Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

STOP AIDS BY STOPPING THE SINS
US Centre for DIsease Control & the Physicians Consortium ^ | 5/22/2002 | RWBaral, RN,CEN,EMT-P

Posted on 05/23/2002 1:46:16 PM PDT by RWBaral

STOP AIDS BY STOPPING THE SINS

I write as Chairman of the non-profit organization, "Be informed! Lessen suffering! Save lives!, inc." The mission of BLS is "to promote the public health, education, understanding and virtue." I wish to share how we can all help stop the terrible disease of AIDS in America.

It is heartening to know that many are concerned about the suffering and dying from AIDS, and of events to raise money to help AIDS patients. However, such AIDS fundraising events are not an answer to stopping this horrific disease. Rather, let's tell the truth about AIDS. Stop AIDS by stopping the sins that have caused atleast 88% of AIDS cases in the USA. Allow me to explain.

As a career hospital Paramedic and then emergency room Nurse over about 20 years, I have seen so much suffering and death, often self-inflicted and avoidable. For such things my heart and soul break beyond human words. Some of these were AIDS patients.

I note certain activists, industries and politicians - often willingly - are ignorant of the FACTS of who is at risk for contracting HIV and thus what we can do to prevent it's spread. Politics and money over the health and welfare of people? It shouldn't happen, but it does.

Consider the US Centre for Disease Control (CDC) table 5 US AIDS totals for men and both genders to 12/31/2000 for exposure categories: men who have sex with men (MSM); intravenous grug abusers (IVDA); both MSM and IVDA; heterosexual contacts, etc (www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/hasr1202table5.htm).

For US male AIDS cases, 56% are MSM; 22% are IVDA; 8% are MSM and IVDA; 5% are heterosexual contacts.

For US both genders AIDS cases, 46% are MSM; 25% are IVDA; 6% are MSM and IVDA; 11% are heterosexual contacts. 46% + 25% + 6% + 11%=88%.

Further, so called "safe sex" is a medical lie. The Physicians Consortium reports that, even if male latex condoms are used 100% perfectly all of the time, they are no more effective against HIV infection than 85% (www.headlines.agapepress.org/archives/7/252001b.asp).

So what does this data tell us? The truth. Avoid homosexual relations. Do not use intravenous drugs. Do not be sexually promiscuous. Stop the at risk behaviours, and you stop most HIV infections.

Translated: simple! The answers to stopping most US HIV infections, and thus AIDS cases, are morality and marriage. GOD gives us His Moral Code (ex Ten Commandments) and the institution of marriage because He loves us, wants to protect us, and see us flourish and be happy.

Thus, do not engage in forbidden sexual perversions that will cost you your earthly body and the damnation of your eternal soul. Keep your body clean and don't mess with drugs. Abstinence until marriage, then marrige between one man and one woman, within a mutually faithful, loving, uninfected relationship, hopefully for life.

The days of consequence-free sexual debauchery, free love and casual sex are over (as if they ever really existed?). The sexually transmitted diseases you can acquire today in America too often can't be just taken care of with a few pills or a shot. AIDS is lethal, and there is not likely to be a cure - ever.

The AIDS fundraising events, etc are nice gestures, but the answer to stopping most HIV infections in AMerica is to avoid the risk factor exposure category behaviours of homosexual relations, intravenous drug use and sexual promiscuity. Stop AIDS by telling the truth. Stop AIDS bwith GOD's Moral Code and the blessings of marriage. "Stop AIDS by stopping the sins" is my humble prayer, in JESUS' Name, Amen.

