How do Christians comprehend the iconic duo of free will and predestination?

[Baruch]

Ah, but do you define belief as truth?  That is a question many theists struggle with more.

Kibbitzing ... I don't believe in truth (as it is usually defined). 1+1=2 isn't true or false to me, it is tautological ... not the same as truth at all.  Whether Trump won the election isn't even tautological.  Truth and falsehood, like theism and atheism, are rhetorical fighting words.  Fists made up of letters instead of fingers.

[Cavebear]

Yes, vowels are the key within a given language family (spanish vs portuguese).  Between families, it is often the consonants (arabic).  Other languages use tones.  In Mandarin every syllable can have one of four main tones (or a neutral tone).  The tone changes the meaning in Chinese, and they are still stuck with too many homonyms.

Conjoining adjacent vowels is tricky.  For many languages, you get a diphthong as a result.  In other languages, the vowels stay separate.  In other cases it might go both ways, and you need an apostrophe to identify adjacent vowels that are kept separate.  A, E, AE or A'E.

You mentioned Portuguese vs Spanish.  I have a cat blog friend from Brazil, and Google only does true Portuguese.  You should see the differences, LOL!  I can barely translate Brazilian (latin cognates) and the differences can be both subtle and profound.  Cafunes to you. (don't take it literally).

[popsthebuilder]

See?  "warranted".  There always has to be a shade of twist in the argument by theists.

"proven to be such on a multitude of levels"  Really?  prove it.

I already specified that it was on a personal level and cannot be readily displayed by me for all to see.

The topic was destiny and freedom. Can we not discuss that instead of refusing to even talk about the topic at hand without definitive proof of GOD?

all of you are surely aware of the similarities of all ancient sacred texts. Many of these being separated by great expenses of both time and geography. This isn't a coincidence; in fact; there is no proof for coincidence or happenstance or random. History repeats itself. The way to the truth has always been the same; it is the misconstrueing of the truth and the things of the Spirit of life that has changed it to some unrecognizable, illogical delusion.

My screen is super broke on my phone; to the point that I can barely read to fix my surely error laden posts.

[Cavebear]

Kibbitzing ... I don't believe in truth (as it is usually defined). 1+1=2 isn't true or false to me, it is tautological ... not the same as truth at all.  Whether Trump won the election isn't even tautological.  Truth and falsehood, like theism and atheism, are rhetorical fighting words.  Fists made up of letters instead of fingers.

How is 1+1=2 tautological when it is a mathematical premise?  Just saying something is true is not repetitive. 

Atheism and theism are not like truth and falsehood.  Neither can be proven. But theism is an original claim and atheism is a statement that the claim is not proven. 

[Cavebear]

I already specified that it was on a personal level and cannot be readily displayed by me for all to see.

The topic was destiny and freedom. Can we not discuss that instead of refusing to even talk about the topic at hand without definitive proof of GOD?

all of you are surely aware of the similarities of all ancient sacred texts. Many of these being separated by great expenses of both time and geography. This isn't a coincidence; in fact; there is no proof for coincidence or happenstance or random. History repeats itself. The way to the truth has always been the same; it is the misconstrueing of the truth and the things of the Spirit of life that has changed it to some unrecognizable, illogical delusion.

My screen is super broke on my phone; to the point that I can barely read to fix my surely error laden posts.

OK. prove any religious text factuality and ignore the basic deity of it.

[Unbeliever]

I don't believe GOD to be evil, but the freedom of man has the GOD given potential for evil as is necessitated by said freedom.

God may or may not be evil, but according to "His Holy Word" (Isaiah 45:7) he does create evil:

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

[popsthebuilder]

God may or may not be evil, but according to "His Holy Word" (Isaiah 45:7) he does create evil:

Indeed; the capacity for evil is inherent with freedom and exponential potential.

[aitm]

I don't believe GOD to be evil,

We all well know how apologetics turn a blind eye to "gods" atrocities. I can almost slightly find a somewhat kind of smarmy excuse for a god to kill off "his" creations on some kind of mumbo jitsu you have to twirl too, but it is not so easy when your god demands that "innocent" men go off and kill babies and rape little girls. Put that next to his proclamation that man shall not kill....why, its just another example of god mimicking man who mimics god who is merely the rightful alter ego of man. Not so much reality as wishful thinking. But hey...delude away.

[Baruch]

You mentioned Portuguese vs Spanish.  I have a cat blog friend from Brazil, and Google only does true Portuguese.  You should see the differences, LOL!  I can barely translate Brazilian (latin cognates) and the differences can be both subtle and profound.  Cafunes to you. (don't take it literally).

