By John Blake, CNN
“Lead me not into temptation. I can find it all by myself.”
That line, taken from the country music song “Lead Me Not,” evokes smiles because it underscores a truth: The struggle against temptation is universal.
A new survey, however, gets specific about the type of temptations most Americans battle against, and shows that men and women seem to wrestle with different vices.
“Temptations and America’s Favorite Sins,” a survey conducted by the Barna Group, a Christian research firm, concludes that the moral struggles that vex most Americans aren’t the salacious acts that drive the plotlines of reality television shows. Most Americans are too worn down or distracted to get snared by those vices, the survey concludes.
The top three sins seducing most Americans: procrastination, overeating and spending too much time on media.
“You would think it would be sex, drugs and rock and roll,” said Todd Hunter, pastor and author of “Our Favorite Sins,” whose book was consulted in conjunction with the survey.
The survey said that 60% of Americans admitted that they’re tempted to worry too much or procrastinate; 55% said they’re tempted to overeat, and 41% said they’re tempted by sloth, or laziness.
The sex, drugs and rock and roll-like vices fell dead last in the temptation categories: 11% of Americans said they were tempted by drug abuse; 9% were tempted by sexually inappropriate contact.
Even young people put sex and drugs way down on their list, according to the survey, which broke down temptations by gender and age. It found that 21% of millennials (born between 1984 and 2002) considered sexually inappropriate behavior their chief temptation. It was the lowest percentage attributed to any vice by millennials. Their top two temptations were worrying too much and procrastination.
The battleground for temptation has also shifted – it’s gone digital, according to David Kinnman, president of Barna Group, which based its survey on 1,021 online interviews with a representative sample of white, African-American and Latinos.
“Temptation has gone virtual, ’’ Kinnman said. “Nearly half of Americans admit to being tempted to use too much media and one in nine admits to expressing their anger digitally.”
Temptation also seems to affect men and women differently – more women said they’re tempted by gossip and overeating, and only 8% of women admitted to being tempted by online pornography versus 28% of men.
Many Americans who admit to being tempted aren’t putting up a big fight. The study said that 59% of Americans admit that they don’t do anything to avoid temptation and half can’t explain why they give into temptation.
Many Americans still can’t explain what sin is, Hunter said. Worrying, for example, is not considered one of the seven deadly sins (pride, envy, gluttony, lust, anger, greed and sloth). Yet survey respondents listed it as one of their top temptations.
“There’s no agreement on what sin is,” Hunter said. “It’s one of the aspects of the world we live in. It’s becoming more relativistic. It’s hard to talk about sin when everyone disagrees about what it is.”
Hunter knows a little bit about temptation. One of his is chocolate. He once shot up to 330 pounds because he overate. He said all temptations start with a desire for something good: tasty food, rest, intimacy. They become “disordered” when they enslave people and spread pain through their lives.
“Disordered desires imprison us,” he wrote in “Our Favorite Sins.” “In the end they give us nothing – not one lasting shred of goodness, freedom, joy, or love.”
Hunter’s advice for staying clear of temptation: fasting, praying and staying out of places and relationships that lead you toward temptation.
For those who aren’t religious, Hunter recommends thinking about sports. He cites the practice habits of superstars like NBA legend Michael Jordan. They practice progress, repeating athletic exercises every day until their body complies.
Little victories lead to big things, Hunter said. In his book, he quoted the legendary college basketball coach John Wooden:
“When you improve a little each day, eventually big things occur. So don’t look for the quick, big improvement. Seek the small improvements one day at a time – that’s the only way progress happens – and when that kind of progress happens, it lasts.”
Off the subject of religion but I had to say snakes are by far the most disapointing animal. The one in the picture is almost cute and evidently docile enough to be handled and pose for a photo. However, the other day there was one at the zoo, a cobra who rose up at me just for existing. I could feel the hate from its cage.
You just never know how they will react. It's a pitty. They are such an interesting creature.
I have a bible in my house. I don't read it. I did, however as a kid pull it off the shelf and wave it around whenever the slumber party seances went horribly wrong.
As embarassing as that is, I bet I'm not the only one.
How does a slumber party seance "go wrong"? Is it like Girls Gone Wild or something?
Ha ha. No. Shame on you, mister. ;-)
The point of any good seance was to scare yourself stupid. I don't think it'd be the same now, but it was fun back in the day.
Why would it be embarrassing that you haven't read a book that was compiled and edited by Roman emperors, added to, translated, is difficult to read, frequently contradicts itself, exists in numerous editions, languages, and only really makes sense if you believe it before you start reading it?
Fladabosco, firstly that was probably the longest sentence I've ever seen.
But besides that, remember the Necronomicon? It was a big deal back in the day but it didn't make any sense. The egyptian book of the dead was nice though.
Only for the new members of this blog:
Let us start from the beginning:
From a friend who is a Catholic Professor of Theology–
"Baptism does not erase original sin since the sin does not exist. The old "laundry of the soul," approach to Baptism is no longer accepted."
Regarding the "sins" of gluttony/overeating and laziness in the 21st century: Acts of simple stupidity with the penance of heart trouble, stroke, and/or lack of education and poor job skills resulting in unemployment. And Hell and Purgatory are not in the picture since neither exist.
Actually Americans like to sin via the media in three ways – by reciting dim, rote, asinine insults in place of sane, rational, on-topic discussion.
Actually, I find it hilarious that people would even consider worrying a sin...in that case, plenty of caring mothers are guilty.
If there is an omniscient and omnipotent god, it could have set the universe's initial conditions such that our past present and future were inevitable via natural processes. Sadly, an omniscient omnipotent being is in conflict with validated law.
@Tom, Tom, the Other One "I know Francis Collins. He's a fine, respectable fellow. Very insightful . I know his back story as Christian, but he doesn't impose on people with it. He fully embraces Darwinian evolutionary dynamics.
=> LOL, you sure are something
Theistic evolution in no way shape or form embraces "Darwinian evolutionary dynamics".
