No. Everything is perfect. God had a great reason for creating cancer, he just can't remember what it was.
Incorrect. No definitive genetic link has ever been found.
The two most common reasons for homosexuality are:
1. Being sexually abused by a homosexual as a child
2. Being extremely promiscuous and eventually the person breaks that ability to be satisfied, going from one thing to another.
God created a perfect world and everything in it. He gave us free will. Using that free will, sin was chosen, thus defiling the perfect creation.
That defilement of sins continues to this day and will continue until Jesus returns.
And the Good News is, we are not condemned to the punishment for our sin that we deserve. Because God took our punishment upon Himself in the incarnation of Himself in Jesus Christ.
The wages of sin is death, the Gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ
1. 'Being sexually abused by a homosexual as a child'
In his own words...
'An adult who he says approached him in a sexual manner when he was just 5 years old'
All sickness is a result of the fall of man. When sin came into the world, so did sickness and death.
God heals people all the time from death, from disease, from addictions, from bitterness. He heals relationships. It is because we are separate from God that death and disease and relationship problems came. I know people that have been healed.
If god is what you claim, he would have to know man would sin, he gave man no choice. He was just waiting behind the bushes to pop out and say gotcha. It's entrapment.
But I guess a toddler deserves cancer because of the sins of the past.
Quite simply, the idea of a loving god does not hold up.
But the ungodly would have us believe that homosexuality is genetic and not a choice, and if it is genetic, then it can't be changed or given up.
You are absolutely, paulsfam4, God can being forgiveness, healing, and change.
This ain't heaven bub.
thenannerpus says that "this ain't heaven."
For the born-again child of God, this is as close to Hell as we will ever get.
For the unsaved, this is as close to Heaven as they will ever get.
"Then cancer would be a good place to start, considering it’s His genetic code that He done messed up in us."
All of our earthly life leads us to life eternal. If cancer is the catalyst for bringing someone closer to God and eternal salvation, it is a temporary loss. To live a perfectly "healthy" life on earth and end up in hell would be the permanent loss. God Bless you.
"God had a great reason for creating cancer, he just can’t remember what it was."
God remembers/knows all. God Bless you.
Homosexuality is natural and it is part of our sin nature which is also natural. For some people the aesthetics of homosexuality are much more appealing and "meaningful". Just as vanity is more appealing than humility and brokenness. I would rather be humble and broken than support any kind of wicked pride, including gay pride. Homosexuality is more grounded in a fallen spirit than a fallen physical nature. It is a spiritual hunger for sameness, likeness, and one's own image.
Bravo,Bravo Kid I am impressed with the way you did that.
kaydeebeau, we are not condemned to the punishment for our sin that we deserve"
No sir you are totally incorrect. Remember what happen to king David after he was forgiven the illicit child he bore. The child died as a punishment for his sin even though he was for given.
[-1] September 29, 2014 at 10:54pm
Humans have a 100,000 year old streak going. Don’t hold your breath.
 September 27, 2014 at 3:51pm
Social conservatism is essentially the desire to enforce a fringe (religious) morality onto a populace of 300 million people. Yep, that sure sounds like small government.
Yup he'd probably be dead if not for that experimental drug they gave him.
I heard they sprinkled birds blood over him 7 times and then let the live bird go in an open field but then decided to go with the experimental drug next. They aren't sure at this point which one worked.
July 15, 2014 at 5:31pm
It doesn’t matter who said it. You believe in the Bible or you don’t. There is no middle ground. It’s either all true or all made up. Those are your options.
Now, if you believe a barely-literate, pre-scientific society of desert nomads, no less than 30 years removed from the events they wrote about got it all correct, then that’s what you believe. If you believe a book that has been selectively edited, voted on and re-translated countless times is the 100% unfiltered word of God, then that’s what you believe.
"a barely-literate, pre-scientific society of desert nomads,"
Are you referring to God's Chosen People? God does not make a mistake even choosing His messengers.
[-1] May 19, 2014 at 1:49pm
With all this talk against gays, it seems Christians have forgotten about one of God’s other esteemed commands. Lest we forget, wearing clothes of mixed fiber is a very grave sin. How many of you are in line with God’s policy on this important issue? If you’re not wearing all cotton, you’re just as sinful as a gay Christian.
