Debate: Remove "In God We Trust" from pledge and U.S. Currency
Side: No

Again, this is irrelevant. Unless you are insisting that by him rebelling he suddenly experienced amnesia. Everything Lucifer knew as an angel he would have also known as a fallen angel.I wouldn’t put anything past that rotten bastard. However, he likes to think he knows best but I guess God proved him wrong, on countless other occasions too.With foreknowledge of future events he would be in a particularly advantageous position to prevent all these things from happening, so either he doesn't know or he doesn't care or he isn't able.Just because God knew what would happen does not mean that He would prevent it. His whole idea from the very beginning was for us to have free will, so to prevent all sin would to be preventing free will – a debate I have already had here with a member and they lost.The simple solution would be to have never created Lucifer in the first place.Well, that is certainly the solution that our limited minds would come to, yes. What you have to consider is that without evil in this world, there would be no ability to sin therefore there would not be the free will that God had intended.Chance has nothing to do with it.Actually, chance has everything to do with it. I can see how if chance was out of the picture it would benefit your argument greatly but sadly if you say something that doesn’t always make it true. But then again, there is a chance it sometimes does... but this time you were wrong ;)People are not offended by insults on the basis of probability, they are insulted on the basis of the content of the insult, and on the type of person they are.Well, God is three divine Persons so I think it is fair to say He is on a whole other level when it comes to Him being offended as opposed to ourselves, which effectively rules out your “booger-face” example. Notice I said People. The personality traits which all contain some degree of imperfection, allow people to become offended. This would not apply to a perfect entity.I don’t think it has anything to do with imperfection, at least not in the person who is offended. God made man in His image, therefore there will be similarities between Himself and His Creation therefore for us to be offended by those that hurt us should not be so different to God being offended also.No, my 'plan' was to show that your argument is inherently contradictory, and thus irrational. You can't have it both ways.I would really appreciate it if you stopped ordering me around, it is pissing on the enthusiasm and positive side to this debate and is quite frankly beginning to make this debate boring. You in no way proved my argument to be contradicting but only further made a fool of yourself by forcing a one word answer and pleading for me to not provide reason. Scared of something?If you say that God's perception of time DIDN'T impair his sacrificing his son in the most beneficial way, and then in the same breathe say that he didn't sacrifice his son sooner because of his perception of timeThis is not an impairment because it is just you who sees the time issue as negative, not me or the billions of other believers. One question, why does it bother you so much that He didn’t send Him sooner when you don’t even believe in Him? Seems rather odd to me. Thus he would be aware of the power to see into the future, assuming he posses such powerWho is “he”? God? Satan? Job? Be more specific. Assuming you mean God (as He is the one we have been discussing to see the future) what does that have to do with Satan wanting and failing to destroy Job’s faith in God? God knew all that would happen; God knew everything that has happened from since time began up till this very second, what exactly is your point here?So even though God knew that humans would act in such a way (within the limitations that God created humans with) that he would have to wipe out millions of people including babies, so that he could use this genocide as a way to scare humans into obedience? Which is some how preferable to creating humans with the propensity towards doing good?I find it quite interesting that whilst so many atheists have said this very same thing and judged God for all that He has done for us, they still cannot find a logical explanation to explain another way that He could have wiped out all evil and still have given us free will other than “He is omnipotent; an omnipotent God could have thought up something”. Very interesting.AND you believe he is a loving God?Loving beyond comprehension :)Then he isn't omnipotent.That, my friend, is an illogical objection.God can only do that which is consistent with His nature; He cannot stop being God or holy. Omnipotence does not mean that God can violate His own nature and become an ice cream (I’m holding one now hence the example). An ice cream is not by nature God therefore God could not be the ice cream. But that does not mean that He can’t do all things that He desires to do which is what the biblical definition of omnipotence means.Why do you keep calling Him Yahweh? An atheist shouldn’t be concerned about His name so would probably use the shortest possible such as God.