Collins most certainly does not.
so, you not so subtle attempt to portray Collins as embracing a purely naturalistic process by which humans have achieved their current complexity utterly fails..
You might consider reading his book, "the Language of God" before saying nonsense things like that ;-)
What ego. Did you really think your post was such deathless prose that it would be a shame if no one read it? Is that why you had to post it twice, you little twit?
You might consider reading his book, "the Language of God" before saying nonsense things like that
You might consider stuffing a sock in your mouth before saying ANYTHING.
Haha, Doobs. Good one.
Sorry Chad. I was a member of one of the four large centers that did the bulk of the work on the Human Genome Project. I've met Francis Collins on a number of occasions. We aren't pals, but we've spoken at dinners and informal group meetings often enough that I feel I know him. What do you suppose we talked about?
That's gonna leave a mark....
Chad, I knew from the statement "I know Francis Collins. He’s a fine, respectable fellow. Very insightful" that TTTOO very likely has met and talked with the man...and your abject arrogance got in the way once more, predictably.
You just got spanked.
Perhaps this will be a lesson the next time you decide to use snarkyism to get your point across, but somehow, I doubt it. Snarky seems to be your forté.
Color Chard gob-smacked.
Oops, I forgot to put the => in, signifying it is me talking. Well, it was me talking.
Chad, and many of the not-so-brilliant believers here, has been spanked many, many times. Apparently their mental illness allows them to forget how stupid and dishonest they have been shown to be and they just keep on coming back to make the same stupid claims and tell the same lies.
I think HAA may have shut the clod up for a while. We're all indebted to you.
Whoops-I should have said TTTOO.
so, you would have us believe, that Francis Collins wrote a book outlining his beliefs with respect to the development of the complexity of life as we know it
He wrote the book to lie.. to fool people into thinking that he believed something he does not..
Read the book and tell me how he believes in "Darwinian evolutionary dynamics"
Here's a general statement that may help you, Chad:
"I do not believe that the God who created all the universe, and who communes with his people through prayer and spiritual insight, would expect us to deny the obvious truths of the natural world that science has revealed to us, in order to prove our love for him."
""I do not believe that the God who created all the universe, and who communes with his people through prayer and spiritual insight, would expect us to deny the obvious truths of the natural world that science has revealed to us, in order to prove our love for him."
you also keep studiously avoiding the fact that Collins does not support "Darwinian evolutionary dynamics"
I dont blame you, since you would be unable to, best to stay away from it and just discuss generalities.
yeah, Chad, I'm sure you're right and not the person who has met and discussed these issues with the person in question. How are you this arrogant in your stupidity, Chad? How?
You seem angry, Chad.
"No serious biologist today doubts the theory of evolution to explain the marvelous complexity and diversity of life. In fact, the relatedness of all species through the mechanism of evolution is such a profound foundation for the understanding of all biology that it is difficult to imagine how one would study life without it."
"theory of evolution"
"Darwinian evolutionary dynamics"
Lets examine these terms, the difference between them, and why TTTOO is trying to conflate the two.
EvolutionEvolution is the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.
Darwinian evolutionary dynamics: Adaptation occurring through the gradual random modification of existing structures and preserved thru natural selection.
At the core of Collins book, and theistic evolutionary thought, is that genetic mutation and natural selection is a directed process, set in motion with the extraordinarily low entropy state of the original state of the universe.
Darwinian: random, non-directed, gradual
theistic: non-random, directed, punctuated.
both believe in common ancestry, the distinguishing characteristics that distinguish each, is the dynamics themselves.the forces behind the mutation and natural selection. Darwinist's believe in random, non-directed and gradual.
TTTOO is trying to take a belief in common ancestry, and turn that into a belief in Darwinism..
Chad, there's no such thing as "Darwinism." Darwin didn't start an "ism." Many of Darwin's conclusions were wrong, and SCIENCE is the mechanism that found out Darwin's errors and corrected them. Not surprisingly, scientists today work with the current theory of evolution the way the facts prove it to be, and they don't bother much with the mistakes Darwin made that have already been corrected.
Of course whatever pet scientist you're quoting or discussing doesn't believe in "Darwinism," you fvcking moron. No scientist does. Firstly, because there's no such thing, and secondly, because Darwin's errors have already been corrected. Do you have any clue how fvcking dumb you advertise yourself to be, here?
Thanks for pointing that out Moby, I completely agree that most of Darwin's notions have been refuted.
@Tom, Tom, the Other One –
According to Jonathan Wells PhD., a UC Berkeley educated molecular biologist, Christian apologist, and ID advocate, Francis Collins absolutely accepts Darwinian natural selection. Chad simply doesn't want to accept this because he is a Collins nutt-hugger and accepting this would mean all of Chad's "Darwinian gradualism is dead, dead, dead" and "punctuated equilibrium supports god's continued tinkering with evolution" nonsense would collapse.
...other evolutionary biologist in the reference video assert the same thing regarding Collins acceptance of Darwinian evolution.
Sorry, Chad...the house of cards is collapsing.
"Darwinian: random, non-directed, gradual
theistic: non-random, directed, punctuated."
This is either a lie, willful ignorance, or stupidity. Collins accepts natural selection; he posits that it was simply "set in motion" by god as part of his design.
My February 10, 2013 at 2:15 pm post is based on the assumption that Chad is claiming his definition of theistic evolution is what Francis Collins accepts, which it is not.
You'll have to do some reading to understand the difference between gradualism (referring to the mutation occurrences) and natural selection (referring to organisms possessing less favorable genetic traits dying off)..
sorry about that.. but, that's the way it is.. Do some reading..
You're asserting Francis Collins rejects Darwinian natural selection as the process by which evolution occurs. That is incorrect. Dr. Collins fully accepts Darwinian natural selection. He simply believes it is the process god set in motion to accomplish evolution. You're arguments regarding "gradualism" are just a diversion. Everyone sees that.
You're as dishonest as ever, Chad. Oh, and you're a bigot.