GOD's Speed To All,

Mr. R. W. Baral, RN,CEN,EMT-P, Chairman, "Be informed! Lessen suffering! Save lives!, inc." Po Box 315 Bennington, VT 05201 bls135@aol.com (802)-423-7636


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Announcements; Culture/Society; Editorial; Free Republic; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Technical; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: abstinence; adultery; aids; drugs; gays; god; hiv; homosexuals; intravenous; love; marriage; promiscuity; safesex; sin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-118 next last

1 posted on 05/23/2002 1:46:17 PM PDT by RWBaral
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
Amen to that! It's too bad that you may catch some flak for this from some FReepers who are unwilling to admit that God is ultimately in control, whether they like it or not.
2 posted on 05/23/2002 1:59:34 PM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
So what do you think would happen if we had a leader that took to the airwaves & stated it as a lifstyle disease & cut funding by 90% with the remainder going to education only & no aids medicine covered under medical policies. Do you think the homosexuals would change their lifestyle?
3 posted on 05/23/2002 2:02:50 PM PDT by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
If I get the flu, and go to my doctor, they must report it to the state department of health. If I get AIDS and go to my doctor they are FORBIDDEN to report it to the state department of health.
4 posted on 05/23/2002 2:30:00 PM PDT by ThreeYearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: RWBaral
Oh you troublemaker!

You are obviously guilty of agreeing with God's plan for man and woman and using common sense.

The god of political correctness, to which you must bow, is not happy with your unrepentant "sin".

6 posted on 05/23/2002 2:58:36 PM PDT by ASTM366
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThreeYearLurker
Yes, the flu doesn't have; flu advocates, flu activists, flu education and flu initiatives. When you get the flu you suffer and don’t blame society and you don’t have special interest groups lobby for more flu research because you “believe” that “we must find a cure”.
7 posted on 05/23/2002 3:01:08 PM PDT by BeAllYouCanBe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Digger
The Missionaries of Charity (founded by Mother Teresa) run an AIDS hospice in New York's West Village. But because the nuns make those who enter the hospice abide by a set of rules that conform to traditional Catholic teaching (no drugs, no porn, no condoms, etc.), they get blasted by the "gay" activists here, who refuse to donate any AIDS money they've collected to the this particular AIDS hospice.

IOW, these activists are interested only in promoting homosexuality ("gay rights") and sexual mutilation ("transgenderism") as normal variants of human sexuality, not in helping people with AIDS.

So IMO, the answer to your question is, nothing could convince these miscreants to alter their behavior.

8 posted on 05/23/2002 3:11:34 PM PDT by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: eastsider
I have seen TV interviews with AIDs patients where they say when they get out of the hospital they are going to go right out to bars in San Francisco looking for ” partners/dates ”. It seems that even though they have the disease and are suffering terribly they are incapable of any human kindness or feeling for their fellow humans. The sexual urge is stronger than any compassion to save others from this scourge. Its all in the uncontrollable URGE!!
9 posted on 05/23/2002 3:57:42 PM PDT by BeAllYouCanBe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Come get it
OK, great strategy, we'll just...like...you know...wipe out sin. That's so simple, why didn't we think of it before? /sarcasm
10 posted on 05/23/2002 4:00:16 PM PDT by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
That 5% heterosexual number represents medically unverified CLAIMS by the patient. Ther has not been a medically verified case of female to male sexual transmission in the US. Ever.
11 posted on 05/23/2002 4:08:23 PM PDT by Atlas Sneezed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
Well, nobody is likely going to be able to do away with homosexuality though I see many in here who woud like to.

It seems to me to be pragmatic to not make it so hard for them to formalize a relationship somehow to stop much of the promescuity in that culture.

I never understood making more formalized (not marriage mind you) relationships between lesbians and gays difficult which encourages multiple partners, and then calling for an end to behavior causing further infections.

Seems to me the pandemic logistics take priority over some American's longtime past-time of waging a war against gays and lesbians.

You can't do the latter without hurting the effort to do the former.

12 posted on 05/23/2002 4:13:16 PM PDT by Glutton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Glutton
I never understood making more formalized (not marriage mind you) relationships between lesbians and gays difficult...

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck then it's a...?

13 posted on 05/23/2002 4:15:23 PM PDT by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
"If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck then it's a...?"

...Quacker-backer? I'm not sure of your point here. Not to mention you are speaking to a graduate of the University of Oregon, whose mascot is the duck.

