₦airaland Forum

Truthseeker10:
So your God has set the day that you will die even before you were born and there's nothing either you or Satan can do about it?

Whether you like it or not you cannot live longer than Adam.

And whether you like it or not, if you want to die today, you know what to do.

And whether you like it or not if sayt sets you to die, you goan die,

So clearly you do not have any reasonable questions hence your repetitions

Dtruthspeaker:
Whether you like it or not you cannot live longer than Adam.

And whether you like it or not, if you want to die today, you know what to do.

And whether you like it or not if sayt sets you to die, you goan die,

So clearly you do not have any reasonable questions hence your repetitions

You mean Satan can kill you before the day God has set for you to die before you were born? Is Satan now stronger than your God?

Truthseeker10:
You mean Satan can kill you before the day God has set for you to die before you were born? Is Satan now stronger than your God?

Who killed male and female Adam and got a whole world to die? And a dieing that is still continuing non stop, even today?

As I said whether you like it or not if sayt sets you to die, you goan die

Dtruthspeaker:
Who killed male and female Adam and got a whole world to die? And a dieing that is still continuing non stop, even today?

Do you mean that God did not know when Adam will die before creating adam?

Truthseeker10:
Do you mean that God did not know when Adam will die before creating adam?

See how you are just twisting here and there like a snake. Did you not already read that God warned them that they would die when they do something?

As I said, you don't have anything reasonable to say

Image123:
You don't know what claptrap is. You don't know what narcissism is. You didn't answer the question too.

LoLz. You don't or else you won't write this.

I will answer if you can show me the relevance.

Dtruthspeaker:
See how you are just twisting here and there like a snake. Did you not already read that God warned them that they would die when they do something?

As I said, you don't have anything reasonable to say

So when God warned them, he did not know before they ate it that they would eat the fruit and die a particular day?

DeepSight:
I challenge the idea that the Bible does not teach predestination in an absolute sense.
If this is true, then what do you think the Bible is teaching in the following -

Romans 8:28-30
29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

Jeremiah 1:5
“ Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;
Before you were born I sanctified you;
I ordained you a prophet to the nations.”

Psalm 139:15-16
My frame was not hidden from You,
When I was made in secret,
And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.
And in Your book they all were written,
The days fashioned for me,
When as yet there were none of them.

Romans 9:20-21
But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?

Isaiah 46:10-11
Declaring the end from the beginning,
And from ancient times things that are not yet done,
Saying, ‘My counsel shall stand,
And I will do all My pleasure,’
Calling a bird of prey from the east,
The man who executes My counsel, from a far country.
Indeed I have spoken it;
I will also bring it to pass.
I have purposed it;
I will also do it.

Finally -

Jeremiah 10:23 - "O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps."


I urge you to look critically at each of the foregoing and see if these are not teachings of absolute predestination, from the very steps you take, to your final purpose even before you were made. Intricately.

These are on all fours with Islamic Fatalism.

Thank you for the detailed response. I do appreciate it. My apologies for not keeping my word to reply to you after work the other day. I had typed a response but deleted it when I revisited what you said in your initial reply: "I don't know if predestination exists or not," along with your definition of how religious people use the word.

Those statements are the root of the issue and the reason we've been talking past each other. You're arguing from a position of philosophical determinism, employing scripture secondarily to support the view of a fixed cause and effect universe. However, you're doing so by insisting that specific Bible verses can only mean absolute predestination, a theological concept you claim not to know exist , is true or understand.

There's no consistency in defining authoritatively a theological principle for others that you're agnostic about yourself. " You don't know but also know at the same time" .If you don't know what predestination is, how can you be certain that the Christian God must conform to your deterministic interpretation of it

I will come back to this later after tackling the Bible verses you brought in.

The scriptures you cited don't equate Islamic fatalism . Your selective interpretation of them without counterbalancing with other verses in the same Bible is why you believe that.

Romans 8: 29-30, Jeremiah 1:15, and Psalm, 139: 16 speak powerfully of the Christian God's foreknowledge. However, a foreknowledge of someone's path isn't the same as mechanically pre-determining every step . The Christian God knew the entirety of Jeremiah's life in a single glance, but this doesn't negate Jeremiah's own " yes" to the calling .