Just so it's clear, my reference to "gradualism" was to point out your ridiculous characterization. I've consistently refuted your assertion that Darwinian natural selection equates to "gradualism" (Dr. Dawkins eloquently explains your "gradualism" misconception, if you care to edify yourself). More equivocation from Chad as a diversionary tactic. Tragic comedy.
@Really-O "'a sserting Francis Collins rejects Darwinian natural selection as the process"
one more item to the list of things you get wrong..
I never said that, I do not believe that.
Natural selection does not provide any distinguishing characteristic between Darwinism and theistic evolution.
Natural selction simply says that the less equipped an organism is to survive, the more likely it is to die off and take it's genes with him and out of the gene pool.
it never bothers you that you can seemingly NEVER follow an argument???
One more point of clarification for you, Chad.
If you assert that "theistic evoluton" is "non-random, directed, punctuated", then you do not accept the position of Francis Collins regarding evolution. It's as simple as that.
...and the cards continue falling.
If you follow a Chad argument, he'll not only argue, but predict what your answers will be!
you need to do some reading, you simply have NO IDEA what you are talking about..
start with understanding the difference between genetic mutation and natural selection.
You're not that smart, Chad – your diversionary tactics are far too obvious.
You claim evolution is "non-random, directed, punctuated". Darwin and Francis Collins disagree.
You have also stated numerous times on this blog that god directs evolution via mutation. Darwin and Francis Collins disagree.
You do not agree with Darwin. Francis Collins does agree with Darwin.
It's that simple.
Let the flailing, gish-gallop, and emoticons begin!
Hey, Chad...it's been months and I'm still waiting for the citation from "The Language of God" where Dr. Collins defines "evolutionism". Hahahahahahha!
"You do not agree with Darwin. Francis Collins does agree with Darwin."
you dont realize why you're wrong, because you have no idea what you're talking about.
start with this: describe the difference between theistic evolution and atheistic evolution.
There are two different positions, there is a difference between the two. You dont know the difference because you simply are clueless as to an understanding of the different opinions on the underlying dynamics..
so, what is the difference between theistic evolution and atheistic evolution? ("that's all nonsense" , "there's no such thing as theistic evolution" blah, blah blah.. not acceptable answers)..
I've got better things to do the slap around dishonest bigots like Chad. I simply made an appearance in this thread to support Tom, Tom, the Other One.
Cheers Tom, Tom, the Other One.
@Chad "You dont realize why you're wrong, because you have no idea what you're talking about. Start with this: describe the difference between theistic evolution and atheistic evolution.
@Really-O? "I've got better things to do the slap around dishonest bigots like Chad"
@Chad "Q.E.D. (look it up...)"
"Darwinian" is mainly a nod toward evolution under selection pressure. And randomness is definitely part of it, but there is constrained randomness and self-organizing complexity at work, among other things. The features of modern theory that confuse Chad might have confused Darwin too.
Flail, bigot, flail! I know you want to bust out the emoticons...restraining yourself must be killing you. Anyone can follow this short thread and witness your diversionary flailing. Again, tragic comedy.
I'm off, too. I need to get in some time at the range.
Hi Tom, Tom, the Other One –
Agreed. The main point I'm making in this short thread is that Chad's assertions regarding Francis Collins views on evolution are incorrect. Chad assert Collins posits evolution is "non-random, directed, punctuated" (this is the logical conclusion when Chad uses that to describe "theistic evolution" and he asserts Collins accepts "theistic evolution"). This, however, is patently incorrect. Collins accepts random mutation and non-random natural selection pressures. Collins simply believes this is part of god's design. Quite different from the "non-random, directed, punctuated" theistic evolution spinning around in Chad's head.
Well, if you find defining theistic evolution and atheistic evolution, and articulating the differences in the two positions a bit threatening or difficult
try and parse this statement, and identify that various dynamics being referenced.
"Darwinian" is mainly a nod toward evolution under selection pressure. And randomness is definitely part of it, but there is constrained randomness and self-organizing complexity at work
since you cant, I begin to wonder where all of your arrogance actually originates from? Not from knowledge certainly...
@Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son –
I'm also off to enjoy this beautiful Sunday. Enjoy your practice.
@Really-O "...Collins accepts random mutation "
here's where you are 100% wrong.
The ENTIRE PREMISE of Collins book, is PRECISELY that there are NO RANDOM MUTATIONS.
that IS the language of God.
That IS the defining characteristic of theistic evolution, namely that God guides the dynamics by which new inheritable characteristics are introduced into the population.
The fact that you didnt realize that, is what exposes your complete ignorance regarding the difference in the two positions (theistic evolution and atheistic evolution).
stay in the shallow end or learn how to swim.. one or the other.
Oh Chad! A gentleman knows when he's been bested. Why don't you?
@Chad, As always, fantastic arguments!! :)
Wow. Not only are you completely defeated, but you have to use a sock puppet.
Galatians 5:14 – For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
For those that stick to scripture. Here you go...plain and simple. The law is summed in this one thing. Nothing to add, nothing to take away. LOVE.
Yet universally used as a pawn against others that do not agree with them...sad.
Love does not kill.
Love does not commit adultery.
Love does not steal.
Love doesn't lie, December deceiver. You failed the test, big time.
"I still believe that freedom is the bonus you receive for telling the truth. Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free."
Martin Luther King, JR.
Then, December, you are in chains. Continually trying to redefine "day" to mean "any amount of time" is simply deceit. We know what a day is, and it isn't a thousand years or any other length of time.
You wouldn't know the truth if it walked up and kicked you in the balls.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”
Anger really does start as a fear. And you really are just hurting yourself.
And yet he kept mistresses.
Star Wars? Seriously? What an ass hat.
> And yet he kept mistresses.
Yea, he had some struggles. He was a flawed human being. But he gave some great speeches.
Yeah, and Mussolini made the trains run on time.
You don't like Star Wars? Yea, no wonder I cringe when I see your stupid rants. "Use the force, TOMTOM."
Good. Go cringe some more, idiot.
Martin Luther King Jr, known adulterer. . .
