I'm not talking about the kid, I'm talking about you, and you know it. I'm asking what was your profit for writing it in that order and not in another one. You choose to write it in that order.

The whole point is that the order was chosen by his personality traits.  The next question for you is to show whether he chooses his personality traits.  His whole idea of "profit" (somewhat flawed since it is so abstract) is that he is fulfilling the goals of his personality traits.  Does he choose those traits?

I see what you mean now (and before I didn't know it). I wrote Coke first because it was the first product I could come up with. I simply wrote what came to my mind in order because by thinking about something as unnecessary as the order of the two options I would be wasting time/making a loss.

Also, Robzo made an excellent description of the situation.

You choose cauliflower first too. And here you know that the other word was broccoli.

You choose to write cauliflower first due to your personality traits? that's crazy.

That's because English is not my first language so I copied your spelling, and therefore also your word order.

...And because my memory is poor :P

That's what I'm saying, especially at the Bold. From what I understand, some people are just 'stuck' good or evil. Their heart is destined to be good or evil regardless of how much a person tries to change it. They can act good or evil, but their identity will always be the case. It's completely up to luck whether their heart is good or bad.

If that is the case, don't you believe that it's extremely unfair that God judges people over something they have little-to-no control over?

Really?  That's crazy?  Yes we do things according to our personalty.  The problem, I suspect, is that you are thinking of personality traits in a macroscopic context; things like happy, sad, cool, funny, ambitious, etc...  Our personality also exists on a microscopic level - like whether one takes out the cereal before they take out the milk, or maybe they like to have an ice cream cone with vanilla ontop and chocolate on the bottom rather than reverse.

Yes, these minute decisions are still reflective of who we are.  That is our identity/personality/character/etc... pick whever word you want.  The point is who is picking these personality traits for us?  Are we?  or are other people?

Maybe. But isn't it unfair regardless? And what if, even if the root was unchangeable, it still allowed us control over what would constitute the full set of God's requirements (if we're to dive back into the theological aspect)?

Add to that the infinite saving power of the Messiah, and I don't think it's unfair in the very end, the choice is too free. One would have to be excessively evil such that, in full knowledge of the work of Christ on the cross, was unable to choose good over evil, since biblically Christ actually does perfection for you, in essence.

It's basically like being given heaven, and refusing. In the end, bottom line, hell is the choice.

I don't understand the first paragraph.

Even if a man was excessively evil, the man still is not deliberately evil. His uncontrollable heart is just so evil that it causes him to oppose heaven, Christ, & everything good. But he still wouldn't be the source that caused the evil.

Good point. What about the first para would you like me to clarify?