I've seen too many gorgious babes on the shoulders of many of our football players - whose team came in second in the nation - to think of those guys as worried about each other's rump. ;-)

14 posted on 05/23/2002 4:25:32 PM PDT by Glutton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Glutton
The reason that many (if not all) conservatives are opposed to the idea of any officially recognized "gay unions" is that it would be one step closer to legalizing true gay marriages.
15 posted on 05/23/2002 4:28:08 PM PDT by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
I am very glad that you have posted this. It never has made sense to talk about AIDS without considering the source of the disease. It is all backwards.
16 posted on 05/23/2002 4:30:03 PM PDT by Angelique
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
Stop the at risk behaviours, and you stop most HIV infections.

Stop talking sense you Limey! The American media and public have no appetite for it.

17 posted on 05/23/2002 4:35:30 PM PDT by Barnacle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
I realize that. But I also understand priorities.

It is more imporant to make allowances for social custom to slow this pandemic then it is to worry it will lead to marriage between gay and lesbians.

Every additional infected person endangers - and costs - this nation. I would rather see gays and lesbians stick to one partner then to sleep around.

And the only way I see that happening is if there is the social incentive of some form of sanctioned social bond between these people.

Less of a culture of "sleeping around" in this sub-culture makes it less likely bi-sexual men will bring something home to their wives.

I am not saying my suggestion is perfect, but anything done to cut the rate of spread of HIV that works seems to me to be worth doing.

18 posted on 05/23/2002 4:40:32 PM PDT by Glutton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
Smokers are looked at as low life scum who cause their own medical problems

Promiscuous homosexuals that cause their own problems are heroes

INSANITY
19 posted on 05/23/2002 4:44:37 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
Hey, I never said that we could wipe it out. I just want people to acknowledge the real reason this disease spreads so rapidly. If they were really interested in stopping AIDS, they would find out how to avoid getting the disease. It's simple: stop living a perverse lifestyle. If one wants to accept the risks of their lifestyle, so be it. The problem is that they want taxpayer dollars to be spent to help them deal with the consequences.
20 posted on 05/23/2002 4:45:24 PM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hobey Baker
In deciding how research funds are spent, priority should be given to diseases that we don't know how to prevent. Diseases that are easily preventable (and AIDS is one of the most preventable diseases around) should take a lower priority. I don't how to keep from getting a brain tumor, but I sure as hell know how to keep from getting AIDS.

100% agreed.

21 posted on 05/23/2002 4:46:47 PM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Glutton

We are talking about inherently irrational actions committed by people without any moral-restraint. Your liberal ideas of promoting a perversion of marriage sounds good to uninformed ears, but really they are merely band-aids to a festering wound. So-called 'safe sex' used to be their big answer, until the sexual deviants bailed out on that as being 'too much trouble.' Now we have organizations such as 'Sex Panic' who are calling for MORE promiscuity rather than less. The only way to stop self-inflicted behavioral diseases is to stop the behaviors which cause them. The waste of taxpayer money is about as bad as the moral-liberal excuses for their evil behaviors.

God is infinite wisdom. Humanism is pure hubris, which always results in unneeded suffering and death.

22 posted on 05/23/2002 4:53:00 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: RWBaral
The truth. Avoid homosexual relations. Do not use intravenous drugs. Do not be sexually promiscuous.

I've said virtually the same thing for years- so I'll give you a bump to the top.

24 posted on 05/23/2002 4:56:40 PM PDT by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Glutton
I never understood making more formalized (not marriage mind you) relationships between lesbians and gays difficult which encourages multiple partners, and then calling for an end to behavior causing further infections.

I understand it to mean that we don't want this crap perverting our culture in any way, shape, or form. Yes, making their relationships somehow formalized may cut down on their promiscuity, but not likely. If we somehow allow them a legalized, formal relationship, then we acknowledge that being gay is acceptable. Either way, we're screwed (ok, not the best choice of words for this topic).

This approach is analagous to the situation where a parent tells their teen that they don't want them drinking, and the teen says "well if you let me drink at home, then I won't get into trouble". That's not the point, the parent doesn't want ANY drinking. Just like we don't want ANY homosexual relationships going on. Giving in to a lesser evil is not a solution.

25 posted on 05/23/2002 4:57:10 PM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Glutton
It is more imporant to make allowances for social custom to slow this pandemic then it is to worry it will lead to marriage between gay and lesbians.