In response to your post @955 pm, love can make you do all those things.
Abortion is our greatest sin,
Never had one. You?
If so, why didn't the Bible mention it?
Says who? You?
Ohhh ok then. Then it MUST be.
don't make them pregnant, no seed no tree.
Oh, horse hockey. Abortion is legal. It's only a "sin" to morons like you who think your opinion matters to women. Stick it up your fundament, you pea-brain.
83% of women obtaining an abortion are Christian.
Yeah, Observer, god was too busy telling us how we should and shouldn't feel about stuff our neighbors own rather than saying something like "don't own another human being."
Isn't it, though?
Here's the breakdown:
43% of women obtaining abortion identify themselves as Protestant, and 27% as Catholic; and 13% of abortion patients describe themselves as born-again or Evangelical Christians.
Regarding unsafe se-x and its "sin" of significant irresponsibility:
The reality of se-x, abortion, contraception and STD/HIV control: – from an agnostic guy who enjoys intelligent se-x-
Note: Some words hyphenated to defeat an obvious word filter. ...
The Brutal Effects/Penance of Stupidity:
: The failures of the widely used birth "control" methods i.e. the Pill (8.7% actual failure rate) and male con-dom (17.4% actual failure rate) have led to the large rate of abortions and S-TDs in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the Pill or co-ndoms properly and/or use safer methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and S-TDs.- Failure rate statistics provided by the Gut-tmacher Inst-itute. Unfortunately they do not give the statistics for doubling up i.e. using a combination of the Pill and a condom.
Added information before making your next move:
from the CDC-2006
"Se-xually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psy-ch-ological consequences of S-TDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."
Consumer Reports, January, 2012
"Yes, or-al se-x is se-x, and it can boost cancer risk-
Here's a crucial message for teens (and all se-xually active "post-teeners": Or-al se-x carries many of the same risks as va-ginal se-x, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of or-al cancers in America in people under age 50.
"Adolescents don’t think or-al se-x is something to worry about," said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 's-ex.'" (It should be called the Bill Clinton Syndrome !!)
Obviously, political leaders in both parties, Planned Parenthood, parents, the "stupid part of the USA" and the educational system have failed miserably on many fronts.
The most effective forms of contraception, ranked by "Perfect use":
– (Abstinence, 0% failure rate)
– (Masturbation, mono or mutual, 0% failure rate)
One-month injectable and Implant (both at 0.05 percent)
Vasectomy and IUD (Mirena) (both at 0.1 percent)
The Pill, Three-month injectable, and the Patch (all at 0.3 percent)
Tubal sterilization (at 0.5 percent)
IUD (Copper-T) (0.6 percent)
Periodic abstinence (Post-ovulation) (1.0 percent)
Periodic abstinence (Symptothermal) and Male condom (both at 2.0 percent)
Periodic abstinence (Ovulation method) (3.0 percent)
Every other method ranks below these, including Withdrawal (4.0), Female condom (5.0), Diaphragm (6.0), Periodic abstinence (calendar) (9.0), the Sponge (9.0-20.0, depending on whether the woman using it has had a child in the past), Cervical cap (9.0-26.0, with the same caveat as the Sponge), and Spermicides (18.0).
I don't provide my real e-mail address, even though it says it is required.
I always give your real e-mail address.
You said, "I don't provide my real e-mail address, even though it says it is required."
Wouldn't that be lying? Isn't that a sin?
Yea. I'm a sinner. That is why I need Jesus.
you could have gone with @Austin and his blowup doll....they were going to church tonight.
Sounds like a good time.
Because we both live in Colorado Springs, CO?
Because you're both morons who deserve each other.
This is the chief sin on Gods hit list, Pride.
A number of religious folks have stated the top sin on god's list, all have been different. What does that mean?
It's not a well-ordered list?
Contemporary English Version (CEV)
16 There are six or seven kinds of people the Lord doesn’t like:
17 Those who are too proud or tell lies or murder,
18 those who make evil plans or are quick to do wrong,
19 those who tell lies in court or stir up trouble in a family.
They are talking out of their ass.
Wasn't this Satan? "I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.” A recurring sin in your Bible.
"19 those who tell lies in court or stir up trouble in a family"
For I have come to turn "'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law– Jesus
Tom, Tom, the Other One,
Satan a created being said that. What made him say it?
Presuming that sin exists, pride is worse than murder; I think that says everything you need to understand about religion.
You were talking about pride, Robert. Hubris, actually. There's this too: "when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God" .
Clearly He's making a list and checking it twice.
Blessed are the Cheesemakers,
His coming turned family members against one another in that one family member believed and the other did not. The proverbs verse is more along the lines of a troublemaking family member.
In Santa we trust,
It is all related. If you become angry with another it is the beginning of murder. Could you become angry without pride?
The very first sin in the bible, the desire to know what God knows, pride.
Robert's threatening, torturing asshole of a god apparently gets jealous too. What a jerk. No thanks.
You said, "The very first sin in the bible, the desire to know what God knows", and "This is the chief sin on Gods hit list, Pride."
Wat is the bigger sin? Wanting to know what your imaginary friend knows, or claiming to know it?
"His coming turned family members against one another in that one family member believed and the other did not. The proverbs verse is more along the lines of a troublemaking family member."
So what? Why should god have to require us to believe without proof? Pretty vain for the ultimate diety. Doing so splits families apart which you say your god is against. It is more "do as I say not as I do". And christianity teaches humans are part of god's family, he should follow his own advice and quit being such a troublemaker.
Either one would qualify, don’t you think?
Moron, LinCa asked which was bigger. Can you read? Doesn't look like it.
People create gods in their own image. It's little wonder that Robert's god is a torturing ass hole.
He has given us everything we need to come to him.
Could creation telling the creator what he should do be called pride?
Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son,
I think what she was saying was that I claim to know.
"He has given us everything we need to come to him."
No he hasn't. That is a lie. The bible is BS, the god of the bible isn't anything to worship or emulate.
"Could creation telling the creator what he should do be called pride?"