All of God’s words must be obeyed. Not just the one’s you already agree with. It’s not your job to interpret or question. It’s already been decided by the only one who matters. Fall into line and throw out all that sinful clothing.
Prhomos* are so unintendedly Hillarious attempting Exegesis and Theology.
Thanks for the Leading Belly Laugh of the day, Gaimember, and I'm with you on Benghazi and much else. On this...snicker....not so much. See my above deconstruction as to why. Your "all sins are equal" argument is not only Theologically and Biblically Unsound, it is not germane.
*pro-homosexuals promoting sexual deviancy see "provos" of Dutch 60s Anarchism and the "Provisional Wing" of the IRA.
Here we go again, that is old testament law, the old testament had, really 2 purposes, first it gave the hebrews a guide line to live (eat this, don't eat that, wash after you touch a dead body but don't touch a dead body if you don't have to) second, especially in the later old testament, it was to teach us that we are not and can never be blameless in the sight of God..... The new testament is the fullfillment of the law... Jesus is the final lamb sacrified for the sins of the people (old testament, they had to do this every year in the temple to cleans the sins of the people) he is the final blood shed for our sins..... so many people want to use negatives to justify anothers sin.... "well your sining so why do you judge me" thats like a murder saying "well you stole something so you are no better than me" Sin is sin and neither are clean in the eyes of God but we now have a society that wants to condon and accept a sinful activity and goes even further to tell us and our children that what we believe is wrong and that they need to allow and accept this sin and good and okay...
May 13, 2014 at 7:37pm
A part of me is all for making Bible readings mandatory in schools. There’s no greater tool for making someone an atheist than actually reading the Bible.
Hey right...that way they can believe in nothing. People not believing in GOD that are called atheists that gather to share their believes in nothing I know that sound crazy but they have their gatherings and sermons against something they say is not real? What a great way to spend their time ha…
[-5] May 9, 2014 at 12:09pm
“There’s a segment of America that is demanding that our freedom of speech come with consequences if it does not agree with their speech,”
This has always been the case. The 1st amendment protections of speech and expression have to deal with government censorship, not individuals censoring other individuals. This is a common misinterpretation of what the 1st amendment guards us against. Other people or non-governmental organizations can censor us all they want. Why do you think Beck is able to have banned words on this very site?
You can still say whatever you want. But the public also has the right to say that your beliefs are bad beliefs. You don’t have the right to be removed from the consequences of your free speech, at least not when dealing with other individuals. These brothers have a constitutional right to say what they want, and they did. They don’t have a constitutional right to a tv show so they can be pulled without retribution.
If you spread hatred and evil like these two did, you’re gonna get some right back. The only difference is that most people don’t have a tv show to lose.
So being Pro life...and believing homosexuality is a sin, is spreading hatred and evil?
Does that private right go to a Christian conservative who chooses not to bake a wedding cake for a homosexual,wedding? or chooses to fire an employee who engages in a behavior like homosexuality? These brothers were fired because of their beliefs.
Spreading evil and hatred? Are you serious? Wow. Exactly what evil and hatred are they spreading. That because they love and acknowledge God, and abide by his word, that's hatred? There's a difference between "hatred" and disagreeing you tool. I don't agree with what heroin addicts do, but I don't hate them. I've chosen not to agree with their lifestyle. Same with gay people and marriage. I don't hate them, I disagree with their lifestyle. Is this really the simplicity of your thinking? Perhaps someday you can pop that ridiculous bubble you live in.
You are only partially right.
What would happen to HGTV if they announced that they cancelled someone because they advocated for "Gay Marriage"?
From Gay Community News, Feb. 15-21, 1987
(reprinted from The Congressional Record, with preface restored)
We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.
Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of with men. Then go and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too, and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand the depth and feeling, the mind and body of another man.
All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked. Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men.
There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less. Those who oppose us will be exiled.
We shall raise vast private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.
The family unit-spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence--will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.
All churches who condemn us will be closed. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.
Sodomy has been condemned by every civilization since the beginning of recorded history, not just Christians.
While agency does come with blessings and consequencies, eternal truths are not negotiable.
There is a God in Heaven. We are His Spirit offspring.
God has a moral code. This code is the same today as it was when it was given to us in Pre-mortal life. This code is not influenced by popular vote.