This "pandemic" is a self-inflicted result of their deviant lifestyle. It affects so few people who are not gay, IVDA, or promiscuous. I think we should cease treatment of AIDS and then see how many people continue to put themselves at risk. They are only spreading it among themselves, so let's just let them die off.

anything done to cut the rate of spread of HIV that works seems to me to be worth doing.

I think this solution would cut the spread of HIV, don't you? Is this worth doing? I sure like it a lot better than your idea.

Disclaimer: I don't really advocate this method. I only suggest it to prove a point.

26 posted on 05/23/2002 5:11:00 PM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
Further, so called "safe sex" is a medical lie. The Physicians Consortium reports that, even if male latex condoms are used 100% perfectly all of the time, they are no more effective against HIV infection than 85% (www.headlines.agapepress.org/archives/7/252001b.asp).

And now we're spending millions on bring condoms to every corner of Africa. Regardless of morality, a promiscuous person using condoms will eventually get all sorts of venereal diseases, including AIDs. The only way to stop the AIDs epidemic is to convince people to forego sexual promiscuity. By selling the condom theory to everyone, we are just slowing down (and not by very much) the eventual spread of the disease to every part of the world that is sexually promiscuous.

27 posted on 05/23/2002 5:35:15 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Glutton
And the only way I see that happening is if there is the social incentive of some form of sanctioned social bond between these people.

Come on. Homosexuals can get 'married' in certain churches (like the Unitarian Church), they can have their 'unions' in Vermont, etc. At the end of the day, NOTHING prevents them from committing to be faithful to one another. But they don't. They are highly promiscuous, and (for homosexual men especially), their lives revolve around promiscuous sex.

28 posted on 05/23/2002 5:39:26 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
OK, great strategy, we'll just...like...you know...wipe out sin. That's so simple, why didn't we think of it before? /sarcasm

The point is: Promiscuous homosexuality is exceedingly dangerous to your health. If you engage in that behavior, then take the consequences. Don't come running to the rest of society crying that it's our fault.

29 posted on 05/23/2002 5:41:08 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Digger
So what do you think would happen if we had a leader that took to the airwaves & stated it as a lifstyle disease & cut funding by 90% with the remainder going to education only & no aids medicine covered under medical policies. Do you think the homosexuals would change their lifestyle?

No. But they might not get the idea that what they're doing is right or moral or smart or acceptable. Our government (who is supposed to represent most Americans) has simply told gays to go out and do whatever they want, and that we'll pick up the tab. I'm tired of paying for their sexually promiscuous and filthy perversions.

30 posted on 05/23/2002 5:45:14 PM PDT by yendu bwam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
AIDS CURE!!

Don't stick things where they don't belong!

What do you suppose "against nature" means?

31 posted on 05/23/2002 5:56:40 PM PDT by G Larry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
As a career hospital Paramedic and then emergency room Nurse over about 20 years, I have seen so much suffering and death, often self-inflicted and avoidable. For such things my heart and soul break beyond human words. Some of these were AIDS patients.

You in the medical profession are brave souls. You try to help hurting people, knowing full well that one little slip, a cut, or a needle stick, can be a death sentence for you, largely because of the irresponsible behavior of some that you try to save.

32 posted on 05/23/2002 6:03:26 PM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
Three actions to minimize the spread of AIDS:
1. Wear a long sleeve shirt and keep the cuffs buttoned.
2. Remain seated.
3. Keep your mouth shut!
33 posted on 05/23/2002 6:31:28 PM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Digger
Heart disease is a lifestyle too, related to the sins of gluttony and sloth. If we cut medical funding for research and treatment, do you think the overwight would change their lifestyles?
34 posted on 05/23/2002 8:34:23 PM PDT by Looking for Diogenes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Come get it
"...who are unwilling to admit that God is ultimately in control,whether they like it or not. "

The buck stops there.

If you have the ultimate control you have the ultimate responsibility.

35 posted on 05/23/2002 10:11:54 PM PDT by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad
My experiances socializing with co-workers and neighbors who are gay or lesbians are that they are not any different out of the bedroom then anyone else.