An analogy may make it more clearer. Imagine a designer who has an ultimate purpose for a device, like a smartphone being used for communication. The designer's will is fulfilled, but not by micro-managing every text sent or calls made . The specific journey is co-created with the users' free choices. This analogy, though not perfect,is the coherent framework that makes sense of the Christian God's sovereignty , meaningful human prayer and actions .Philippians , 2: 12-13. " Therefore , my beloved..work out your salvation with fear and trembling , for it is God who works in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure".

If the Christian God has immutably will it for believers to have salvation ,why then the advice for them to work for it with fear and trembling? please answer that.

The Potter and the clay ( Romans 9) . This is the key text for your position. However, it's primary context is for the Christian God's sovereign right to choose nations for his redemptive purposes , like choosing Israel, then including the Gentiles. It's not the micro- management of every individual's action. The next chapter, Romans: 10, is a conditional statement which emphasizes human responsibility. " If you confess with your mouth...and believe in your heart....you will be saved " ( Romans, 10: 9)

Isaiah 46: 10-11, " My counsel shall stand" .This refers to the Christian God's ultimate,macro- level purposes for creation and redemption. His overarching plan will be accomplished. However, the means by which it is accomplished are the real choices of individuals . The "bird of prey from the east", Cyrus, was a real historical figure who made his own decisions, yet the Christian God used those decisions to actualize his larger will.

Your approach of isolating verses brings to mind a common interpretative error concerning the " Parable of the Mustard seed". Many Christians and non Christians read it and interpret it literally to mean the quantity of the faith: "Small faith" ."just have small faith and God will answer your prayers". But in the right context and alongside Jesus rebuking his disciples for having "little faith, during the storm, it becomes very clear the parable is about the quality of the faith, a faith that like a small mustard seed is certain of its growth when planted in the right soil.

You're applying a similar method. You're isolating verses about the Christian God's foreknowledge, reading them with a deterministic lens, and separating them from the counterbalancing narratives of human agency and changed outcomes. This is not drawing meaning out of the text, it is imposing a meaning onto it to fit your philosophical framework.

This problematic approach is rooted in a deeper, fundamental error. You're attacking a definition of 'destiny' and 'the future' that does not exist outside of pure fatalism.

You insist that 'religious people' see destiny as 'something specifically placed in the future,' as if the future were a fixed, pre-written script or a physical location we are destined to arrive at. You then argue against this simplistic idea. But this is a strawman.

Anyone with a commonsense understanding of time knows there is no 'future' out there as a real place to walk into. The only thing that exist is the present moment, not the past nor the future. The future has always been understood, in both religious and secular thought, as the emerging result of a million present moments The accumulation of past actions, current choices, and their consequences. It is not a destination, but one in the making .

This is precisely why the Christian God, in the non-fatalistic view, incorporates human agency. Your interpretation of the Bible verses relies on first misconstruing the very concept of 'future' and then using that misunderstanding to force a fatalistic reading onto the text. It is a circular and flawed way to reason

Eckankar, the religion of the light and sound of God, is a FAR DEEPER school of thinking than anything to be found in Abrahamic religions. Yes, what you have described here is apt, and karma has a lot to do with it, in Eck thinking, and most Eastern schools of thought if not all.

I was part of the group and can tell your that Eckankar has taken "things" from everywhere , including from the Abrahamic religion to form some of its doctrine. However, this doesn't make it lesser or inferior, it's actually superior to those one in the sense its teachings continue to evolve to meet with the changing times. Eckankar doesn't teach that all of destiny is fixed . I hope you won't have issues with them using that word too? . The religion teaches a blend of fixed and malleable karma:: What one is bound to experience in this life time based on previous life karma and the one that will come based on current life choices. Past life karma is what determines the family one will be born into, the era, county, ethnicity, genetiic and similar others. This what's regarded has fixed karma. You can't change your family of birth through prayers and spiritual exercises. Anyway, I digress.

They really should find another word because its just not the same thing. But yes, I understand the colloquial usage. That usage is entirely informal and has no business in serious discussions.

