Is it not equally valid for those who believe in free will to say "Your reasonings are rendered irrelevant by the stubborn fact that you have freely chosen not to believe in it?" That's not justification for believing in free will, any more than what you're saying is justification for not...
Sorry to be a constant pain, but could you explain the italicised bit and what precisely this "wholeness" is?
And how does this all relate to good and bad?
Thanks,
Matt
So "whole" means interconnected? Well I can agree with that. But that's not the way Snoopy was using the word - whole means undivided. You can't have connectedness without division (or can you...).
My point is that a God who can accomplish his plans and purposes without having to impose absolute determinism on his creatures is a much wiser, more sovereign God than one who does.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.