No because the only thing the "god" of the bible created is false claims and immorality. That god is no more real than Vishnu.
Ahh the poor sack of sh!t Robert Brown and his paint job over his bs.
What does it smell like now – at this very moment? Could it be putrid blue? With a dash of odour du cretin?
Here's what Jesus said about heteros and their Ten Commandment sin of ADULTERY:
– Matthew 10:11 “And He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her;”
– Matthew 19:9 “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."
Here's what Jesus say in condemnation of hom0s-xuals:
Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Zero.
You'd never know that from listening to all the Christian HYPOCRITES.
Every word in the entire Bible is Jesus' words. Leviticus 20:13 is Jesus words regarding ho mose xuality and wherever the abomination is mentioned throughout the entire Bible it is listed as a sin.
Now that's an odd statement. Jesus went from being an abrasive reformer of Judaism to messiah to the...what...author? incarnation? of the writings accepted by Christians.
Every word in the entire Bible is Jesus' words. Leviticus 20:13 is Jesus words regarding ho mose xuality and wherever the abomination is mentioned throughout the entire Bible it is listed as a sin
truth be told
"Every word in the entire Bible is Jesus' word"s"
lol. So Jesus believes that r@pe victims should marry their rapists?
Does Jesus believe in slavery and discrimination against women?
Your arguments get more ridiculous and desperate all the time.
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God... Jesus always was the entire Word of God, Jesus never went from one position to another He always was God.
That is a mistranslation and you know it. To continue to misuse that passage that way after you have been repeatedly shown the Truth marks you a person devoid of honor or character.
Truth be told:
New International Version (NIV)
7:1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."
You do nothing to forward your cause for Christianity. What you are doing is at cross-purposes of everything our Lord Jesus ever preached. Hush, now.
truth be told:
According to you, Jesus believes that r@pe victims should marry their rapists., Jesus believes in slavery and discrimination against women.
Do you believe in them too?
know ye not that you are to judge angels
truth be told,
"Observer. That is a mistranslation and you know it."
WRONG again. It is from the largest selling English Bible. It was created by 100 scholars.
It is YOU who likely is mistranslating. Are you a Biblical SCHOLAR? Yes or no?
when you lie down with the Sodomites and Canaanites you come away with the comments like you just posted. Here is one from me to you...get behind me Satan.
I know the Hebrew to that passage having studied it. You are shown devoid of honor and character. You have no honest desire to ever see Truth.
Anyone who READ the Bible would know that the sin of Sodom was GREED.
Why not stop the mindless comments and spend time actually reading a Bible?
You said EVERY word of the bible is Jesus's words. UM? Have you read the bible? Ok so lets talk bible....you know most of it was written by MEN right? I am sure you would know that as you seem so well versed. NOT.
C'mon! Your comments on all the above topics are absurd.
In fact, the final canon of Scripture, thereafter recognised by all Christians for over 1,000 years, was settled on 28 August 397 AD by the Council of Carthage after the example set by St Cyril of Jerusalem in 350. Men did this, not god. Men also wrote all the contending books.
Truth be told, you are putting forth the statement that you are, in fact, an angel?
Did you actually just tell someone "get behind me satan"? K I am not wanting to panic here but...have you taken your meds?!
Holy double hockey sticks!
tbt. You do know that the OT pre-dates christianity?
I don't think he does know that. really.
Truth be told,
Mathew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
Huey Dewey and Louie each wear a different color. Does anyone know which is which?
They're like neutrinos, Chad. They can start out being one and change to another. But is this related to your God of Israel in some way?
@Chad, nowhere God said....my way or highway.
What was Jesus' way? He seemed to show love to people outside of God's chosen people.
The people in his hometown seemed to accept Jesus, until he reminds them that God's prophetic mission typically pushed beyond human boundaries – His mercy and healing are extended to those regared as outsiders. Not just God's 'chosen people'.
God's ways are always bigger and better than man's ways.
"Chad, nowhere God said....my way or highway."
you might consider reading the bible once...
To all religious pundits Chad, tbt: what is opposite of Sin? If there is no proper word in English, who told you Sin means always something bad?
sin is the act of violating God's will
obedience is the act of obeying Gods will
obedience is impossible with out Jesus Christ
So man's best friend the dog gets to go to heaven after all. That means dogs have souls.
"obedience is impossible with out Jesus Chris"
How totally HEARTLESS of God to send millions of people to hell because they never heard of Jesus. Disgraceful.
Chad, I did not ask to spell out, why not use disobedience for sin?
So hanging Chad, what of all the billions of people who don't recognize your god and therefore are not obdient?
They will all go to hell, and only the ones that believe the way you say get the heaven pass?
You yourself say god controls everything, so it must have control over what those people who don't believe in it believe.
So your god makes people purposefully not believe in it so they can then be sent to eternal misery in hell?
You really believe that?
Like so many other westerners, Russ, I've read the bible. It is a load of crap. Please stop pushing it and your sicko blood cult at me. I've already seen right through the Christian fairy tales and there ain't no going back. Maybe some day you'll get your head out of your ass and progress that far.
So come on s-c-u-m-b-a-g ... do re-introduce myself to the one and true god that is Zeus. What about the Spaghetti Monster? Oh I love Italian pastas... mhm mhm mhm – delicious.
I think religions would benefit from having good science advisors. If you want to stick to the belief that god created man, ok. There is no need to try to dispute a physical fact like evolution. You could say evolution operates on living things but isn't responsible for man, or god used evolution to make man (like putting a bun in the oven). Disputing evolution is no diferent that disputing the spheroid nature of earth, or disputing that the earth orbits the sun.
Worth your consideration...
1) the evolutionary argument against naturalism
2) CS Lewis' critique of scientism
In addition to a few science advisors you have to have built in flexibility enough to handle changes in scientific understanding.
C.S. Lewis was an arrogant asshat.
So is Russ.
Some very valid points. Science is not the sole source of useful knowledge. Art, literature, etc are key to fulfillment. I didn't say otherwise. I said religions ignore science and physical facts and don't need to to preserve their ideas. Ignoring science makes them look dumb and unnecessarily makes their followers less smart. Why do that?
