous posts, what nonsense.
Dude answer the question forget this useless tactics you are using if you don't want to post your answers here then forget it,I did not read your posts on other thread before coming up with that question but since I am an atheist I must be lying so soothe yourself,either you post your response here or you forget about it,I don't have time to start searching your posts to see the answer you gave to a similar question

Ihedinobi3:
Well, it is obvious then that you were never going to consider anything other than your own false ideas about this issue. You would use dishonest tactics and persist in doing so rather than give up any errors in your argument. That is not anything I can help or do anything about.

As for what God should or should not do, save me a seat when you become God and begin to run your own Universe.

If you presented a reason good enough to justify Gods's dormancy in that story I would have no option but to change my mind.
But so far he reasons you gave for God not interferring in that story is not consistent with what we know about God from the Bible,your reason is that God didn't intervene in that situation because according to his nature he does not interfer with a persons free will hence if he acted in that situation he would go against that and he did not want to do so.
I think first we should define free will

Free will is the ability to choose, think, and act voluntarily.

If this is the case be the case then God could have intervened without altering anyone's free will and I gave instances of how he could have made that happen
1)He could have caused rain to fall preventing the kidnap
2)he could have caused the girl to fall sick requiring her to be hospitalized,preventing the kidnap
3)He could have created circumstances that would require the girls family to move to another location
There are other ways too,and with these instances I pointed,God would have prevented the incident without interfering with anyones thinking or decision making


Your position that God does not interfere with free will is not stated in the Bible so could you tell me how you discovered that,in fact here are passages contrary to your opinion about free will

Proverbs 21 vs 1
"The king's heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will."
John 12:40
"He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, so that they cannot see with their eyes, and understand with their hearts, and turn, and I would heal them."

Romans 9:18
Therefore God has mercy on whom He wants to have mercy, and He hardens whom He wants to harden.

Exodus 4:21
The LORD instructed Moses, "When you go back to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders that I have put within your power. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go.

Please show me where the bible says that God doesn't interfere with free will or is this question false dilemma too

I have demonstrated that your reason is inaccurate because
1)God does interfere with free will,from what we know in the Bible
2)Even if God does not interfere with free will he could have saved the girl without interfering with anyone's free will

Ihedinobi3:
I'm not sure how else to explain this to you.

Your questions were loaded. That means that they made questionable assumptions that I would be forced to agree with by answering yes/no. That is the dishonesty in that tactic. I gave you benefit of the doubt that rather than being deliberately dishonest, you were merely making the mistake of the inexperienced. You rejected that benefit of the doubt.

You keep saying that you are trying to demonstrate the inconsistency of God's Love with the actual experience of human beings in life. You don't appear to appreciate that you have been assuming that inconsistency as a given. As long as you are, you will take exception to any response I give that does not "line up" with it.

Loaded questions and false dilemmas can only work with your opponent's cooperation. That is why they can be as frustrating as you are finding them right now.

As to how your questions were loaded, I have explained several times and I really don't want to do it anymore. I came to answer your protest as you asked. I did not promise you an answer you would like or one that you would accept. If my answer does not satisfy you, you are free to reject it. So far, I have answered your follow-up challenges because it is my custom to defend my answers.

When you asked whether God could intervene without violating the free will of the evil men, you were assuming either that divine intervention in that instance can be mutually exclusive with violation of free will or else you were assuming that omnipotence is the power to do whatever Hermes019 demands. These assumptions led to a false dilemma. The correct situation (or, at least, the Christian position) is as follows (and as I have described several times now):

Omnipotence means that God has no true opposition to His Will. He can do anything He pleases because nothing and no one exists that can prevent Him from doing so.

But God has a stable Nature and a stable Character, otherwise He would not be God. It is impossible for God to go against His Own Nature and Character. So, for example, God cannot lie. This is not a test of Omnipotence. It is a test of reliability or assurance. God, by definition, must be "rock solid", in a manner of speaking, in His Existence, otherwise it would be impossible for creation to exist. So, He must have a fixed Nature and Character that are inviolable. So, God cannot change in those things. Or, at least, He simply does not.

