Search results

A different perspective on Renee Good:

The left pays protestors to make noise anout issues they want advanced in their favor. The right usually doesn't have time to go out and protest, because they're busy trying to earn enough to not only advance their own toals, but to also pay for all the leftist policies that get pushed on them...

Repeating your position as though it hasn't already been addressed is not a rebuttal. The argument was not that God’s knowledge causes their choice. The argument was that if their choice was infallibly known beforehand, then their choice was necessary; and if it was necessary, they could not...

You must have me confused with a Trump supporter. I don't care what his approval ratings are. The rhetoric being put out by the left has their constituents trying to kill a sitting president. The rhetoric on the right has people wanting justice for criminals, no matter how high up in...

Saying it doesn't matically make it so. What crime did he commit? What crimes did these "plenty others" commit? It's not okay to be gay. And you are there in the top left:

On that much we agree.

No. You finally answered after several pages of refusing to say what letting the guilty escape punishment teaches. Until then, you kept evading the actual point by answering what should happen, rather than what such allowance teaches, and only at the end admitting that it ‘would set a bad...

Telling people to bear false witness makes you just as guilty. I doubt it originated with my friend.

So after several pages of pretending not to understand English, you finally answered the question: Finally! After several pages of dodging, you admit the point. If allowing someone to get away with a crime sets a bad precedent, then it teaches the criminal and everyone watching the wrong...

Bearing false witness is a sin.

It's not okay to be gay.

That has not been my question for the last several pages, Arthur. At this point, it really does seem that you either are not reading what I write, or are deliberately substituting an easier question because you cannot answer the one actually asked. I am not asking: “Should a person be allowed...

I couldn't care less what Geisler says. Geisler is not Scripture, nor does he have the authority of Scripture. I'm willing to be corrected. But you haven't demonstrated that I'm wrong. You've only asserted that I am wrong. You don't get to simply declare your theology “correct” and then...

No, I would not agree with Geisler’s definition as stated. And notice what you just did again. You still have not made the biblical argument. You moved from GotQuestions, to Merriam-Webster, to Norman Geisler. Geisler defining omniscience as knowledge of “past, present, and future” does not...

This is still eisegesis by way of leading questions. You are not making an argument from Psalm 147:5. You are asking questions designed to smuggle your interpretation into the phrase “His understanding is infinite.” The verse says God’s understanding is infinite. Amen. I affirm that. But you...

Yes, I believe Psalm 147:5 in its totality. “Great is our Lord, and mighty in power; His understanding is infinite.” Amen. But Psalm 147:5 does not say every future free act already exists as a settled fact before it happens. That is your addition to the verse. And yes, I believe 2 Timothy...

You just conceded the point. If “omniscience” is not a biblical word, then the doctrine must be defined by Scripture, not Webster. You cannot use a dictionary definition of a non-biblical term as the standard, then accuse us of denying the Bible when we reject your definition. Show the...

Haven't you noticed which particular "social groupings" they are? They all seem to be on one particular side of the aisle...