The catholic church did that for years. They just recently proclaimed that the earth was in fact NOT the center of the universe, like some 400 years after the fact had come out.
And religion is trying to use science as you say when they come up with stuff like intelligent design.
They lost that, but they will come up with yet another contrived story to try to inject their magic sky fairy into the conversation.
The are fundies, it's what they do....
See Francis Collins, the physician-geneticist noted for his discoveries of disease genes and his leadership of the Human Genome Project (HGP). He currently serves as Director of the National Inst itutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland.
Collins has described his parents as "only nominally Christian" and by graduate school he considered himself an atheist. However, dealing with dying patients led him to question his religious views, and he investigated various faiths. He familiarized himself with the evidence for and against God in cosmology, and used Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis as a foundation to re-examine his religious view. He eventually came to a conclusion, and became an Evangelical Christian during a hike on a fall afternoon. He has described himself as a "serious Christian".
In his 2006 book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Collins considers scientific discoveries an "opportunity to worship". In his book Collins rejects Young Earth creationism and intelligent design. His own belief is theistic evolution or evolutionary creation which he prefers to term BioLogos.
I know Francis Collins. He's a fine, respectable fellow. Very insightful . I know his back story as Christian, but he doesn't impose on people with it. He fully embraces Darwinian evolutionary dynamics.
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
– Albert Einstein
From Sam Harris' "The Strange Case of Francis Collins" –
"In fact, to read The Language of God is to witness nothing less than an intellectual suicide. It is, however, a suicide that has gone almost entirely unacknowledged: The body yielded to the rope; the neck snapped; the breath subsided; and the corpse dangles in ghastly discomposure even now—and yet, polite people everywhere continue to celebrate the great man’s health."
I've only seen Sam Harris get his knickers in a wad over the evils of the God of Israel. Isn't he a match for Chad?
@ Bostontola: yes, religion has been very guilty of ignoring science at various times. i agree that is a problem. but i think you missed the thrust of my response...
1) the first link is an argument by philosopher Alvin Plantinga pointing out that evolutionary theory itself contradicts methodological naturalism (science's foundation). or to flip your initial reasoning: maybe it's scientists who need to seek the advice of some philosophers...
2) science is not the same as scientism.
science is a discipline based on human observation. scientism is a faith.
science poses no threat to religion (physics cannot speak to metaphysics; it presupposes it). scientism seeks to supplant it.
if you watch the rest of the video, you'll see how CS Lewis articulates his concerns about the fundamental flaws of scientism. He notes 3 marks of scientism: it tends to treat science as...
1) a religion (instead of information)
2) credulity (explaining away everything also explains away one's own argument)
3) a quest for power
his goal: rescue science from scientism.
much of what is advanced in the comments on this blog is scientism, not science.
Thanks, Russ, that was helpful for me.
I have to remind myself that science used to say the world was flat, not just religion.
I didn't miss it, I responded to your point 2 because we had some agreement. Your first point I disagree with. The philosophical point is not even close to agree on by philosophers, never mind scientists. I personally think it has numerous logical flaws and is bunk.
Mr. Harris "gets his knickers in a wad" over a wide range of claims made without good evidence. He is especially concerned about Islam being used to justify acts of terrorism, but Christianity doesn't get a pass. Check out his website – much food for thought.
You point out a key difference between science and religion. Science will modify its position as new information is found and verified. Religion irrationally adheres to untenable positions for very long times.
@ Bostontola: that knife cuts both ways – especially in ethics...
is racism always wrong? what if evolutionary science begins to say one race is more advanced than another? would that support Hitler's claims of a uber-race?
again, pitting science against religion is inherently flawed.
as I said above, physics cannot speak to metaphysics – it presupposes it.
would you mock the road for not being as mobile as the car that drives on it?
As I said, I don't disagree with that point. Ethics are relative and culturally variant.
Yes, our knowledge of both science and religion is partial.
Some belief systems actually embrace this. Maybe not typically in our American society.
But I do. And I know other people like me. We discuss about science and technology in church. We pray for advances that will help people.
What we know from science is an unimaginably small fraction of all there is to know. What is fascinating to me is that as we discover more and more at an accelerated rate, a natural explanation of our universe is more and more consistent, where the old world religious explanation becomes more and more tenuous. That doesn't prove no god, but it does prove religion is wrong in many ways.
I find it fascinating. I think through science we reveal more truths about God and his creation.
Although I belong to a church that states:
"There is no inherent conflict between scientific findings and the understanding of God as creator, redeemer and sanctifier."
Actually, December, science contradicts the absurd rubbish that is in the Christian book of horrors AKA the bible on pretty much every page of that silly book. In that sense, science is revealing, but revealing of the sheer BS of the whole wicked set of Christian fairy tales. Here are just a few examples, from thousands:
The Genesis 1 creation account conflicts with the order of events that are known to science. In Genesis, the earth is created before light and stars, birds and whales before reptiles and insects, and flowering plants before any animals. The order of events known from science is just the opposite. 1:1-2:3
God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day (1:14-19). And how could there be "the evening and the morning" on the first day if there was no sun to mark them? 1:3-5
God spends one-sixth of his entire creative effort (the second day) working on a solid firmament. This strange structure, which God calls heaven, is intended to separate the higher waters from the lower waters. 1:6-8
Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (1:14-19). 1:11
God lets "the earth bring forth" the plants, rather than creating them directly. Maybe Genesis is not so anti-evolution after all. 1:11
In an apparent endorsement of astrology, God places the sun, moon, and stars in the firmament so that they can be used "for signs". This, of course, is exactly what astrologers do: read "the signs" in the Zodiac in an effort to predict what will happen on Earth. 1:14
God makes two lights: "the greater light [the sun] to rule the day, and the lesser light [the moon] to rule the night." But the moon is not a light, but only reflects light from the sun. And why, if God made the moon to "rule the night", does it spend half of its time moving through the daytime sky? 1:16
"He made the stars also." God spends a day making light (before making the stars) and separating light from darkness; then, at the end of a hard day's work, and almost as an afterthought, he makes the trillions of stars. 1:16
"And God set them [the stars] in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth." 1:17
In verse 11, God "let the earth bring forth" the plants. Now he has the earth "bring forth" the animals as well. So maybe the creationists have it all wrong. Maybe God created livings things through the process of evolution. 1:24
God gave humans dominion over every other living thing on earth. 1:26
God commands us to "be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over ... every living thing that moveth upon the earth." 1:28
"I have given you every herb ... and every tree ... for meat."