But how can you, who don't know if the reality of 'destiny' or 'predestination' even exists, presume to dictate the correct terminology for those who live within that belief system? Words gain their meaning from the shared understanding of the community that uses them. You're like a native speaker of English language , with no knowledge of French, insisting that the silent 't' in 'depot' should be removed because it doesn't align with English pronunciation rules. That's certainly ridiculous.

.

I disagree. The "Our Father" is not a prayer to change any divine will. If anything it is an affirmation of it, and a signal of humility and thanks.

And I strongly urge you not to attempt to trivialize Gethsemane. It is a huge example. It shows very well that the will of God in Christianity cannot be changed by any amount of prayer, even by the son.

Yes, you're very correct in the sense that, the word, change, isn't the right one to use.. So, I have replaced, change, with " align" . However, the "Lord's Prayer" is both affirmation and petition; "give us this day" , deliver us from evil"

If God's will immutably provides bread, why are Christians instructed to ask for it?



However , the petitions in the prayer aren't for changing divine will in a manipulative sense, but about aligning human will with the divine while participating in a relationship where prayers are a genuine factor.


I did not trivialize Gethsemane. It seems you used it to score a point that "prayer didn't even work for Jesus." But the real lesson of Gethsemane is that when a higher, redemptive purpose for all humanity is at stake, submission to divine will transcends personal desire. Jesus's prayer was not "unanswered"; it was answered within the context of a greater good.

I truly cannot comment on the antics of every prophet. It could well be that the result was always what was going to happen, and the warning only ensured the result, if you get my drift. Something self-fulfilling. Be that as it may, this cannot stand against the weight of all the verses in red above.

This is where you reveal your biases , confirming you're not debating this objectively. What you try to present as factual statements are actually your subjective opinion disguised as truth. Take no offence please it's also my personal about what I observe you do.

If you distrust Prophet Isaiah's revelation to Hezekiah, why do you accept his other revelations you cited as absolute? The consistency of your critique matters.

The Hezekiah's story is not an 'antic' but a cornerstone of a non-fatalistic theology. It presents a genuine prophetic declaration from Isaiah, no different in form from the ones you cited from Jeremiah or Isaiah 46.

Yet, you apply different rules to them. You accept the prophecies about Jeremiah's calling or the Christian God's ultimate counsel as absolute and fixed, but you dismiss the prophecy to Hezekiah with speculation, suggesting it was a self-fulfilling trick. This is inconsistent talk.

The text gives us no reason to treat Hezekiah's prophecy differently. It was a true proclamation from the Christian God based on his foreknowledge of the current path. Hezekiah’s prayer was then a genuine, causal factor the Christian God in his responsive sovereignty, incorporated into a new outcome. This story demonstrates that not all divine declarations are unconditional decrees; some are conditional warnings intended to provoke a response. To ignore this distinction is to ignore the dynamic nature of the Christian God's interactions with people throughout the Bible.

All this I understand, but in truth, if any Christian believes in God's will, they will not bother themselves. Rest, for it will be done. But there is no rest, because fear of tomorrow is part of that program and part of that will, and it is, in itself, self-fulfilling.

Have you ever heard of the Greek myth of Oedipus? When Oedipus was born to the king and queen of Thebes, Laius and Jocasta, a prophet announced that the baby would grow up to kill his father and marry his mother. The boy did everything to avoid this prophecy and all those actions are exactly what made the prophecy come true. I trust you see the point.

But you haven't shown me you understand what the God will is and how it actually functions. The Bible verses you cited has been misconstrue by you.

Yes , I have read Oedipus Rex. The fictional story is a perfect illustration of pure fatalism which doesn't exist in reality. The prophecy in the narrative is a fixed sentence, and the attempts to avoid it directly cause it. But in the Hezekiah's model, the prophecy is not a fixed sentence. It’s a conditional warning. Hezekiah’s prayer wasn’t an attempt to "trivialize" God's will. It was a plea for alignment. He presented his case, his desire to live, "let me live" and through that process of prayer, his personal will was brought into alignment with the Christian God's merciful will. The outcome was changed not because the Christian God was defeated, but because the relationship between God and Hezekiah or man involved a genuine exchange.