Haitian Creole isn't real French either, but not trying to start a fight.  And there are plenty of differences between various Latin American Spanish, and between them and Castilian.  Not all Spaniards speak Castilian ... hence their problem with Catalonia.

[Baruch]

Indeed; the capacity for evil is inherent with freedom and exponential potential.

G-d is a verb, not a noun.  G-d is becoming, not being.  Dynamic, not static.  Europeans have a grammatical prejudice, that bends their philosophies.  We are what we do ... if G-d creates evil ... then G-d creates evil.  I can't conclude what G-d is, or even what I am.  This is part of the theological joke about "I am" that even Jesus plays with.  In fact, in Semitic languages, there is no "to be" ... just "was" or "will be" ... translation to European languages destroys the very fabric of the Bible.  Hence Muslims are correct, the Quran can't be translated and still be the Quran.  Neither can the Bible, because of all the subtle mistakes that are made.

[Baruch]

We all well know how apologetics turn a blind eye to "gods" atrocities. I can almost slightly find a somewhat kind of smarmy excuse for a god to kill off "his" creations on some kind of mumbo jitsu you have to twirl too, but it is not so easy when your god demands that "innocent" men go off and kill babies and rape little girls. Put that next to his proclamation that man shall not kill....why, its just another example of god mimicking man who mimics god who is merely the rightful alter ego of man. Not so much reality as wishful thinking. But hey...delude away.

Gods being projections of humans, that makes humans superior to gods.  Just as the Sabbath is made for man, not the other way around.  So I am not being quite accurate by saying I am a demigod.  But I am not some SJW god, I understand the criminality and irrationality of the Bible god.  I feel empathy for imperfection, because I am perfect.  Perfect gods are the kind that the Klingons killed in forming their independent society.  Even Buddhists say, if you meet the Buddha along the road, kill him!

[Baruch]

I already specified that it was on a personal level and cannot be readily displayed by me for all to see.

The topic was destiny and freedom. Can we not discuss that instead of refusing to even talk about the topic at hand without definitive proof of GOD?

all of you are surely aware of the similarities of all ancient sacred texts. Many of these being separated by great expenses of both time and geography. This isn't a coincidence; in fact; there is no proof for coincidence or happenstance or random. History repeats itself. The way to the truth has always been the same; it is the misconstrueing of the truth and the things of the Spirit of life that has changed it to some unrecognizable, illogical delusion.

My screen is super broke on my phone; to the point that I can barely read to fix my surely error laden posts.

Sympathy for your technical problems.  The scriptures are similar, because the authors are similar.  They are all humans of the last 10,000 years.  A totally different sentient would produce much more interesting scripture, if they wrote at all, as opposed to use hive mind telepathy.

[Baruch]

How is 1+1=2 tautological when it is a mathematical premise?  Just saying something is true is not repetitive. 

Atheism and theism are not like truth and falsehood.  Neither can be proven. But theism is an original claim and atheism is a statement that the claim is not proven.

Math is a topic for the math section.  Given the definitions of "1" and "2" and "+" and "=" ... the result follows from the definitions.  Trying to deduce this from pure logic took over 300 pages of logical proof, by Whitehead and Russell over 100 years ago, and we still aren't sure if they got it quite right ;-)  This is why I prefer a practical viewpoint.  I can handle simple math on my fingers same as a cave man.  I don't need to study the Principia Mathematica.

I added a funny explanation of this to the Math section, just for you.

[Baruch]

Indeed; the capacity for evil is inherent with freedom and exponential potential.

Some deny that G-d is free ... Mutazilite.  Others say G-d is free ... Ash'arite.  So this leaves the question of "Evil" and "G-d" up in the air.  Ash'arite theology is like Klingons, Mutazilite theology is like Vulcans.  I suspect neither are from Terra ;-)

[SGOS]

Warranted belief would indeed be truth to the individual. Faith is indeed in what cannot be readily and easily observed by all; and too is still truth and has been proven to be such on a multitude of levels; all within an individual or personal perspective or experience. Truth of a metaphysical or spiritual sort is, by definition, not physically verifiable through any third party.

Then what you mean by "Just a truthful statement" is "What [you] believe to be true."

To me this is not a small difference. 

Writers do have an obligation to be clear to the reader.  This is pretty basic communication.  Not being understood can't be blamed entirely on the reader.  The writers have to put some effort into the process too.