Since many plants have evolved poisons to protect against animals that would like to eat them, God's advice is more than a little reckless. Would you tell your children to go out in the garden and eat whatever plants they encounter? Of course not. But then, you are much nicer and smarter than God. 1:29
All animals were originally herbivores. Tapeworms, vampire bats, mosquitoes, and barracudas – all were strict vegetarians, as they were created by God. 1:30
"God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good." He purposefully designed a system that ensures the suffering and death of all his creatures, parasite and host, predator and prey. 1:31
In Genesis 1 the entire creation takes 6 days, but the universe is 13.7 billion years old, with new stars constantly being formed. 1:31
Humans were not created instantaneously from dust and breath, but evolved over millions of years from simpler life forms. 2:7
God fashions a woman out of one of Adam's ribs.
Because of this story, it was commonly believed (and sometimes it is still said today) that males have one less rib than females. When Vesalius showed in 1543 that the number of ribs was the same in males and females, it created a storm of controversy. 2:19
God curses the serpent. From now on the serpent will crawl on his belly and eat dust. One wonders how he got around before – by hopping on his tail, perhaps? But snakes don't eat dust, do they? 3:14
Because Adam listened to Eve, God cursed the ground and causes thorns and thistles to grow. Before this, according to the (false) Genesis story, plants had no natural defenses. The rose had no thorn, cacti were spineless, holly leaves were smooth, and the nettle had no sting. Foxgloves, oleander, and milkweeds were all perfectly safe to eat. 3:17-18
Go here for more:
I've seen websites that scientifically discredit the Bible.
I've seen websites that scientifically support the Bible.
And I can copy and paste a huge list.
Some of our current scientific theories seem to contradict with the origin story in the Bible.
In a couple hundred years these scientific theories probably will not seem as reasonable as they do now.
So we don't really know.
I don't worship the Bible. I worship what the Bible points to: God.
The Bible doesn't say exactly when the universe was created. But, Psalm 90:2-4 directly refers to the creation period where God "formed the earth" and, in that context, says that a day could be any amount of time to God ("a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday"). God was obviously the only observer of creation. The word "day" (Hebrew yom) can mean a period of time or epoch, and "evening and the morning" (Hebrew ereb and boqer), found in Genesis 1, can be plural (e.g. Daniel 8:14 & 26) rather than singular, enabling the creation period to be billions of evenings and mornings in six epochs. Arguments that '"yom" plus a number' are always interpreted to mean 24 hour days is a nice statistic but there is no rule preventing yom from being legitimately interpreted as an indeterminate period of time or epoch. And, as previously explained in Psalm 90:2-4, days are defined as long periods of time in the context of creation. In addition, in Genesis 2:4, yom is interpreted to mean the whole six days of creation. Thus, billions of evenings and mornings in each of 6 epochs/days is a legitimate interpretation.
Go here for more
The earth is a flat disc that God looks down upon from his throne in heaven. 40:22
Dragons and owls will thank God for irrigation. 43:20
"My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure."
Unlike the god of the process theologians, the God of Isaiah is in full control of his creation; he has pre-ordained everything. 46:10-11
God set the earth on foundations so it doesn't move, his hand is as big as the universe, and the stars stand up straight when he calls them. 48:13
God cut Rahab (the sea monster) to pieces, wounded the dragon, and dried up the sea. 51:9-10
"Neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee." Of course the moon doesn't give off light, but only reflects the light from the sun. 60:19
Immortal worms: "Their worm shall not die" 66:24
"We shall overcome because the Bible is right. 'You shall reap what you sow.'"
– Martin Luther King, Jr.
LOL, you sure are something
no.. Darwin embraced a purely natural gradualism (which has been put to death by Punctuated Equilibrium..)
Collins most certainly does not.
so, you not so subtle attempt to portray Collins as embracing a purely naturalistic process by which humans have achieved their current complexity utterly fails..
Oh, goodie, Chard's getting hives again. The smiley faces are back.
there are those who take the Bible seriously & have thoughtful reflections to your objections – but that assumes you actually want to engage that. it is certainly easier to assume Christians are all just idiots. but in case you're willing...
“In reading Chesterton, as in reading MacDonald, I did not know what I was letting myself in for. A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. There are traps everywhere — "Bibles laid open, millions of surprises," as Herbert says, "fine nets and stratagems." God is, if I may say it, very unscrupulous.”
― C.S. Lewis, Surprised by Joy
Like so many other westerners, Russ, I've read the bible seriously. It is a load of crap. Please stop pushing it and your sicko blood cult at me. I've already seen right through the Christian fairy tales and there ain't no going back. Maybe some day you'll get your head out of your ass and progress that far.
@ Bob: when you object to positions I don't hold, either:
a) you don't care enough to accurately portray those with whom you disagree
b) you are purposefully creating a straw man
c) you don't actually know/understand it
I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and put you in the latter camp.
The first two positions are merely distractions from any real, substantive conversation.
And more to the original point, most westerners (including the Church) have not read the bible seriously.
Jesus had a lot to say about that – even to those who did study it rigorously (Jn.5:39-40; Lk.24:27,44).
Add that to another sin CNN. showing boobs and butt ain't s e x y or classy just trashy.
I agree with CNN on this one.
All that does is tempting you to lust after a woman who is not your wife. Of course CNN is the proud sponsor of SIN.
Cover up nominees want to see class tomorrow on the red carpet.