So, when a Christian prays against a dream, he is not trying to thwart a divine decree. He is participating in this dynamic. He is bringing his fear and his desire for protection into alignment with the Christian God's will as a protector and deliverer ," deliver us from evil".He is saying, "May your will to protect me overcome this threat."

You are right that fear can be a problem. But the act of prayer is the prescribed method in Christianity and some other religion for transforming that fear into faith, for moving from a fatalistic anxiety , like Oedipus, to a participatory trust like Hezekiah.

In the end, you see a contradiction where many Christians see a coherent, dynamic relationship. The issue isn't the word "destiny"; it's our starting assumptions about how divine will and human agency interact.

My initial goal in joining this thread was simply to offer a perspective that could resolve the misunderstanding between Westerhoffe and Lordreed. I wanted to show that, from within the Christian tradition itself, there is a coherent framework that views prayer not as an attempt to thwart divine will, but as a dynamic participation in it, a framework supported by scriptures like the story of Hezekiah.

I believe I have presented that case to the best of my ability.

At this point, the discussion has moved into a deeper debate about the core tenets of Christian theology. As someone who does not operate from a Christian worldview, it would be inauthentic for me to continue arguing the intricacies of a doctrine I do not personally subscribe to any longer.

I will therefore leave the conversation here, for the Christians on this forum to continue if they wish. I respect your viewpoint, @DeepSight, and thank you again for the civil and challenging discussion.

Modified. This has cost me my sleep tonight.

LordReed:
LoLz. You don't or else you won't write this.

I will answer if you can show me the relevance.

You might see the relevance if you answered.

triplechoice:
Thank you for the detailed response. I do appreciate it. My apologies for not keeping my word to reply to you after work the other day. I had typed a response but deleted it when I revisited what you said in your initial reply: "I don't know if predestination exists or not," along with your definition of how religious people use the word.

Those statements are the root of the issue and the reason we've been talking past each other. You're arguing from a position of philosophical determinism, employing scripture secondarily to support the view of a fixed cause and effect universe. However, you're doing so by insisting that specific Bible verses can only mean absolute predestination, a theological concept you claim not to know exist , is true or understand.

There's no consistency in defining authoritatively a theological principle for others that you're agnostic about yourself. " You don't know but also know at the same time" .If you don't know what predestination is, how can you be certain that the Christian God must conform to your deterministic interpretation of it

I will come back to this later after tackling the Bible verses you brought in.

The scriptures you cited don't equate Islamic fatalism . Your selective interpretation of them without counterbalancing with other verses in the same Bible is why you believe that.

Romans 8: 29-30, Jeremiah 1:15, and Psalm, 139: 16 speak powerfully of the Christian God's foreknowledge. However, a foreknowledge of someone's path isn't the same as mechanically pre-determining every step . The Christian God knew the entirety of Jeremiah's life in a single glance, but this doesn't negate Jeremiah's own " yes" to the calling .


An analogy may make it more clearer. Imagine a designer who has an ultimate purpose for a device, like a smartphone being used for communication. The designer's will is fulfilled, but not by micro-managing every text sent or calls made . The specific journey is co-created with the users' free choices. This analogy, though not perfect,is the coherent framework that makes sense of the Christian God's sovereignty , meaningful human prayer and actions .Philippians , 2: 12-13. " Therefore , my beloved..work out your salvation with fear and trembling , for it is God who works in you both to will and to work for his good pleasure".

If the Christian God has immutably will it for believers to have salvation ,why then the advice for them to work for it with fear and trembling? please answer that.

The Potter and the clay ( Romans 9) . This is the key text for your position. However, it's primary context is for the Christian God's sovereign right to choose nations for his redemptive purposes , like choosing Israel, then including the Gentiles. It's not the micro- management of every individual's action. The next chapter, Romans: 10, is a conditional statement which emphasizes human responsibility. " If you confess with your mouth...and believe in your heart....you will be saved " ( Romans, 10: 9)

Isaiah 46: 10-11, " My counsel shall stand" .This refers to the Christian God's ultimate,macro- level purposes for creation and redemption. His overarching plan will be accomplished. However, the means by which it is accomplished are the real choices of individuals . The "bird of prey from the east", Cyrus, was a real historical figure who made his own decisions, yet the Christian God used those decisions to actualize his larger will.

