Omnipresence logically requires omniscience.
Yes, because if He did not control it, it would be chaos in the metaphysical sense,
God offers free forgiveness because He cares about sin.
1 Like
Thus, with even more reason it will be useless to repeat it in this thread!
I would like to propose the following:
Before commenting again here, you post some points where you consider to find common ground with other frequent posters in the thread.
If you find none, then it will be impossible to hold any productive discussion.
1 Like
Just to prove that I am not just arguing Richard’s view Here are a series of links
G Watkins
Ken Stothard
The Bible for Normal people
RNS
First Things
There are many more, so, even if I am unique on this forum I am not unique Worldwide.
Orignal Sin is a false Doctrine. Paul did not beleive it let alone preach it. It is derived by misreading Paul who was talking about the Law and Sin and not some pandemic disease.
Sin cannot be transmitted. it as no substance or natural existence. It certainly cannot be transmitted by some sort of indemic DNA code.
The Scriptures deny it. Specifically Jeremiah & Ezekiel
Jer 31
29“In those days people will no longer say,
‘The parents have eaten sour grapes,
and the children’s teeth are set on edge.’
30Instead, everyone will die for their own sin; whoever eats sour grapes—their own teeth will be set on edge.
Sin cannot be transmitted from father to son let alone from Adam (even if he existed in the form of Genesis 3)
Adam was,at best, the Original sinner, as in the first one
Adam also provided the means of sin by eating the fruit of understanding. Adam & Eve excluded themselves from Eden by losing their innocence.
And finally God cancelled any notion of continuing sin by forgiveness through the death of His son Christ.
I trust this is understandable enough!
Richard
1 Like
You’re not among those who claim they no longer sin, are you? Remarkably, there are such.
Nope, and I do not subscribe to OSAS either.
It is not a case of not sinning, it is a case of the sins are already forgiven even before they are committed.
Christ died for all our sins.
What part of that do you not agree with?
Richard
I’m glad.
Yes, he died for the ungodly’s sins in his patience with all of us, but no, that does not mean they are all forgiven.
‘…the ungodly…’ That does not mean they are all his lost sheep and he died for their eternal salvation.
Why not?
Show me where Christ died for only some of our sins.
Who on earth claims otherwise.
However you seem to be claiming that God does not forgive all sins/sinners.
That means that grace is added to. That humans can actually prevent grace. How powerful do you think humans are compared to God? Not only can they corrupt His creation, they can overrule His taking back of it.
Richard
PS Jonah 4
11And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?””
IOW innocent!
All of our sins are forgiven if we belong to him, if that’s what you are asking. And I’ve already showed you John 17.
He died for all the ungodly; there is no limitation given. So yes, He died for the eternal salvation of all – which is the obvious conclusion from His desire for all men to be saved.
Which BTW is why a number of church Fathers held that eventually all will be saved, because none can thwart His will.
Which BTW is a logical fallacy.
Shall we talk about our timeboundedness and God not so much? There is this little detail about our free will not being thwarted either. And maybe a little extra reading about things destined, willed, to destruction.
Ah yes, the self-centered God who only looks after his own.
You have been criticised before for your iterpretation of John 17.
And he destroys despite His promise not to in Exodus.
Predestination denies the existence of free will. We are just rats in a maze of God’s creation. Not only that it is a one-directional maze with an inevitable conclusion subject to God.s Providential view of who is going to do what.
I don’t think so
Richard
That is not an argument nor does it change what is said in it. (I could easily take it as a compliment. ; - ) Do you have it highlighted in black marker too? 
Where have you been when I have talked about the limitations of timebound words? Predestination is one of them. Properly understood it does not deny the existence of free will. I believe we have free will.
(Besides, are you free not to believe in free will? “We have to believe in free will, we have no choice.” I.B. Singer 
)
Not what it says. Only what it means.
You are not God’s oracle on interpreting the Bible (and neither am I)
It would be arogant to think I knew exactly what the Bible meant at all times and in all places. (and I repeat, I do not claim that)
Furthermore bible interpretation is not a defined art, or science. There is no single viewpoint or understanding so you cannot hold it.or claim another is false. You do not have that authority
Richard
How am I changing any meanings? Then Jesus did not mean what he said:
Please give us your eisegesis of the highlighted parts. Maybe you’ve never read about the sheep and the goats, the wheat and the tares. This is not the only place he has expressed something similar.
Where does He talk about those who have not been given Him?
It is not about what you see, it is about what you do not see because it is not there to see.
You are inferring what is not written
Your whole theology is based on taking what is written and superimposing it onto everyone, every thing, every time, and every space.
Richard
It’s funny, but reality and the truth that comes from it stays pretty consistent (except for YECs ; - ).
And where does He define these people who are doomed?
You really think you can second guess who God judges?
Read what is there. Not what is not You highlight half phrases as if they can be separated from the rest of the text and impose your views on all of it/ it just does not say what you say it does.
I am not going to split the text up just because you do.
Richard
I’ll just let others read it – it’s pretty obvious. Your major problem is me, not what Jesus clearly says and you deny. We could talk about evolution if you’d rather.