Plateforme Level Extreme
Abonnement
Profil corporatif
Produits & Services
Support
Légal
English
George Bush...
Message
Information générale
Forum:
Politics
Catégorie:
Autre
Titre:
Divers
Thread ID:
01028993
Message ID:
01030518
Vues:
16
>>>>Or is it that your god is not omnipotent and couldn't stop them?
>>>>
>>>>Yes, God is omnipotent and could have stopped it all. He could have stopped it all after Adam and Eve's sin. Everything that happens is for His glory and the good of those who believe (when I say "good" I mean that it makes them more like Christ - not that they derive some pleasure from these things.) God uses even horrendous actions by unbelievers to acheive His purposes. In God's perfect plan, He allows these things to take place. Sometimes He reveals His reasons sometimes He does not.

>>>
>>>OK. I see your point but I'm still somewhat confused.
>>>
>>>If he's omnipotent (that is "All Powerful"), then why did he snet a tsunami to killl 200,000+ people in Indonesia last December?
>>>
>>>a) He did it because they are all sinners (including the children and babies that died by the thousands).
>>>b) He did it because some were sinners and he couldn't care less who else was killed.
>>>c) He didn't do it. Just slipped his attention (in which case he's not omniscient) and couldn't stop it in time (in which case he's not omnipotent)
>>>d) Sames a (c) but he didn't *want* top stop it in which case he's a despicable murderer.
>>>e) He had nothing to do with it, and couldn't care less.
>>>f) It was a totally natural process (plate tectonics) and there is no god. A subduction zone in the Sumatra plate created an underwater earthquake, which in turn triggered a massive tsunami.
>>>
>>>Take your pick. Using Occam's Razor principle evidence points to (f) above.
>>
>>G) I don't and can't know why He did that. I do know that He was indeed in control of that situation and that He had His glory in mind.

>
>
>No. You don't get out that easy. If you don't know, as you have just admitted, then you cannot answer the question. Period. You cannot use that as another option. It simply means you don;t have the answer. That's fine. But then if you don't know, how can you know "He was indeed in control of that situation"?
>
>And if he was, then one of the options (a) through (d) applies (discarding (e-f)). Which one of (a to e) would be in your opinion?

Okay - I can't answer the question (which is what I was saying with my previous answer...)

I know He was in control of the situation because the Bible says so (Rom 8:28-29 and others.)

Just becuase I cannot know the mind of God does not make me trust Him less.
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Fil
Voir

Click here to load this message in the networking platform