Your approach of isolating verses brings to mind a common interpretative error concerning the " Parable of the Mustard seed". Many Christians and non Christians read it and interpret it literally to mean the quantity of the faith: "Small faith" ."just have small faith and God will answer your prayers". But in the right context and alongside Jesus rebuking his disciples for having "little faith, during the storm, it becomes very clear the parable is about the quality of the faith, a faith that like a small mustard seed is certain of its growth when planted in the right soil.

You're applying a similar method. You're isolating verses about the Christian God's foreknowledge, reading them with a deterministic lens, and separating them from the counterbalancing narratives of human agency and changed outcomes. This is not drawing meaning out of the text, it is imposing a meaning onto it to fit your philosophical framework.

This problematic approach is rooted in a deeper, fundamental error. You're attacking a definition of 'destiny' and 'the future' that does not exist outside of pure fatalism.

You insist that 'religious people' see destiny as 'something specifically placed in the future,' as if the future were a fixed, pre-written script or a physical location we are destined to arrive at. You then argue against this simplistic idea. But this is a strawman.

Anyone with a commonsense understanding of time knows there is no 'future' out there as a real place to walk into. The only thing that exist is the present moment, not the past nor the future. The future has always been understood, in both religious and secular thought, as the emerging result of a million present moments The accumulation of past actions, current choices, and their consequences. It is not a destination, but one in the making .

This is precisely why the Christian God, in the non-fatalistic view, incorporates human agency. Your interpretation of the Bible verses relies on first misconstruing the very concept of 'future' and then using that misunderstanding to force a fatalistic reading onto the text. It is a circular and flawed way to reason


I was part of the group and can tell your that Eckankar has taken "things" from everywhere , including from the Abrahamic religion to form some of its doctrine. However, this doesn't make it lesser or inferior, it's actually superior to those one in the sense its teachings continue to evolve to meet with the changing times. Eckankar doesn't teach that all of destiny is fixed . I hope you won't have issues with them using that word too? . The religion teaches a blend of fixed and malleable karma:: What one is bound to experience in this life time based on previous life karma and the one that will come based on current life choices. Past life karma is what determines the family one will be born into, the era, county, ethnicity, genetiic and similar others. This what's regarded has fixed karma. You can't change your family of birth through prayers and spiritual exercises. Anyway, I digress.


But how can you, who don't know if the reality of 'destiny' or 'predestination' even exists, presume to dictate the correct terminology for those who live within that belief system? Words gain their meaning from the shared understanding of the community that uses them. You're like a native speaker of English language , with no knowledge of French, insisting that the silent 't' in 'depot' should be removed because it doesn't align with English pronunciation rules. That's certainly ridiculous.

.

Yes, you're very correct in the sense that, the word, change, isn't the right one to use.. So, I have replaced, change, with " align" . However, the "Lord's Prayer" is both affirmation and petition; "give us this day" , deliver us from evil"

If God's will immutably provides bread, why are Christians instructed to ask for it?



However , the petitions in the prayer aren't for changing divine will in a manipulative sense, but about aligning human will with the divine while participating in a relationship where prayers are a genuine factor.


I did not trivialize Gethsemane. It seems you used it to score a point that "prayer didn't even work for Jesus." But the real lesson of Gethsemane is that when a higher, redemptive purpose for all humanity is at stake, submission to divine will transcends personal desire. Jesus's prayer was not "unanswered"; it was answered within the context of a greater good.


This is where you reveal your biases , confirming you're not debating this objectively. What you try to present as factual statements are actually your subjective opinion disguised as truth. Take no offence please it's also my personal about what I observe you do.

If you distrust Prophet Isaiah's revelation to Hezekiah, why do you accept his other revelations you cited as absolute? The consistency of your critique matters.

The Hezekiah's story is not an 'antic' but a cornerstone of a non-fatalistic theology. It presents a genuine prophetic declaration from Isaiah, no different in form from the ones you cited from Jeremiah or Isaiah 46.

Yet, you apply different rules to them. You accept the prophecies about Jeremiah's calling or the Christian God's ultimate counsel as absolute and fixed, but you dismiss the prophecy to Hezekiah with speculation, suggesting it was a self-fulfilling trick. This is inconsistent talk.