I remember reading in Desmond Morris' book "The Naked Ape" about sexual imprinting and how much like the imprinting that causes a duck to take the first thing it sees as 'mom.' The lack of chioce in being a homosexual makes more sense to me then the thought anyone would deliberately chose this lifestyle so incomprehensible in so many ways to a hetrosexual.

In fact, Eugene, Oregon I understand has more lesbian couples per capita then any other West Coast city. And as I have three of these couples living in expensive, well groomed homes a stone's throw from mine, I believe it.

I refuse to treat anyone differently based on sexual preference. (Other then we have no need to explore sexual issues, and we would not find each other together in a bedroom of course.)

With all due respect, I have my suspisions that those scpegoating these people would have an inherent need to find another target group to go after if these folks did not exist. I have known people so intensely obsessed with homosexuals, that is all they will talk about. And that was a boresome drag(no pun intented).

I strongly detest people who victimize children who have not the tools for informed consent adiquate to be any sort of comsenting partner, but I am still not convinced pedophiles and homosexuals are the same thing.

I read these threads in this forum on this issue, then as in other issues I look to see what the other side says. And until I see empirical evidence as compelling as those studies that changed the classification of homosexuals from sickos to being normal folks with one big difference that harms nobody in the eyes of shrinks, I doubt seriously I will change my thinking on this issue.

Most influential to shaping my opinion was being picked on in High School by an idiot slurring me as a "faggot" to bully me and impress his girl. I know first hand how a label can harm the innocent.

His actions, and the 'blindness' of adults to the problem when they could have put this jerk in his place make me cagey about accepting obvious hatred and anger towards a group over well executed studies.

I would verbally dismantle a gay sending lustful signals my way. I would go way more postal on anyone dumb enough to use any term for homosexual in reference to me to my face. They would be in serious, very profound trouble.

Perhaps if I hadn't had this experiance I would be more alligned with your viewpoint. But I did. And I don't.

In any event, thanks for your perspective on this issue. I am sure you feel as sincere about your beliefs on this as I do.

36 posted on 05/23/2002 11:00:45 PM PDT by Glutton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: yendu bwam
Interesting view. But not one I can share unless factors such as enclaving into metro communities for security of numbers and the lack of venues to meet others ecept for usually a bar are factored in or adjusted for to test your premise.

If a study showed the behavior you attribute as an inate characteristic of homosexuals to exist with all "what came first, the chicken or the egg" factors adjusted for or nuetralized, what you contend would be much more convincing.

37 posted on 05/23/2002 11:09:30 PM PDT by Glutton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Digger
No, The worst sin and public health concern in America is if you smoke.
38 posted on 05/24/2002 4:34:48 AM PDT by victim soul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
Stop the at risk behaviours, and you stop most HIV infections.

As a former intravenous drug user, all I can say is "DUH!"

Risky behavior = AIDS.

I just thank God I dodged that bullet. I stopped using needles in 1985 and subsequent tests have proven that I have neither AIDS nor HIV.

But, if I did, I would have no one to blame but myself.

39 posted on 05/24/2002 4:43:27 AM PDT by Skooz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RS
If you have the ultimate control you have the ultimate responsibility.

Just what exactly do you mean by that? I will clarify my point. God is in control, however, He gave us free will, which means that we can do whatever we want. The problem is that He doesn't want us to do certain things, so He will punish us when we do those things. If we aren't aware of God's presence, we will make no connection between our actions and His punishment for them.

AIDS and other VD's are God's punishment for sexual immorality, IMO, the same way heart disease is punishment for gluttony and sloth (like LFD pointed out). So in a way, God is responsible for their AIDS because He allowed them to get it as punishment for their sins.

God is in control, whether you like it or not.

40 posted on 05/24/2002 10:42:03 AM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Come get it
"He gave us free will, which means that we can do whatever we want. "

"God is in control, whether you like it or not."

Interesting that you don't see the contradiction of these two sentances.

Castro has a free people, as long as they vote the way he wants them to.