In accordance with His Nature and Character, God was pleased to create Moral Creatures who have a right and a responsibility to choose their disposition toward Him and therefore their eternal destiny. So He did. And He structured Creature History to ensure that every moral individual has the perfect opportunity to exercise that right and responsibility.

Thus, every event that actually occurs in time is one where the only conclusion we can make is that all moral creatures involved are being given their opportunity to choose. We cannot then claim that things could have been different in any given case because unless God is pleased to change anything, we have no reason to think that things could have been.

In other words, I cannot say that, yes, God could have intervened and preserved the free will of the evil men in that story because I am not qualified to know more than that He did not intervene and that not doing so preserved their free will. Nor can I say that, no, He could not have intervened because He is God and if He was pleased to do so, nothing can prevent Him from doing so.

In summary, as I said before, God ordained things to happen like they did so that everyone involved could exercise their free will.


When you asked whether I would ask God to save my daughter or not, you were making the same assumptions as above in addition to one where God would give such choices to anyone.

As I told you, the Christian position is that we must not take God for granted. We must pray for protection and deliverance from evil because we live in an evil world today. That is what I strive to do. So, if I were put in that situation and I can make any choices about it, I would pray that God would deliver my daughter but I would also strive to believe in Him regardless what happens. That is what we are taught to do in the Bible. We are not taught that God ever shows up to give us a say in the outcome of events. He is the God. We are the believers. He rules. We pray.


As I said before, I am not obliged to answer dishonest questions. If you make mistakes asking loaded questions and committing fallacies as a result and I tell you that you do and you insist on continuing to do so, I have no responsibility to indulge you. I am not going to countenance any request to tolerate your fallacies anymore if you are not going to make an effort to make an honest argument. It is a waste of time to ask me to join you in committing fallacies. It is also a waste of time to talk about your good intentions when your actions are dishonest. I already warned you of it several times.

If you are concerned about having a simple and clear conversation, put in the work to create clear and honest arguments. Trying to box your opponents into a corner with underhanded methods is not the same as having a simple and clear conversation.

I think this response reiterates my position on whether God is love,if such events like the one I cited and other such events occurred and still occur God despite being able to intervene (because he is omnipotent) does not intervene(because of the reasons you gave) then I do not regard such God to be love because he has other options,you can not rule that out,he is omnipotent which means his powers are endless,he has the option to do things differently but he CHOSE not to.
I have said it before the difference between you and I is that you think that God's reason for not interferring is good enough but I think it is completely flimsy,nobody makes a rule for him,he makes the rule for himself,if he defies the rule he made to intervene in a situation nothing would change after all he has done such in the Bible, when God hardened Pharaoh's heart was that not interferring with his free will ?
I recognize that God has a rule of allowing evil people to do what they want without interferring ,but I am saying that he should alter that,he shouldn't allow evil people to do what they want if truly he is love,I don't care what rule he makes or not.He should not allow such things to happen,if he does then he is not Loving as long as I am concerned,no matter the reasons you give,he is omnipotent like I said so he has infinite of options but chose the one he made.

Ihedinobi3:
I already explained multiple times. Please refer to my earlier posts.

Loaded questions make debatable or false assumptions that lead to false dilemmas.

Oh my goodness,how is my question creating a false dilemma for crying out loud

I created this thread to show the inconsistency in claiming that God is love considering the events that happen around us.
I cited a story of a girl that was brutally molested and murdered.
I hold the position that if God is love he should have intervened and saved the girl,you claimed that if he did so he would have to interfere with the "free will" of the perpetrators. This now led to my first question


Could God have intervened in that situation to save the girl without altering the "free will" of the perpetrators?

This is the question you referred to as a false dilemma,and I am asking you to demonstrate how this question is a false dilemma.
Given the fact that God is said to be omnipotent the only answer suitable to the question is YES
So how exactly is this a false dilemma ?