What God has declared as abominable and unnatural is exactly that. What God has declared as evil is exactly that.
One is free to choose how they will believe, but they will not be able to define the consequences because of their beliefs. These consequences have already been established.
Calling good evil and evil good demonstrates which master you follow.
April 26, 2014 at 1:23am
Surely the Bible, God’s perfect, unalterable word, and manuscript for all mankind to live by wouldn’t contain slavery and the maltreatment of women. Surely it wouldn’t tell its followers to raid the cities of unbelievers and pillage their belongings and take their women as their own. No, that would make it seem like the Bible was written by desert nomads of a pre-scientific society instead of the divine revelations of an omnipotent, benevolent Creator.
To compensate for such errors in moral judgement, surely God included some knowledge of disease, antibiotics or clean water. Maybe some electricity generation? Atomic power? No? Not even a treatise on how a democratic republic should form and function? It’s almost as if the Bible is as relevant to modern society as any other nameless book that’s over 2,000 years old.
If you need guidance on how a society of shepherds and illiterate paupers ought to function, look no further than the Bible. However, if you want relevant advice on how a modern republic consisting of millions of people should be run, it might be wise not to shun that which made us prosperous to begin with, science and technology.
If we were to follow Beck’s advice, we’d be a society that didn’t eat tainted meat. Yet we wouldn’t ever understand why we shouldn’t eat tainted meat. Ask yourself if that level of ignorance belongs in humanity’s past or humanity’s future.
April 4, 2014 at 11:27am
So where’s the religious freedom you all love for the employees? If the executives of the company get to force their religion into what health care they provide, the rank-and file workers are subject to a religion that might not even be their own. They get no say about how their own religious beliefs fit into their personal health care needs. How is that freedom of religion?
I guess using your example, it would amount to the same as the emplyee forcing thier own religion onto thier employers by demanding they follow thier beliefs. Two can play this fun game.
Why do you get to force your beliefs on us to provide abortions?
March 20, 2014 at 3:41pm
“I think if you just look at the roots of how improbable the emergence of Christianity was historically — think about its origins,” Bock said. “It was tucked away in a tiny corner of the Roman Empire … involved people who had no political power whatsoever.”
Is the author also prepared to make the same claim about Islam, scientology or mormonism? He’s basically arguing that it’s true because only a few people believed it to begin with and then a lot of people believed it later. This can be said for any cult or any religion that’s ever been practiced. Islam started of as a cult made up by an epileptic tribal warlord. Mormonism was imagined by a known con-man. No one here would ever argue that Islam is true based on sheer numbers of people who believe it. This argument could only be made with the presupposition that Christianity is already true.
His second weak assumption is that Christianity had supernatural origins in the Roman Empire. If this is true, imagine where Christianity would be without a Roman Empire. If there’s no Rome, there’s no Council at Nicea. There’s no one to decide what is canon and what is not. There’s no one to then spread what became accepted doctrine. Christianity, without Roman patronage, remains a regional belief, if that. God didn’t just hand down the Bible in some final form. There was no official Christianity, no official Bible until Roman bureaucrats decided what to put in it. It wasn’t supernatural. It was completely art
I was going to point out that which you just stated in your first paragrapg addressing the statement made by Bock. I'm not stating that I fully agreewith all your sentiments, but you clearly spotted a logical fallacy. Well done. I would add one last thought to your comment - that it was the joining of church and State that brought us the modern-day version of Christianity. The early church was anti-state. The church seems to serve as a method of apologetics for the actions taken by the State and the State seems to protect the church as long as the church does it's bidding and preaches it's [the State's] version of doctrine.
Your last paragraph is an argument from silence. You cannot substantiate those claims.
February 7, 2014 at 3:55am
No. It’s not so hard. Just unbelievable, if you take God to mean the God of the Bible. If we are truly designed, this designer hates us and wants us to suffer.
Just take a look at any hospital across the world. Hospital beds are filled with people who have had something horrible happen to them. Barring an accident, any disease or defect is the result of God’s plan. That means God wants us to get cancer, something humans are almost guaranteed to get if we live long enough. He wants us to have stillborn children. He wants mothers to die in childbirth. He wants our unnecessary organs to explode on us. He wants our unnecessary teeth to get infected and kill us. He wants us to have brain disorders and mental defects. I could go on, but I won’t.
