The Tri-Omni God chooses life

Thank you for the opportunity. I'm going to best prove the Tri-Omni God chooses life and has purpose for it being done. I will base my points upon regeneration and salvation because both of these points to the cause of the Tri-Omni God choosing life rather than death (hell).Regeneration: the action or process of regenerating or being regenerated, in particular the formation of new animal (humans)Salvation: deliverance from sin and its consequencesP1) If God is able to save then He should. P2) God saves. C1) Therefore, God saves as He should. Heart of the Matter: RegenerationA lot of the time people often ask how does one get saved or attain grace to being saved, well, it is not of our own doings that this is done, but rather God’s Spirit giving the grace to give hearts a change of mind to not desire to sin, but rather to seek God. God works things for His Good and His Good alone.This is an example as to explain that regeneration really is something we as humans have no control of, except the free will to obey His Spirit. Which would thus-- by far, say that the Tri-Omni God does in fact, choose life after all. “...we play no active role at all. It is instead totally a work of God.” Attaining SalvationThis therefore is the outcome of regeneration, once a changed heart has been made, then salvation has been attained only because of obedience to obeying what He has willed. The Tri-Omni God chooses to give salvation only to those whom He predestined for His Glory Alone and to reveal His grace to the world, but only those whom He has chosen for salvation have come to realize His true intentions. None but grace given through His Son Christ death and giving a chance for salvation for all who would believe and it being by the Holy Spirit of changing one's heart one attain this gift. Ephesians 2:8- For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.Point IP1) If the existence of the Tri-Omni God is logically coherent then He can choose life. P2) So, the existence of the Tri-Omni God is logically coherent. C1) Moreover, this means the Tri-Omni God is logically coherent. I will ONLY be proving that there is a possibility of there being a Tri-Omni God that exists. If this is negated, then my opponent automatically can assume that there are chances that there is not a Tri-Omni God after all. However, I can easily just imply to my opponent that the Tri-Omni God does in fact exist, but this would only lead to further discussion which would not concede forth upon the resolution. iC1) Evidence of Faith and Necessity of the Tri-Omni God It takes only faith to believe in the Tri-Omni God and what He says. Without the faith comes doubt or rejection to His existence, hence, my opponent is clearly stating from his quote of assuming that there ultimately does not need to be a cause of the universe or anything in it by the Tri-Omni God. “It is embarrassingly unscientific to speak of anything creating itself from nothing.” Ray Comfort“It is true that you can't prove a negative. However, the existence of God is provable in the same way a building is positive proof that there was a builder.”Ray ComfortThere are two text of Scripture that I would like to point out, which in regards to my opponent, there are more to provide, but nevertheless, these will suffice for the time being. Moreover, it is simply to clear the idea of God having a cause do to the idea of the universe “possibly” attaining or not attaining a cause, therefore;“In the beginning, God…” “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” In light of these verses, it is some form of evidence to provide that God never had a cause as my opponent did address already and that it is safe to imply that He was and was always there from the start and before Beginning came to be. As my opponent said, it is a theory… Which therefore could mean that both could be possibly wrong. But to simply assume God be uncaused is to negate the fact, that it is unnecessary for a being such as the Tri-Omni God to have had a cause otherwise, this would leave Him to not even be God at all. iC2) Absence of Evidence is Evidence of AbsenceSurprisingly, I agree, my opponent cannot prove that the Tri-Omni God does not exist just like I cannot truly prove that He does exist either, however, based on the evidences of what we both provide would insinuate that either of us are wrong or right. For example, if I say something as this, “ There is no evidence that says a god doesn't exist, so a god must.” then I am saying that my evidence is just based on what my ideas are and not some form of evidence. And to define “ideas”: a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of actionis in terms of knowing what it truth and what is not, not something we assume because in our own minds it is true or is not. However, to explain the existence of God would have to be through the matter of other valuable things seen by the human eye since some do not base on faith of unseeing. Some cling to the saying, “seeing is believing” because of lack of faith to believe at all. iC3) Epicurean ParadoxAnswers to the argument:“If God is willing to prevent evil, but is not able toThen He is not omnipotent.He Holy and therefore chooses to permit evil for the sake of goodness to be shown forth. If He was not omnipotent then He would not even have the ability to save people or give salvation. If He is able, but not willingThen He is malevolent.Just because He does not do anything never means He is malevolent, but rather patiently waiting for the people to realize what they are doing and henceforth be charged with justice. So in the end, God always wills to do something. If He is both able and willingThen whence cometh evil.Because of sin. Not because of us. definition of sin: an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.“What is sin?It is the glory of God not honored.The holiness of God not reverenced.The greatness of God not admired.The power of God not praised.The truth of God not sought.The wisdom of God not esteemed.The beauty of God not treasured.The goodness of God not savored.The faithfulness of God not trusted.The commandments of God not obeyed.The justice of God not respected.The wrath of God not feared.The grace of God not cherished.The presence of God not prized.The person of God not loved.That is sin.” R13; John PiperIf He is neither able nor willingThen why call Him God?” (3)I agree if He WAS NOT able or willing then He should not be God nor would He even be God, but since He is able and willing in many ways, that is why He is always in mysteriously at work. To express the argument in other terms: P1) Because the Tri-Omni God exists, he is omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent. P2) So God is omnibenevolent, He stops suffering; God is omnipotent, he uses the power to put a stop to it and prevent it. P3) Although suffering occurs, God chooses to provide help. C1) Therefore, the Tri-Omni God exists.Basically because gratuitous suffering exists that doesn’t eliminate that He isn’t able or isn’t willing. In fact, he is like the director behind a scene for a play performance. When there is a mess-up or a failure or a downfall, He is there and ready to pick anything up that has been destroyed by anything necessary. He is in fact, Omniscient and because He is, He also allows mistakes to befall upon us as humans to teach us something even if it means through suffering. It is not to say He does not will or is able to provide the means of help. IC4) Elaboration of Free Will Free will is the choice of doing right or wrong as my opponent and I agree upon, however, God does not have free will in the sense to do wrong, I am not sure if maybe I misunderstood my opponents intentions here; so if anything I would like clarity regarding his position on this concerning God having free will. Omniscience is the ability to know the past, present and future, yes. Nowhere in this definition does it suggest or even imply to omniscience being random? So please elaborate this as well. An infant, is at much more lesser problem than a grown up because a grown knows whether to do rightly by taking care of oneself whereas an infant is unable to care-take for his/her self, this is why a mother is the caretaker for the child. Meanwhile, my opponent may suggest that this could also apply to God, maybe so, but who is to say that He does not already do that, point is, are we watching, listening and acknowledging it? It is not God who is not omniscient it is us who lack the knowledge to knowing everything and for that, it is necessary to depend upon the Tri-Omni God that does know everything because He IS able and willing, are we though is the question? Point ii.A choice is not in the same sense as to of decision making as we finite minded people assume it to be though. iiC1) Omniscience, God does have free willAgain, God does not base things off decisions, but rather choosing as to say able willing to give second chances to all mankind, but only few are picked because they have decided to obey upon Him. Sources(1) http://www.monergism.com...](2) [https://www.biblegateway.com...](3) [https://www.biblegateway.com...] (4) [http://www.brainyquote.com...](5)[http://biblehub.com...](6) [http://biblehub.com...](7) [http://www.skepticalraptor.com...](8) [http://www.goodreads.com...]