The people want to see more action, down on that carpet.
The horrible sins that infect America are a cancer on this great land and should never be taken lightly. The three most damning sins in America today are atheism, abortion and ho mose xuality.
Read a Bible.
The horrible sins that infect America are a cancer on this great land and should never be taken lightly. The three most damning sins in America today are truth be told, captain america, and pervert alert.
Read a Bible in Hebrew and Greek, study the Word of God daily, seek God with all your heart and soul and mind.
The Bible NEVER mentions abortion.
Jesus never "trashed" gays, but "trashed" some hetero s-x practices.
Hetero ADULTERY is in the Ten Commandments (the list of leading sins).
The biggest cancer in this country is the belief in your god.
Speaking for myself I fit very well into one nation under God and all my sins are dealt with in the cross of Christ past, present and future. I am an asset to America. President George H W Bush has said I am a patriot as well. I can understand your bitterness at not being chosen but Truth be told it's your own fault.
"President George H W Bush has said I am a patriot"
Bush "talked to God all the time". He left the economy tanking, started a war for false reasons and was one of the worst presidents ever. Lot of good his coversations did.
Do not be deceived there are no gays only sick demented perverts, whose acts are accursed by Jesus and condemned. The entire Bible is the Word of God and all references are from Jesus. When ho mose xuality is described as an abomination in the law deserving of death...those are Jesus words.
Does the fable of the boy who cried "wolf" ring a bell, turdy? It should. You and your sort have no credibility.
speechless. How can you possibly say these things?! You are saying a people group deserve to die?!
If I were your mother I would wash your mouth out with soap....the anti bacterial kind.
"there are no gays only sick demented perverts, whose acts are accursed by Jesus"
lol. Read a Bible sometime. Give us an EXACT QUOTE from Jesus or the 12 MEN he hung around with. Ooops.
You brag about GWB? Seriously, tbt? Is that why he cannot leave the country because he has an international warrant out for his arrest for crimes against humanity?
This is who you hold up as the highest standard of patriotism? You are only not a decent Christian, you are not a decent human.
I'm not a bitter person; I just don't drink at your well of gullibility. Educate yourself.
Jesus is the great I AM, Jesus is God , Jesus is the Word of God. The entire Bible is the words of Jesus, all references to sin and judgment are Jesus words including ho mose xuality.
Oh, you were talking about Bush I, tbt. I see. Yes, he told me I was one of a thousand points of light, also. I guess I have been chosen.
Cite those "words" Jesus spoke about hom0s3xuality, you lying little turd.
"@observer. Wrong Bush."
Jesus is the great I AM, Jesus is God , Jesus is the Word of God. The entire Bible is the words of Jesus, all references to sin and judgment are Jesus words including ho mose xuality
When the fundies start quoting babble versus or hymns you know they have given up and have retreated into fairy tale land.
News flash Truth Be Sold, we don't care what the babble says, so quoting it is meaningless to us.
I was asked to provide the reference.
I asked for an EXACT quote from Jesus and you quote from the OLD TESTAMENT.
Why not read a Bible if you are going to pretend you know what it says?
Which part of the whole Bible being Jesus' words are you having trouble with?
Leviticus? It tells us it's a sin to eat lobster, dumbfvck.
And it never says hom0s3xuality is a sin. You're so stupid your ignorance sits on you like stink on a skunk.
truth be told,
"The three most damning and detestable sins in America today are atheism, ho mose xuality and abortion"
Read a Bible SOMETIME. lol.
Ho mos xuality is not part of the Ten Commandments, but hetero s-x practices are. Ooops.
Abortion isn't even mentioned in the Bible. Ooops again.
Do some Bible reading to avoid so many thoughtless statements.
You would be wrong there are not just ten commandments there are many more. Ho mose xuality is always an abomination and deserving of death, abortion appears as Baal worship, idolatry and warranting the destruction of a nation and atheism or disbelief also carries a death penalty in the ten commandments.
Read a Bible. Jesus says that anyone divorcing and remarrying commits the TEN COMMANDMENT sin of adultery (unless they had already married an adulterer)
The punishment for adultery is death according to your thinking. Ooops. SKIP the HYPOCRISY..
The wages of all sin is death. There is the physical death and there is a second death, the eternal death. The Christian is spared through the sacrifice of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. If you have not been born again there is no one to blame but yourself.
So Christian ADULTERERS go to heaven. lol.
Heaven is not gained by what you do or do not do it is gained by what Jesus did on the cross.
Jesus, if he's any kind of god, would deplore people like you, turd.
As all normal people know so called atheists are liars. There are extremely few of them and when given the opportunity they love to murder. More innocent people have been brutally tortured and murdered by atheists in the last 100 years than were killed in all previous centuries. Atheist doctors have murdered by abortion well over 200 million alone.
Truth actually be told, no atheist doctor ever did what God did when he murdered EVERY pregnant woman, child, baby and fetus ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH.
Get a girlfriend, honey. It's so sad you're alone with your sister's panties on a Saturday night.
again....your comments are appalling....verging on the absurd.
God's judgment is never murder. You are confused but since you are aware that judgment has already occurred you are without excuse.
"God's judgment is never murder. You are confused but since you are aware that judgment has already occurred you are without excuse."
lol. What SINS did the babies and fetuses commit to deserve punishment? None. It was MURDER.
We are not even aware there were babies or fetuses on earth at that time, but since all flesh was corrupted we can be assured that if there were, they too would have been evil. Speaks of a responsibility you should have for your next generation doesn't it.
"We are not even aware there were babies or fetuses on earth at that time'
lol. Your comments are totally thoughtless. You are SOOO DESPERATE.
So I was looking for some info on natural abortions (miscarriages). While I couldn't find an exact number, the percentages listed seemed to hover around 30% of ALL pregnancies result in miscarriage. So doing a litte quick math and using a population less than 7B people, since we havent had quite that many people on the planet for the last 100 years or so, I arrived at an estimation of 26,250,000,000 deity sanctioned, all natural abortions in the last 100 years.
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.