The text gives us no reason to treat Hezekiah's prophecy differently. It was a true proclamation from the Christian God based on his foreknowledge of the current path. Hezekiah’s prayer was then a genuine, causal factor the Christian God in his responsive sovereignty, incorporated into a new outcome. This story demonstrates that not all divine declarations are unconditional decrees; some are conditional warnings intended to provoke a response. To ignore this distinction is to ignore the dynamic nature of the Christian God's interactions with people throughout the Bible.



But you haven't shown me you understand what the God will is and how it actually functions. The Bible verses you cited has been misconstrue by you.

Yes , I have read Oedipus Rex. The fictional story is a perfect illustration of pure fatalism which doesn't exist in reality. The prophecy in the narrative is a fixed sentence, and the attempts to avoid it directly cause it. But in the Hezekiah's model, the prophecy is not a fixed sentence. It’s a conditional warning. Hezekiah’s prayer wasn’t an attempt to "trivialize" God's will. It was a plea for alignment. He presented his case, his desire to live, "let me live" and through that process of prayer, his personal will was brought into alignment with the Christian God's merciful will. The outcome was changed not because the Christian God was defeated, but because the relationship between God and Hezekiah or man involved a genuine exchange.

So, when a Christian prays against a dream, he is not trying to thwart a divine decree. He is participating in this dynamic. He is bringing his fear and his desire for protection into alignment with the Christian God's will as a protector and deliverer ," deliver us from evil".He is saying, "May your will to protect me overcome this threat."

You are right that fear can be a problem. But the act of prayer is the prescribed method in Christianity and some other religion for transforming that fear into faith, for moving from a fatalistic anxiety , like Oedipus, to a participatory trust like Hezekiah.

In the end, you see a contradiction where many Christians see a coherent, dynamic relationship. The issue isn't the word "destiny"; it's our starting assumptions about how divine will and human agency interact.

My initial goal in joining this thread was simply to offer a perspective that could resolve the misunderstanding between Westerhoffe and Lordreed. I wanted to show that, from within the Christian tradition itself, there is a coherent framework that views prayer not as an attempt to thwart divine will, but as a dynamic participation in it, a framework supported by scriptures like the story of Hezekiah.

I believe I have presented that case to the best of my ability.

At this point, the discussion has moved into a deeper debate about the core tenets of Christian theology. As someone who does not operate from a Christian worldview, it would be inauthentic for me to continue arguing the intricacies of a doctrine I do not personally subscribe to any longer.

I will therefore leave the conversation here, for the Christians on this forum to continue if they wish. I respect your viewpoint, @DeepSight, and thank you again for the civil and challenging discussion.

Modified. This has cost me my sleep tonight.

Bravo, bravo, bravo. Thank you for the detailed, thorough, scholarly and thoughtful feedback.

Re: loss of sleep: those who burn the midnight oil are pursuers of excellence.

Will revert if and where need be.

Thank you and bless you.

Image123:
You might see the relevance if you answered.

Y'all have a habit of going off on weird tangents. I'm not going down that road if you can't show the relevance.

LordReed:
Y'all have a habit of going off on weird tangents. I'm not going down that road if you can't show the relevance.

Stay on the more familiar road then.

Truthseeker10:
So when God warned them, he did not know before they ate it that they would eat the fruit and die a particular day?

When you warn a person about something, is that not proof you know?

As I said you don't have any reasonable thing to say

Dtruthspeaker:
When you warn a person about something, is that not proof you know?

As I said you don't have any reasonable thing to say

So God knew before he Created Adam that he would eat the fruit and eventually die? So what is the point of warning Adam since God knows that warning him will not change what he has plan or seen for Adam before creating him?

Talkisneeded:
Jesus has no powers over death,plus it’s boldly written that all soul shall taste death,even tasted death before resurrection

Oga you are very wrong. Read this verse and repent of your sinc

John.10.17 - "The Father loves me because I lay down my life that I may have it back again.
John.10.18 - No one can take my life from me. I lay down my life voluntarily. For I have the right to lay it down when I want to and also the power to take it again. For my Father has given me this command."