41 posted on 05/24/2002 12:01:34 PM PDT by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: RS
Typical. Take my quotes out of context. Did you bother to read anything else, like the part right after the first sentence you used where I qualified my statement? If someone reads the post in its entirety, there is no contradiction.

Yes, we are free to do what we want, but we are not free of consequences. There is no such thing as a life without consequences. If you live according to what God wants, you probably won't get AIDS. I say "probably", because the story of Job comes to mind. However, Job didn't die because God wouldn't let Satan kill him. He said that Satan could harm him in any way, but couldn't take his life. This was all to test Job's dedication to God.

Read the story, or continue to be ignorant, either way it's your choice. If you read the Bible and then choose to not follow God, at least you'll be making an informed decision. You are free to choose God or to turn away from him. Both decisions have consequences. You may not realize the consequences until after you die, but they are waiting for you.

Ultimately, God is in control.

42 posted on 05/24/2002 12:26:15 PM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RWBaral
Bump
43 posted on 05/24/2002 12:30:20 PM PDT by EdReform
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Come get it
That old Bible verse, "The wages of sin is death" is certainly true in this instance. And the literal hell of it is, innocent people must pay those wages too, when they become infected by one of the sinners.

This old-fashioned language may offend some. Tough.

44 posted on 05/24/2002 12:35:00 PM PDT by Judith Anne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Come get it
"Read the story, or continue to be ignorant, "

You know nothing of my knowledge of the Bible or God, and your ignorance has led you to make statements with no supporting information. A childish mistake, but one that I can forgive.

Unless you assume God has no knowledge of the consequences of His actions, He specifically created the fallen angel Satan, one of whose pre-ordained tasks was to torture poor Job. Conversely, God knew that Job would prevail in the trials, yet He still put poor Job through them. Even today's scientists would not put a lab rat through such an experiment , knowing with 100% certainty what the outcome would be.

Or perhaps you don't believe in an all-powerfull, all-knowing God.

45 posted on 05/24/2002 3:28:54 PM PDT by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

Comment #46 Removed by Moderator

To: RS
You are right that I made assumptions regarding your knowledge, and for that I apologize. Yes, God created Satan, and yes, God knew what the outcome would be, but He still did it because other people need to see the power of God displayed through the lives of everyday people. He did that to Job for our benefit, and for the benefit of Job's friends. There are many sides to any one action of God's. He can accomplish more things with one action than we can imagine. You seem to be trying to put God in a box, so to speak. He is not that simple.

So to answer your question, yes, I do believe that God is all-powerful and all-knowing. He knew what the result of Job's testing would be, but He did it anyway because we need to see and hear Job's testimony.

But we digress...

47 posted on 05/24/2002 4:27:35 PM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RS
One other minor point, but it is an important one. You state that "He still put poor Job through them", yet God did not do those things, He allowed Satan to do them.

I know you will come back saying that God created Satan, so God did it indirectly. If you want to believe that, fine, but the point is that Satan did it, not God.

48 posted on 05/24/2002 4:31:11 PM PDT by Come get it
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Come get it
"This was all to test Job's dedication to God. "
"He did that to Job for our benefit, and for the benefit of Job's friends. "
I'm glad you seem to have realized that Job's trials were not a test of him but simply some sort of demonstration for the rest of us.

But what has it really demonstrated ?
That the trials in our lives might be God running an experiment? Hardly, since He knows the outcome.
That God is the boss and can take the leash off his nastier creations whenever he chooses ? Nope, If you believe in God you already know it, if you don't you won't connect it.

Hopefully he had some rational reason for it, but the explainations so far are simply not very God-like, more like some petty dictator trying to prove how strong he is, and therby asserting his weekness.
49 posted on 05/24/2002 5:02:09 PM PDT by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Come get it
"..but the point is that Satan did it, not God."

"He said that Satan could harm him in any way.."
Sure looks like He gave His permission to me ... Billy, you can do anything to your sister excpt hit her with the baseball bat...

Hitler didn't kill anyone either
( well, maybe in WW I, think he was a sargent )

50 posted on 05/24/2002 5:11:00 PM PDT by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-118 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson