It's always amazing how badly people want to undermine Christianity so that they can continue in their unbelief and feel justified. If the stakes for their soul weren't so high it would be comical but it is just sad. One such tactic is to pretend that Apostle Paul's theology and teachings are contrary to what Jesus said. It's not true but always facepalm inducing. For example take this article. I waited about 15 hours to see if any atheists would be honest enough on Debunking Christianity to point out how bad this particular argument is but alas nothing. There was a great comment by Dr David Heddle but I will save that for the end of this post. I have some direct observations to make on the post.
According to the famous Whitney Houston song, the greatest love of all is to love oneself.
Travelling back in time long before Grammy awards were handed out, we find that Jesus, (according to the Gospel of John), had a different idea:
“Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.
John 15:13 (NIV)
Well at least Green recognized that Jesus was teaching something different that what our culture says so he gets a point there. It all goes downhill from there.
But, the Apostle Paul (not-surprisingly) had his own take on it:
For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us… For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
Romans 5:7-8, 10 (NASB)
I find several things interesting about this. First, I have to side with Paul on this. I know he usually comes across like an arrogant know-it-all, what with his self-declared apostleship and talk of trips to the Third Heaven, but when he’s right, he’s right. Dying for one’s enemies, for those who are unworthy, is a hell of a lot more nobler and impressive than dying for one’s friends. Friends mean something to you. An act of self-sacrifice for a friend, while admirable, is not unthinkable, but dying for an enemy is a very strange thing indeed.
What I find most interesting that J.M. Green (who wrote this post) thinks that Jesus and Paul are saying contradictory things to one another. I should point out that he later changed the post to say that dying for one's enemies is "unusual". Let's look at the context for John 15:13.
9 “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love.10 If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love.11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete.12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.14 You are my friends if you do what I command.15 I
no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his
master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything
that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.17 This is my command: Love each other. - John 15:9-17
It should be obvious that Jesus is not talking to the same audience as Paul was talking to. Jesus was talking his followers and admonishing them to love one another. And they were all Jesus' friends (except Judas). Paul was talking about the love Jesus has for all us.
So, sorry Jesus, but Paul wins this round. You really should have thought that line through a bit more carefully (or at least, the gospel writer who placed that line of dialog in your mouth should have). That sort of easy mistake tends to undermine the idea that you were supremely wise. And, if you truly had foreknowledge, you would have known that Paul would come along and trump your pronouncement.
Interesting how Green gives Paul's context but not Jesus' context. Either he is ignorant or dishonest. Also Paul did not say the dying for your enemies is greater than loving your friends. He was saying that Jesus showed His love for us in that he died for us inspite of us being His enemies. Green is still Jesus' enemy. Green is arguing that Jesus did not tell us to love our enemies. Is there a single scripture that tells us not to love our enemies? Not a chance. In fact we have the opposite. Jesus said:
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,45 that you may be children
of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the
good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. - Matthew 5:43-45
I know this may seem minor to some of you, but when a ‘mere ma’n one-ups the ‘Son of God’ in defining the highest pinnacle of love, then that is somewhat of a big deal.
Paul didn't contradict Jesus here. I would argue that no where did Paul contradict Jesus. Atheists will have to do better than this to prove this canard.
The other interesting thing is how often the teachings of Paul are at odds with the teachings of Jesus. Oh I know, the letter to the Romans was written decades before the Gospel of John and all, but still, these kind of discrepancies in the ‘amazing unity of the Bible’ should give Christians pause. But, sadly it doesn’t seem to. Perhaps another time, we will take a look at some of more pronounced differences between Paul’s gospel, and that of the Jesus he claimed to have been personally selected and tutored by.
Written by J. M. Green
Poor J.M. Green Of course an outright contradiction should give us cause in accept Christianity. The
problem is no one has pointed out one and that should give atheist pause and cause them to seek God with all their hearts. David Heddle posted the following remark
The Super-duper Paul of Tarsus View:
Atheists often attribute the Apostle Paul with powers far beyond what
Christians grant. To wit: it is often suggested that he a) did not
exist. And yet in spite of not actually being real he managed to b)
usurp Christianity, creating an entirely new religion quite different
from that taught by Jesus—who by the way probably did not exist either.
And c) Paul managed, while not existing, to steal Christianity —through
the use of forged letters. Remarkable! In a nutshell the "super Paul"
view is that two people who never existed created two distinct religions
(fraudulently). Then later fools, who believed in both of these
non-entities, merged their contradictory teachings into a
franken-religion.
I agree with Dr Heddle. He posted a comment showing how silly the remarks in this post are and how it shows how little people understand Christianity in general and Paul in particular. A scathing comment like this of course generated a response. However John Law isn't that honest.
Honest_John_Law David Heddle•2 hours ago Wow! More keen insight from
David Heddle, the guy who reads the Bible intelligently and comes here
for fun. Since David Heddle began visiting this website, we have
observed that:
a) he rejects the position of Early Church Fathers re. their widely held view of an infallible sacred magisterium...
The position of the Early Church Fathers was not the "widely held view of an infallible sacred magisterium..."
b) he agrees with Luther's positions on sola fide and predestination
yet disagrees with Luther's views re. the sacraments and polity...
So? Martin Luther was not infallible. You can disagree with him and still be a believer and go to heaven. I think Heddle is right on that. And Luther himself would not say you have to agree with him 100% to be a true Christian.
c) some of his views re. Calvinism appear at odds with WLC's views...
Duh. So what? Does Law think that William Lane Craig is the beginning and ending of Christianity? If so he should get out more.
d) he stated that " when I (David Heddle) disagree with Pope Francis I think I (David Heddle) am correct."...
And....? Law (I assume) disagree with Pope Francis. Does that mean he is just as wrong as me and Heddle?
e) he stated that "There are probably ~8000 Protestant denominations.
Whether God is happy with that or not I couldn't say." and suggested
that different denominations within the Christian faith are "not a big
deal"...
Why should it be? The majority of them only disagree on minor issues that are not important. Things like worship styles. You can't honestly include Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, and Christian Science in that group. If you do, then you are even more ignorant than I thought.
f) he boldly asserts that the "vast majority of Christians" agree
upon the basic gospel message, yet he provided no statistically
significant independently verified data to substantiate that claim. In
fact, the RCC is by far the largest denomination, and their
comprehensive views re. salvation are at odds with those held by
mainline Protestant "churches". The RCC is abundantly clear on this
point re. those who "knowingly and deliberately" (that is, not out of
innocent ignorance) reject divinely revealed doctrine taught by the
RCC...
If scripture was intended to be read intelligently by individuals who
then may interpret scripture as it seems right to them, it would be
astounding if orthodoxy could be preserved over many centuries. Then
again, David Heddle suggested that different denominations within the
Christian faith are "not a big deal"...
Eureka! We now clearly see that David Heddle HAS contributed
something of real value here. David Heddle is a "Cafeteria Christian"
for all to observe with astonishment and wonder... Well done, David
Heddle. Keep up the good work.
Law forgets that the Roman Catholic Church is hardly based on Sola Scriptura so that is why it's different on some of those main things. They are not reading the scriptures intelligently. Neither does J.M. Green or Law. And while I will agree that David Heddle HAS contributed
something of real value her but he is not a "Cafeteria Christian". However John Law's comment has contributed nothing of value.
The bottom line is that Jesus sacrificed himself on the cross because He loves us. That is what Jesus taught and that is what His followers taught and teach.
In this episode, Sam Shamoun discusses the Trinity and why it should not be a stumbling block to Muslims in coming to Jesus for salvation. Really good stuff!!
I've become something of a fan of James Warner Wallace's ministry/ This is another presentation of his methodology for approaching scripture and witnessing. He brings to bear his years of experience in investigating crime scenes and especially "cold cases" (like the 30 year-old cases) on the evidences inside and outside the Bible for the validity of Christianity. After being an Atheist of 35 years, he came to the conclusion - based on his professional analysis of the evidence - that accepting Christianity is the only reasonable response. He gives a great presentation.
I always find the testimonies of how people have come to Jesus very very interesting. What people who come to a true and saving relationship with Jesus have in common is a huge change in their lives - who they are change. Their priorities and desires align them with Jesus. If this has not happened to you, then you were never saved from your sins. And if it happened to you, it can never "unhappen" to you.
David Wood does an excellent job explaining why some Muslims consider blowing up American citizens to be consistent with Islam. He explain how Surah 5:32 is often twisted out of its Context in the Quran so that it says the opposite things that Surah 5:33 says. I hope everyone hears and understands this.
I recently had the opportunity to speak at my church today. Here are my sermon notes and my presentation.
Slide 1
Good morning saints. For the past two weeks there is
something I can’t get out of my mind: The writing on the wall. My text today is
from Daniel Chapter 5. But in order to understand the text we should explore
the historical context.
Slide 2
Remember that the Old Testament is full of the cycle
of Children of Israel turning their backs on God and his laws , they suffer,
they repent, God raises up one person to through him or her delivers them, and
the nation of Israel live right while that generation lives, and then the cycle
repeats. God continually sent prophets to warn and admonish the people.This cycle repeated itself for almost 1000
years from the time of the Exodus.Israel continually flirted with idolatry.Through the prophets like Isaiah and
Jeremiah, God promises to bring a great judgment on Judah. This was not a vague
threat although Isaiah spoke about 2 or 3 hundred years before the judgment he
prophesied. The prophets said that God would let Babylon destroy Jerusalem and
his temple and the people carried into captivity for 70 years. But it was not
all bad news. God promised to return his people to the land he promised to
Abraham. Isaiah even told his contemporaries who it was God was going to use to
do it – some guy named “Cyrus”. Isaiah does not just talk about him once but
three times.
24 “This
is what the Lord says— your Redeemer, who formed you
in the womb:
I am the Lord, the Maker of all things, who stretches out the
heavens, who spreads out the earth by
myself, 25 who foils the signs of false prophets and makes fools of diviners, who overthrows the learning of the wise and turns it into nonsense, 26 who carries out the words of his servants and fulfills the predictions
of his messengers,
who says
of Jerusalem, ‘It shall be inhabited,’ of the towns of Judah, ‘They
shall be rebuilt,’ and of their ruins, ‘I will
restore them,’ 27 who says to the watery deep, ‘Be dry, and I will dry up your
streams,’ 28 who says of Cyrus, ‘He is my shepherd and will accomplish all that
I please; he will say of Jerusalem, “Let it be rebuilt,” and of the temple, “Let its
foundations be laid.”’ – Isaiah 44:24-28
“This is what the Lord says to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I take hold of to subdue nations before
him and to strip kings of their armor, to open doors before him so that gates
will not be shut: - Isaiah 45:1
I will raise up Cyrus in my righteousness: I will make
all his ways straight. He will rebuild my city and set my exiles free, but not
for a price or reward, says the Lord Almighty.” –
Isaiah 45:13
Slide 3
So did these prophecies comer true? Spoiler Alert: Yes! But I
don’t want to get too far ahead of myself and just keep this in mind and let’s
go to 586 BC. In 586 BC, Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon takes his army, lays seize
to Jerusalem and crushes it. They steal all the gold and precious treasures and
burn the city and the temple to the ground. It was Babylonian custom that when
they subjugated a nation they took the best and brightest of the population and
resettles them all over its empire so that they could not rally and stage
revolts against them. It also made them easier to assimilate into Babylonian
culture and society. Sometimes these people were brought to Babylon and
educated and put into government service.This where we come to Daniel and his friends: Hananiah,
Mishael and Azariah. They were taken from their home, their very names and
identities taken and an attempt made to give them new ones. I wish I had the
time talk about this point more, but it must be pointed out that it was them
holding onto God that allowed their relationship with God to grow and deepen
while they maintained who they were.
Slide 4
Look at this map of the Babylonian Empire
Slide 5
Skip ahead to October 538 BC. Let’s pick up with our main text
today Daniel 5. We are going to read the text and then delve into it and then
apply it for us today.
King Belshazzar gave a great banquet for a
thousand of his nobles and drank wine with them.2 While Belshazzar was drinking his
wine, he gave orders to bring in the gold and silver goblets that
Nebuchadnezzar his father[a] had taken from
the temple in Jerusalem, so that the king and his nobles, his wives and his
concubines might drink from them.
At this point, I want to stop and point out
some very important things. Nebuchadnezzar was one of the main characters in
what was happening in Chapters 1-4. Now we see a shift to what happened after
he died. It’s been almost 50 years since the fall of Jerusalem. One of
Nebuchadnezzar’s successors, Belshazzar is now on the throne. It’s kind of
debated as to whether Belshazzar was the only king at the time, or if he was
Nebuchadnezzar’s son or grandson. Given that in that culture sons and
descendants were reckoned to be the children of prominent ancestors. For
example, it would not have been a big deal as referring to my son Matthias as
the son of Clarence Allen McElhaney Sr, who is actually my father, not
his.We can see here that Belshazzar was
gearing up for a party. Sources outside the Bible reveal that this was a night
in October 538 BC during a Babylonian feast.
Slide
6
3 So they
brought in the gold goblets that had been taken from the temple of God in
Jerusalem, and the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines drank from
them.4 As they drank the wine, they
praised the gods of gold and silver, of bronze, iron, wood and stone.
As if the debauchery and drunkenness was
not enough, Belshazzar purposely too the utensils and things set aside for
God’s temple and even praised idols!? OOOOOO!!!!
Slide
7
5 Suddenly
the fingers of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall, near
the lampstand in the royal palace. The king watched the hand as it wrote.6 His
face turned pale and he was so frightened that his legs became weak and his
knees were knocking
Put yourself into Belshazzar’s shoes for a moment. Here he
is thumbing his nose at God and God writes him a public letter on the wall. No
wonder he was frightened. He knew what he was doing was wrong.
Slide 8
Maybe it would have looked something like this
Slide 9
7 The
king summoned the enchanters, astrologers[b] and diviners.
Then he said to these wise men of Babylon, “Whoever reads this writing and
tells me what it means will be clothed in purple and have a gold chain placed
around his neck, and he will be made the third highest ruler in the kingdom.”
Of course Belshazzar wanted to know what was written. He didn’t understand
the message. He wanted to know bad enough that was ready to share his power
with whomever could tell him what the message meant. I find it interesting how
the story is being told. At this point we don’t know what the message is – only
we are sure it’s not “Good job, Belshazzar!!!” Also I don’t think it was
written in a language he could not read but he didn’t know what it meant.
Slide 10
8 Then
all the king’s wise men came in, but they could not read the writing or tell
the king what it meant.9 So King Belshazzar became even more terrified and
his face grew more pale. His nobles were baffled. 10 The
queen,[c] hearing the voices of the king and his
nobles, came into the banquet hall. “May the king live forever!” she said.
“Don’t be alarmed! Don’t look so pale!11 There is a man in your kingdom who
has the spirit of the holy gods in him. In the time of your father he was found
to have insight and intelligence and wisdom like that of the gods. Your father,
King Nebuchadnezzar, appointed him chief of the magicians, enchanters,
astrologers and diviners.12 He did
this because Daniel, whom the king called Belteshazzar, was found to have a
keen mind and knowledge and understanding, and also the ability to interpret
dreams, explain riddles and solve difficult problems. Call for Daniel, and he
will tell you what the writing means.”
Daniel has a really good reputation. I think it shows how
far Belshazzar has fallen away from common sense and had no real understanding
of what had happened in his own history. He didn’t remember anything that
happened in chapters 1-4. Good thing the Queen did.That is not a coincidence.
Slide 11
13 So
Daniel was brought before the king, and the king said to him, “Are you Daniel,
one of the exiles my father the king brought from Judah?14 I have
heard that the spirit of the gods is in you and that you have insight, intelligence
and outstanding wisdom.15 The wise men
and enchanters were brought before me to read this writing and tell me what it
means, but they could not explain it.16 Now
I have heard that you are able to give interpretations and to solve difficult
problems. If you can read this writing and tell me what it means, you will be
clothed in purple and have a gold chain placed around your neck, and you will
be made the third highest ruler in the kingdom.”
At least Belshazzar was consistent in his promises. He also
explains the problem very well.
Slide 12
17 Then
Daniel answered the king, “You may keep your gifts for yourself and give your
rewards to someone else. Nevertheless, I will read the writing for the king and
tell him what it means. 18 “Your
Majesty, the Most High God gave your father Nebuchadnezzar sovereignty and
greatness and glory and splendor.19 Because of the high position he
gave him, all the nations and peoples of every language dreaded and feared him.
Those the king wanted to put to death, he put to death; those he wanted to
spare, he spared; those he wanted to promote, he promoted; and those he wanted
to humble, he humbled.20 But when his
heart became arrogant and hardened with pride, he was deposed from his royal
throne and stripped of his glory.21 He
was driven away from people and given the mind of an animal; he lived with the
wild donkeys and ate grass like the ox; and his body was drenched with the dew
of heaven, until he acknowledged that the Most High God is sovereign over all
kingdoms on earth and sets over them anyone he wishes.
Daniel has the floor and he make the most of it. Reminding
Belshazzar and all who was listening what Nebuchadnezzar had learned of
God….the hard way.
Slide 13
22 “But
you, Belshazzar, his son,[d] have not humbled yourself, though you knew
all this.23 Instead,
you have set yourself up against the Lord of heaven. You had the goblets from
his temple brought to you, and you and your nobles, your wives and your
concubines drank wine from them. You praised the gods of silver and gold, of
bronze, iron, wood and stone, which cannot see or hear or understand. But you
did not honor the God who holds in his hand your life and all your ways.24 Therefore he sent the hand that wrote the
inscription.
Like many of us Belshazzar did not always learn from the
mistakes of our parents and Daniel tells Belshazzar why he’s about to get
really bad news. He has been prideful and dissed God. All things we were doing
before we got saved and it is what we do when we choose to sin against God.
Slide 14
25 “This
is the inscription that was written: mene, mene, tekel, parsin
26 “Here
is what these words mean:
Mene[e]: God has
numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end.
27 Tekel[f]: You have been
weighed on the scales and found wanting.
28 Peres[g]: Your kingdom is
divided and given to the Medes and Persians.”
Let’s delve into the message. I think that
given a little background, the message is really even clearer and we can see
why Daniel’s interpretation sticks.
Slide 15
These words are known Aramaic names of
measures of currency: MENE, a mina
(from the root word that means "to count"), TEKEL, alternate
spelling of shekel
( the root word means "to weigh"), PERES, half a mina (from a
root word meaning "to divide).
Slide 16
29 Then
at Belshazzar’s command, Daniel was clothed in purple, a gold chain was placed
around his neck, and he was proclaimed the third highest ruler in the kingdom.
So what is Belshazzar’s response? Does he
repent in “sackcloth and ashes”? Does he ask Daniel, “What must I do to be
saved?” What about directly praying to the one who wrote the message on the
wall and apologize?Nope. Nada. But he
does give Daniel everything he promised. Therefore we know he believed that
Daniel told him correctly what the message was, but I don’t think he believed
the message.
Slide 17
30 That
very night Belshazzar, king of the Babylonians,[h] was slain,31 and
Darius the Mede took over the kingdom, at the age of sixty-two.[i]
Here is the payoff. God brought about exactly what
He promised – ending Belshazzar’s kingdom. Babylon was the capital of a huge
empire. Not too long before this it was the superpower of the day. Maybe the
reason why Belshazzar did not change is because he didn’t believe that Babylon
could be conquered.At the time most
people believed it was not possible. The Bible does not go into a lot of detail
here but before I talk about why I know we needed to look at this today let me
say a few things about how Darius did this. Babylon was protected by huge
impenetrable walls. An army would have had a real hard time to break through
them and could not go over them. Therefore according to the Greek historian
Herodotus, the Persians temporarily diverted the Euphrates River that ran under
the city just enough so that they could sneak in beneath the walls and surprise
the Babylonians. It was called the Battle
of Opis.
Slide 18
Here is the take away from all of this. That message
to Belshazzar was not just for him. It’s for us well. When we put each of our
lives up against God’s standard, we have to admit that we have been weighed and
found incomplete. We are not even close to measuring it. There’s handwriting on
your wall. I’m not just talking about your Facebook wall. I’m referring to the
walls made up of your hearts and minds. Don’t respond the way Belshazzar
responded.Here is how you should
respond: Repentance. We must turn away from our sin and obey God. If we don’t,
we will only receive the same kind of outcome that Belshazzar received. We know
what is on our wall. How will you respond? If you are already saved, and if you
have already put your faith in the Jesus, you are on the right track. But we
are still not measuring up. We still have to grow. It’s not that we will ever
be not found wanting, because we saved because Jesus is never found wanting.
The point is to grow in that grace and to be more like Jesus. We must do all we
can while we can…not for our salvation but because that is what we were saved
for.
Oh, yes I almost forgot. What about Cyrus, aka Cyrus
the great?Well, turns out Cyrus came to
power soon after Darius and under him, many people whom Nebuchadnezzar had
exiled and spread all over the known world were allowed to return to their homelands
and the Jews were allowed to rebuild Jerusalem and God’s temple – just like
their prophets had said – 70 years after Jerusalem was destroyed!And the kicker is that when Isaiah wrote
those things about him, Cyrus was not even born yet and neither Persia a world
power!It just goes to show just how
much God is running all of this – everything and that God is so merciful. I
mean he sent a handwritten warning to Belshazzar before He allowed history to
steamroll all over him. This afternoon, please consider the handwriting on your
wall and respond to God better than Belshazzar did. I will end with one more
scripture to sum up the point being made today.
28 And
we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who[a] have been called
according to his purpose.29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be
conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many
brothers and sisters. – Romans 8:28-29
It’s interesting that one can learn those morals from television and movies. The question to ask is: “How do these help you live up to these morals because you know you don’t?” You don’t need “Religion” because you need Jesus. We all do.
John Loftus posted the following quote from Nathan Phelps who is the son of Fred Phelps of Westboro Baptist Church who turned away from his father's teaching and unfortunately did not turn to God.
Here's what I don't understand. When pressed reasonable religious folks concede that faith is what justifies their notion of god. But they all spend sooo much time learning and regurgitating all these biblical arguments that "prove" god. It seems to me if you're going to invoke faith, just stop there. No need to reason it out or rationalize. In fact a more consistent position would be to spout some gibberish then end with "therefore god!" Am I wrong?
Yes, he is wrong. But given the teachings of his Father of course he would not know what Faith is. I wonder what is John Loftus' excuse for not knowing what Faith is? Given scripture none of us have a good excuse for mistaking faith for believing something despite evidence that something is not true. No one in the Bible was ever asked to believe God despite evidence and without verification. Rationalization is not necessary when you have evidence. The same is true now. Born-Again Christians do not reason backwards. Everyone comes to faith through God revealing himself to them. External scientific and historical evidence just adds to the evidence you already have. Given that the Westboro Baptist Church does not teach Biblical truths, its not surprise that he missed it. You can turn your back on Westboro's heresies without turning your back on God. In fact if we want to find God you have to turn our backs on their heresies and our own..
Recently, a debate between Greg Koukl and Dr John Baker regarding the existence of Moral truths. This is one of Koukl's niches. His arguments in favor of objective moral truths really showed up and crushed Baker's arguments. Baker tried to dodge the pitfalls or relativism by promoting pluralism - that is that there are a multitude of moral values and therefore there can't be just one set of moral truths. What Koukl pointed out was that in his view Baker can't really condemn anything or consistently choose between conflicting moral values. This was a great debate but there is no way Koukl could have lost this one short of not showing up.
Here is a video when J.P. Moreland, Greg Koukl, and Craig Hazen discuss answering the question about God's goodness in light of Children suffering and dying of disease.
The thing to remember is that disease is a consequence of sin being a part of this world. And despite the fact the world has such suffering in it, we know God loves us because He allowed sin to go unpunished (for now) so that he could redeem us. Getting rid of all disease would mean getting rid of sin which would mean obliterating each and every one of us now. God is waiting until the time of his own choosing such that all who have been called to repentance come (2 Peter 3:9).
_1896.jpg/262px-Trinity_triangle_(Shield_of_Trinity_diagram)_1896.jpg)