Truthseeker10:
So God knew before he Created Adam that he would eat the fruit and eventually die? So what is the point of warning Adam since God knows that warning him will not change what he has plan or seen for Adam before creating him?

Since you knew your child will fail exams then why did you warn him despite all the plans you had for him?

As I said, you have nothing to say

Dtruthspeaker:
Since you knew your child will fail exams then why did you warn him despite all the plans you had for him?

As I said, you have nothing to say

That is exactly my point. If I know that my child will fail exam inevitably even though I warn him, then what is the point of warning him?

Truthseeker10:
That is exactly my point. If I know that my child will fail exam inevitably even though I warn him, then what is the point of warning him?

And yet, we all see that you warned him. So, the question is left for you to answer

Dtruthspeaker:
And yet, we all see that you warned him. So, the question is left for you to answer

Lol you are funny.....so if I see that you will steal tomorrow before i create you and that there's nothing you can do to change what I've seen, what is the point of warning you?

Truthseeker10:
Lol you are funny.....so if I see that you will steal tomorrow before i create you and that there's nothing you can do to change what I've seen, what is the point of warning you?

See how you are changing post up and down.

First you changed from "If you know that your child" to if you see tomorrow.

Then from if you see tomorrow to if you see tomorrow before you created anybody.

Clearly, you don't have anything to say, again

Dtruthspeaker:
See how you are charging post up and down.

First you changed from "If you know that your child" to if you see tomorrow.

Then from if you see tomorrow to if you see tomorrow before you created anybody.

Clearly, you don't have anything to say, again

Lol.....Are you saying that God did not see exactly what Adam will do in the future before creating him?

Truthseeker10:
Lol.....Are you saying that God did not see exactly what Adam will do in the future before creating him?

Still changing post. Now it is about future and before creating him

By the way which future?

Of course you are not aware that future begins even from the next 5 minutes to tomorrow till 2065 till forever.

So which future?

Anyway, as I said you don't have anything to say

Dtruthspeaker:
Still changing post. Now it is about future and before creating him

By the way which future?

Of course you are not aware that future begins even from the next 5 minutes to tomorrow till 2065 till forever.

So which future?

Anyway, as I said you don't have anything to say

Lol.....Are you saying that God did not see Adam eating from the tree before creating him?
Could Adam have avoided eating from the tree even though God has seen that he would eat from it before creating him?

Dtruthspeaker:
See how you are changing post up and down.

First you changed from "If you know that your child" to if you see tomorrow.

Then from if you see tomorrow to if you see tomorrow before you created anybody.

Clearly, you don't have anything to say, again

Lol....So are you saying that God did not see all the future of Adam before creating him?

Truthseeker10:
Lol.....Are you saying that God did not see Adam eating from the tree before creating him?

It is you who is saying it and besides like future, there are seeings begin from the next 5minutes to tomorrow till 4026 till forever.

So, if you like twist and turn as you change post up and down, it still would not change the fact that you have nothing but rubbish to say.

Truthseeker10:
Could Adam have avoided eating from the tree even though God has seen that he would eat from it before creating him?

What else does "do not eat" mean especially as you see that indeed Adam avoided that eating?

As I said you have nothing to say

Truthseeker10:
Lol....So are you saying that God did not see all the future of Adam before creating him?

Now, you have changed post again to seeing repeating yourself, clearly you have nothing to say

PeterObi4Presid:
Oga you are very wrong. Read this verse and repent of your sinc

John.10.17 - "The Father loves me because I lay down my life that I may have it back again.
John.10.18 - No one can take my life from me. I lay down my life voluntarily. For I have the right to lay it down when I want to and also the power to take it again. For my Father has given me this command."

My sins,you don’t even know my sins

Dtruthspeaker:
Now, you have changed post again to seeing repeating yourself, clearly you have nothing to say

🤣🤣🤣Baba don hook...
Bye bye.

Truthseeker10:
🤣🤣🤣Baba don hook...
Bye bye.

Says scratched CD wey dey repeat.

After I talk am since say you no get anything wey you fit say.

LordReed:
Yeah RIP to him. Valar Morghulis.

Hello bro,I want to discuss something privy with you