Now you still maintained the position that God is Love even though he CHOSE not to intervene(because of the reasons you gave),I wanted to show you that those reasons are not good enough and this led to my second question

Assuming this ordeal is about to repeat itself and this time your daughter would be the victim,unfortunately you had an accident and you are in coma so you can't intervene in the real life and Yahweh appears to you and asks you to make a choice(again remember this is an assumption ) ,if you ask him to intervene he would prevent it from happening,but if you ask God to do things the way he wants (ie not interferring with "free will as you said),then that means this same ordeal that Junko Furuta faced would certainly happen to your daughter,what would your response be ?
WOULD YOU ASK HIM TO INTERVENE ?
Remember like I said,this is an assumption,you have two main answers,its either your answer is a straight YES or suggests you would ask God to intervene or your answer is a straight NO or suggests that you won't ask God to intervene.I am positive that your answer would either be a straight Yes or one that suggest you would ask God to intervene(still equivalent to a Yes) and I wanted to use this to show that you would love God to intervene if your daughter was the one involved(even though you know that he has reasons not to do so) hence the reasons you gave for God's non interference is not good enough and we would expect from him to act in such a situation
Again I ask what how is this a false dilemma

Time and time again you have accused me of trying to lure you to giving a " false answer" and I have tried my best to be as clear and honest with my arguments as possible,I have even gone ahead to explain why I asked the questions I did and you can see that it is in line with the argument and is an attempt to show the problems with your explanations.
I don't know what else you expect from me,show me how these questions are creating a false dilemma



P.S it is worth noting how you have continuously derided me and reiterated your stereotyped position on atheists being dishonest with arguments but I have tried my best to be as honest and clear with my points and that was why I often asked for a Yes or No answer,I wanted to keep the arguments simple and apt,it was nwvwr intended to limit your options,but its rather shameful that no matter how simple and clear I want this argument to be you have completely misunderstood my intentions, I even offered you the chance to ask me Any questions you liked about my position on the argument which I promised to answer the way you would want,go appease you and make things even,but once again its unfortunate that you choose to be difficult, there is nothing else I can do

theoriginalgood:
The wages of sin is death. Since humans are mortal, this means humans are sinners. Does God love sin? No way.

Now, these sinners are suffering. Would you feel pity when a dangerous wild animal is killed? Would you feel bad for killing disease-spreading mosquitoes?

By choosing sin, humans have brought suffering upon themselves. God is good; he endorses the logic that bad things must die (or suffer). God cannot turn off the suffering, he can only eliminate sin. Eliminating sin means humans are left with nothing. This is practically eliminating humanity.

Is Human suffering insignificant to God
Yes or No ?

Ihedinobi3:
By the way, I never used the term "false question". Perhaps you were thinking of "dishonest question". That is something I definitely said. But I did in fact use the terms "false dilemma" and "loaded question" several times in my multiple follow-up posts. Perhaps you didn't read them attentively.

As for kidding myself, that really is on you. If you show inexperience or ineptitude in debate, I don't kid myself just by observing it. If you get upset when it is observed, then you never improve in ability. But then, atheism is a house of lies, so I can understand if you take issue whenever someone makes any observation that touches your ego.

I think maybe we should go back to the questions I asked, let's agree to disagree I was wrong about the false dilemma stuff and I am inexperienced while you are highly experienced and logical,no problems sir.
Now please show how my questions pose the problem of a false dilemma that is what I am interested in

theoriginalgood:
God loves only what is pure, good and perfect. This is why he himself deserves the most love. You think God loves humans and their reproductive organs? You think God loves humans and their excretion? You think sweaty and smelly aging humans are in God’s image? All humans die someday because all humans are truly evil beings. This is definitely not the same as God.

Wake up to reality and don’t deceive yourself. Humans are truly evil and God does not love evil. That’s why humanity suffers so much. Humanity is truly evil.

Is human suffering insignificant to God ?

IamPlato:
I Know I Will Still Climb This Girl One Day but The Only Problem I Have With Her Is Her lack Of Breast

Goddamann,so u dy follow make this kind comment ,I thought u be born again ?

Ihedinobi3:
This is not a conversation I set out to have. I figured you for a more experienced debater. But for the past few responses I have been wondering if you're a new (and therefore inordinately enthusiastic) atheist or just an inexperienced debater. This is not said to put you down. We all have learning curves and I was once both a new Christian (in fact, I was a very immature one for a very long time) and an inexperienced debater.

I imagine that you know what logical fallacies are. If, by some stretch of imagination, you do not, allow me to encourage you to do a little research. False dilemmas are a logical fallacy. What happens with them is that you create an "either/or" situation that forces your opponent to pick from two wrong options and thus prove your position right. But that is something that either an inexperienced debater or a dishonest one would do. Inexperience is not that big of an excuse here because this tactic is only ever used when the person using it is doing their best to avoid evaluating an argument completely.

This is a courtesy response, I hope you understand. I am no longer much interested in "playing with antichristians".

First off,I modified the post u quoted u can take a look at it again

@the bolded,there is a huge difference between false DILEMMA and false QUESTION,you never used the term false DILEMMA(directly for the questions I asked)what you u called them all along were false questions so I didn't think u meant false dilemma,only lately did you say the questions could lead to a fallacy of dilemma

Eitherway in the post you quoted which is now modified I explained why your accusations are wrong

You must be kidding yourself to think I am not well grounded with these things,these are elementary as far as logic is concerned,like I said I added somethings to the post u quoted,they may or may not be of interest to you
And why don't you try the challenge,come on its not to indict you I really wish to see things from your perspective I want to know if there is any question you can ask me that I would refuse to answer or claim its a " false question"

Ihedinobi3:
I'm considering that you are not fully aware what you did.

Loaded questions are a debate tactic used to trap a person into giving a false answer. That is what makes them dishonest questions. Your questions demanded that I give a false answer either way. But why should I if I know a right answer that is not part of your options?

In both questions that you have asked, it would have been false to say "yes" or "no". Both answers were wrong. And any insistence on a binary structure is essentially a logical fallacy posing a false dilemma.

You would need to get out of the yes/no structure in your mind to be able to get to the right answer.

False answer you say
I think not

So what you are saying is that I should not ask you questions that expose the flaws in your argument.
Am I hear to pamper you ?

Firstly,there is nothing like " false question" as long as arguements are concerned,what you are accusing me of is creating a false dichotomy in my questions now let's take a look at what I asked again

This was the first

Could God have intervened in that situation to save the girl without altering the "free will" of the perpetrators?

This question is simple and straightforward, it's answer would either be Yes or No
Yes means God could have intervened (and being omnipotent as you claim this is the right answer)
No means God could not have intervened (this is mutually exclusive with God's omnipotence,so it can'tbe the answer )
So how am I guilty of false dichotomy here,of course God didn't intervene but the question I asked is not the reason he didn't intervene or if it was wrong of him not to have intervened, what I asked was if he could have intervened in the manner I mentioned,and the answer is yes(if he is omnipotent),as a matter of fact any answer besides Yes is incompatible with his Omnipotence.

The second question

Assuming this ordeal is about to repeat itself and this time your daughter would be the victim,unfortunately you had an accident and you are in coma so you can't intervene in the real life and Yahweh appears to you and asks you to make a choice(again remember this is an assumption ) ,if you ask him to intervene he would prevent it from happening,but if you ask God to do things the way he wants (ie not interferring with "free will as you said),then that means this same ordeal that Junko Furuta faced would certainly happen to your daughter,what would your response be ?
WOULD YOU ASK HIM TO INTERVENE ?

This question also requires a Yes or No as the answer giving the circumstances, if you answer Yes God would save your girl,any answer besides Yes means God wouldn't intervene,so I didn't commit the false dichotomy fallacy

You are just giving an excuse using false dichotomy,this two questionsrequire only a Yes or No answer

If you still think I am wrong then let's do this experiment,let's turn the tables,with regards to my position on this argument ask me ANY question at all,twist it the way you like,I would answer the questions EXACTLY the way you want them to be answered
Why ?
Because I am confident that my response is not flawed,but its unfortunate the same can not be said of you,the last question I asked was straightforward and an assumption as well so I had the writers license to create a scenario I liked,everyone knows what your response would be assuming that actually happens,you won't even think twice before asking God to intervene knowing that if you don't your daugheter would face hell,that is what you would do and that is what every other person would do,but why didn't you answer Yes,of course you knew that if you did so it would expose a fatal flaw in your argument so you refused to give a distinct reply choosing to combine the two and here you are claiming I'm asking you "dishonest question" while you are giving "honest answers" . Sorry your alibi doesn't fit my dear.

Remember my challenge,ask me ANY question concerning my position on this argument and I would answer you the way you want me to,I would be expecting your question,that would be the best way to prove you are right.

Ihedinobi3:
First, I don't know why but you are once again insisting on misrepresenting what I said. It might be a mistake or it might be deliberate.

If you want to argue that God could save the girl and just whimsically decided not to, then by all means, do so. But I would appreciate it if you didn't attribute that argument to me again. It is not what I have said.

Let me repeat my position: God is able to do anything He pleases. He has no problem doing anything at all He wants to do. There is nothing that can stop Him from doing it. But what God is pleased to do according to the Bible is to give His Moral Creatures a choice to willingly submit to Him or to rebel against Him. So, He provides each of them with both the ability and opportunity to do so. That is why evil exists and occurs when and how it does. This free will that He has given them is not absolute, however. God can choose to deny certain opportunities or to provide them. Whenever He provides them, it is to allow for free will choices to be made. Whenever He denies them, it is for the same reason. Therefore, when events like the one your thread is about happen, it is always because of free will.

In other words, my answer has remained that God let what happened happen so that each player there could make a free choice about Him and so that all of those who hear about that story or were connected to it somehow would also have an opportunity to make such a choice.

I understand if you dislike that answer. Feel free to argue against it or reject it as you please. But please, don't make something up and attribute it to me again. It will only show how willing you are to be dishonest in order to sell a pet point of view.

Second, as I said before, if you ask an honest question, I will give you an honest answer. If you ask a dishonest one like you did before, I will give you an honest one that you may not like.

As to your question, what the Bible teaches is that we should pray for deliverance out of all troubles AND still submit to His Will in each of them. That is what I try to do everyday. I would pray that God would deliver my daughter out of the hands of evil men. But I hope too that I would trust Him to do exactly what pleases Him and blesses us in the matter.

MODIFIED
If you or anybody asks me any question and requests that I answer Yes or No,I would do so no matter how "dishonest" the question is.
I asked you to answer Yes or No before giving your explanation but its obvious to me that you think very lowly of me.

The worst part is that you did not even answer the question I asked,you went ahead to create a different question for yourself and gave the answer suitable to you and that was what I was trying to avoid she. I said you should first answer Yes or No but you would say that I asked a "dishonest" question while you give an honest answer(I wonder what the hell that means),and what if I am asking a crafty question to implicate you,we have different opinions and my aim is to expose the weakness in yours through my questions,what is wrong with that
Meanwhile this is the question I asked

Assuming this ordeal is about to repeat itself and this time your daughter would be the victim,unfortunately you had an accident and you are in coma so you can't intervene in the real life and Yahweh appears to you and asks you to make a choice(again remember this is an assumption ) ,if you ask him to intervene he would prevent it from happening,but if you ask God to do things the way he wants (ie not interferring with "free will as you said),then that means this same ordeal that Junko Furuta faced would certainly happen to your daughter,what would your response be ?
WOULD YOU ASK HIM TO INTERVENE ?

And this is the reply you gave

I would pray that God would deliver my daughter out of the hands of evil men. But I hope too that I would trust Him to do exactly what pleases Him and blesses us in the matter.

I don't know who is being dishonest here,just like the first question I asked you gave two responses,each contradicting and eliminating the problems that both poses

Your first part says
" I would pray that God would deliver my daughter......"

Although not expressly stated,this implies a YES

the second part
"But I hope too that I would trust him to do exactly what pleases him....... "
This suggests a NO


Dude its not compulsory to answer my question lif you don't want to,but if you do please do well to answer the particular question I asked and if possible answer it the way I requested,it is not like I'm forcing you but I'm trying to make the argument as straight forward and direct as possible . If you have observed the way questions are asked by the lawyer during a trial you would notice that the questions are straightforward and demand straightforward answers,this is not a court room of course but that is the best way to make your arguments clear and accurate that is what I'm trying to achieve but you are undermining my efforts and intentions and its tiring

Op na scam,believe am at your own peril

dlw09 I want to put it to you that you are not a goddamn Chinese,you kept on dodging my question because of course only a person who lives or lived in China or probably studied about China pretty well can answer that.
So far what have you told us about China that ordinary people don't know,Oga you are no Chinese,quit the show

Ihedinobi3:
First, I was not asking for respect from you. Not only do I not particularly desire it, I also am more than content with civility and courtesy. When you have genuine cause to attack me, by all means, do so if you want.