Now, if you believe us designed, what would you think of a designer that could have created us without all of these problems but chose to include them anyway? God could have changed all that, if He is all-powerful. He could have changed it then. He could change it now. But He doesn’t and He won’t. Meanwhile, people suffer and die in misery because of this alleged plan. This is a designer that is either cruel, incompetent or some mixture of both.
Where is God’s love? Where is God’s compassion? Thousands and thousands of years and God will not fix his own design errors. Strip away the cherry picking and wishful thinking and religious people must choose between an incompetent god or an evil one.
Through our struggles comes the appreciation for all things. How can one appreciate sunlight without darkness? All things need balance and all things need opposition.
January 14, 2014 at 12:50pm
Thought control, plain and simple.
January 10, 2014 at 5:37pm
Fortunately, we aren’t a theocracy. We as a country have no obligation to follow God’s law. That’s a 1st Amendment guarantee.
Look at Iran and Saudi Arabia and see how God’s law has worked out for them. Look how their moral police can snatch away people in the night or worse, for not following God’s law. Is that what we want for America?
Good point. The U.S. was established from colonies who agreed on one thing: nobody should use the power of government to enforce their religious choices on others. The challenge comes in when we have secular laws that happen to coincide with some religions, but not others. For example, stealing is forbidden in just about every religion, so having a government law against stealing is not so controversial. What, though, about laws on sexuality? Some people believe such laws can be secular, because they promote stable families and public health. Others believe that if a law is in a religious book, it should not be a part of public law, even if beneficial. Not so easy to untangle these, I think.
January 3, 2014 at 3:22pm
He’s not without God. If he stopped believing, he’d identify as such. This is all just a book deal in the making.
He is and will probably remain “spiritual” whatever that all-encompassing, generic word means. Essentially, he will cherry-pick what he likes and ignore the real moral and logical problems of whichever religious grab bag he takes up next.
It’s a nice step in the right direction. I wish more “cultural” Christians made this attempt. It’s still intellectually dishonest. He’s already refuted the claims of his old religious cult. If he understands why that one isn’t true, he should take the next logical step and say that none of them are true for the exact same reason.
December 31, 2013 at 9:28pm
Ok, let’s assume God exists. I’ll give you that. God is the Christian God and He created us. What next? Take a look at any hospital across the world and see what God’s intelligent design has done for us. Hospital beds are overflowing with people who have had something go horribly wrong with their bodies that are supposed to be designed by an omnipotent, supremely perfect mind.
Why would an intelligent designer make humans that are born with any number of genetic and birth defects and debilitating diseases imprinted into our DNA? Why, if He is supremely perfect and benevolent, does He not fix these glaring errors in His own design, errors that He alone bares the responsibility for?
Creationism is an insult to God. In many ways, modern medicine bests God at His own game. Scientists are constantly at work fixing mistakes God cannot or will not fix. If God cannot fix these mistakes in our design, He is not all-powerful. If God will not fix them, then He is not all-good. We are left with a God that is incompetent, evil or some combination of both. Take your pick.
GOD lets the free will of man do what we do. If HE intervened then we would be in HIS total control. HE loves us too much to control our lives in a forceful manner. It is up to us to make better decisions based on HIS laws. If we followed HIS laws, don't you think this world would look a little different?
December 30, 2013 at 2:34pm
Here’s the true nature of organized religion. Once you see through the pr stunts, positive buzzwords and a face that doesn’t resemble a sith lord, you still have the same bigotry as the last guy and the guy before that.
The Pope is no more qualified than any other ordinary human mammal to decide what is best for people. Sure, he says some nice things about poor people and other discriminated groups. But he still believes everyone that’s not like him deserves to burn for all eternity for imaginary crimes. What’s moral about wishing for that to be true?
December 19, 2013 at 3:51pm
Religion cannot be cherry-picked. If you are religious, you have to believe that the holy books you follow are the true word of God. There’s no room for your personal opinion. You either believe it or you don’t. You cannot pick and choose. If you can’t or won’t believe what those books say, you aren’t a member of that religion. It’s that simple. Have the courage to say that these beliefs are not true.