Posted on 03/30/2006 3:46:27 PM PST by rhema
Good Lord you're an idiot. Next you'll be telling us about the warm hospitality at Auschwitz.
Says who?
"Defective only if it was possible to create beings that would never choose Hell yet be fit for Heaven."
Are you saying that it would be impossible for God to do that ?
I suspect so; can you argue the contrary?
"Since they were never in a position to make the correct "choice"
Says who?"
Soory, I might have made a wrong assumption that you were a Christian. If so, the "word" was not available ( according to traditional theory), so a correct choice could not have been made.
"Are you saying that it would be impossible for God to do that ?
I suspect so; can you argue the contrary?"
You appear to have a very different concept of God then an all-powerfull being, normally God is not given any limitations.
I am a Christian, and consciously choosing to believe in Christ is not necessary for salvation (although consciously choosing to disbelieve in Christ is sufficient for damnation).
"Are you saying that it would be impossible for God to do that ?
I suspect so; can you argue the contrary?"
You appear to have a very different concept of God then an all-powerfull being, normally God is not given any limitations.
You need to broaden your knowledge of Christianity; I recommend C. S. Lewis' Mere Christianity as a start.
"I am a Christian, and consciously choosing to believe in Christ is not necessary for salvation (although consciously choosing to disbelieve in Christ is sufficient for damnation). "
Curious, how does that tally with -
I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me. John 14:6-7"
"You need to broaden your knowledge..."
No I don't think so, if C.S. convinced you that God was not all-powerfull, the entire concept changes.
It is not necessary to consciously believe in Christ in order to go through Him.
if C.S. convinced you that God was not all-powerfull, the entire concept changes.
No, it doesn't; to say that God can't do that which is logically impossible to do is no limitation on His power.
"No, it doesn't; to say that God can't do that which is logically impossible to do is no limitation on His power."
Of course it is, once you say "can't" there is a big stumbling block. Logically, you have placed a limitation on His power.
'Going to hell' is not a cause at all it's a result. Isn't it?
your second one was KYR
I have racked my brain and cannot figure out the acronym KYR. I'm usually good with acronyms.
RS: and in the third one "And here you say God knew before hand who chooses hell and who doesn't. " Are you presuming that HE dosen't ? That we could surprise HIM ?
I'm not presuming about it one way or the other. I was restating one of your positions to contrast it with the two others that it can't possibly fit with.
.... Hhmmm, an interesting concept though - ... Kind of a George Burnsy type of God ...
If you believe that some external God designed each of us individually it would expain the existence of John Denver.
"Put a relative on a boxcar, get a chance to win a volkswagen."
(I'll be spending some time in hell for that one.)
Her logic might fly in a posse of clowns, but it is not conservative. "...[T]he compassionate people at Planned Parenthood?" It's positively Goebbelsian.
Right, because nobody on contraceptives ever got pregnant. And the condoms they give out at Planned Parenthood didn't rank dead last in the Consumer Reports' study.
Face it: they're pushing kids to have sex, pushing to normalize sex outside marriage*, pushing to put kids on unreliable contraception (and there is no perfectly reliable contraception except abstinence), and ultimately pushing them to have abortions.
Because that's how they make their money, off the broken bodies and ruined souls of our daughters and our children. Greedy bastards.
*The university I graduated from invited a PP speaker on campus for "Women's Health Week". The PP speaker told the women to always use condoms and get on the Pill, because that's the safest they could be "except for abstinence, which is no fun".
"'Going to hell' is not a cause at all it's a result. Isn't it?"
Yep, can't type as fast as I think at times...
Our thread friend - KnowYourRights
It's plenty weird that's for sure. One might suspect ignorance but how is that possible on a thread like this? PP is definitely the 'American Council for the Final Solution.'
Duh! (slaps forehead) I'm guilty of PWEC. (posting without enough coffee) OK. Yes, Know your rights originally posted the second postulate. But you agreed that it was true so I am not in error for asking how you can hold it as true while holding as true two antithetical postulates.
Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Pro-Life/Pro-Baby ping list...
and we WANT them to become mothers ?
As opposed to killing their own babies?
Ummmm....yeah!
Get over your evil self.
Hmmmm.....she's evil....
yet YOU are the one who supports the organization who kills so many innocent babies a year!!!!!!
It is mothers having to stick their young children in daycare centers no matter how sketchy the staff.
According to you, that child would probably be better off dead. Better that than be cared for by 'sketchy' staff, right?
life, where there's a chance you might wind up spending eternity in Hell or a " Go directly to heaven" free pass
... do you ?
Probably not a three month old baby either. So it is okay to kill them and let them get a free pass to heaven?
I have been repeating his for a decade--- abortion and birth control will be the death of western civilization. Does anyone honestly believe that if 43 million abortions had not been performed by these monsters that we would have such a flood of illegal aliens?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.