Second, as I explained, my answer was deliberately to remove the possibility of your ascribing contradictions to me. You have gone right ahead to do so. Like I said, that was expected since your question was a loaded one. You wanted to get me to commit to saying either that God could have saved that girl without violating the free will of her attackers and just chose not to or that He couldn't and is thus not truly God. Both answers are wrong or, at least, not completely right. That was why I answered you the way I did.

Third, there is no doubt that our free will is not absolute in the sense that we can do whatever we want and God will not interfere. That is not what free will means. Only God is completely free in His Will so that He does entirely as He pleases. Creatures, on the other hand, are only free to choose between the options that He sets before them through their circumstances and opportunities.

Fourth, for this reason, whenever God permits something like this one to go all the way through, it is presumptuous to claim or insist that He could have done things differently. He is God and thus can do whatever He pleases. He could very well have done things differently if He pleased. We know that God is pleased for His creatures to make a choice. Therefore, He creates or sanctions opportunities for them to do so. So, when things like this happen, the explanation that the Bible gives is that God allows us to choose.

Fifth, no situation is isolated. God has One Eternal Plan of which all events in the world today are a part. That means that everything you see was ordained to happen in connection with everything else that has happened or will happen in creature history. So, unless you actually know what God knows, every time you insist that one part of God's Plan should have been different, you are speaking from a position of no qualification at all. Every free will decision is connected to every other. We all choose what we choose in the context of other choices made before us. And our own choices provide context for other people's moral decisions.

Sixth, regarding your question at the end, today, many Christians are getting killed for their beliefs and God lets it happen. In fact, it would not happen at all unless He had ordained it before Creation. Even further, the Great Tribulation is a three-and-a-half-year period of non-stop, global persecution of Christians worse than this world has ever seen. God planned it before the world began and it is very close now. I will very probably experience it myself. If I do, I may or may not survive it. That is, I may be killed for my faith. Every Christian has always had the possibility of suffering in some extreme degree for their faith hanging over them and I cannot honestly say that we believers haven't all experienced greater difficulty in life generally than unbelievers. So, obviously, God has always been and will always be upholding the free will of those who attack and kill Christians (among which victims I may very well be counted during the Great Tribulation) whenever they have done and whenever they do so.

There are so many interesting things in this post but I don't want to leave the topic so the conclusion of what u have said is this

YHWH is omnipotent and had everything it takes to save the girl but didn't because he CHOSE not too
The difference between you and I is very simple,even if there is none u could think of you would always believe that YWHW had a justifiable reason for allowing that to happen but I don't think so.I feel that since he is supposedly omnipotent he can always do what he wants to do without causing pains to people.

I would love to ask you this question and I wish you would be honest with your reply,again I also plead that you give me a "Yes" or "No" answer first before going ahead to give your explanation

Still on the story I shared,Assuming this ordeal is about to repeat itself and this time your daughter would be the victim,unfortunately you had an accident and you are in coma so you can't intervene in the real life and Yahweh appears to you and asks you to make a choice(again remember this is an assumption ) ,if you ask him to intervene he would prevent it from happening,but if you ask God to do things the way he wants (ie not interferring with "free will as you said),then that means this same ordeal that Junko Furuta faced would certainly happen to your daughter,what would your response be ?
WOULD YOU ASK HIM TO INTERVENE ?



P.S Please,please and please don't make this your response a twisted one,I can't force you but please answer yes or no first before giving your explanation

bloodofthelamb:
Though this was not for me but nonetheless I have a right to respond because the nature and goodness of my Father is being lampooned. God cannot intervene without man's invitation and corporation by faith. The reason being that He has given the Earth to man. God said, "let them have dominion and rule over the Earth." I believe got sought for man to stand in the gap for the girl but found none. Good is good and He is indeed love!

I have a problem with the bolded,the last time I checked,Yahweh was omnipotent so do you mean by saying he cannot

The Heavens belong to the Lord, while the Earth has he given to the sons of men. God cannot intervene in matters on Earth without man's invitation and comparation by faith. God is always looking for men to stand in the gap for his will to be done here on Earth.

If that be the case why hasn't Leah sharibu been released, haven't Christians been praying ?