It works like this:

At the time God made everything, there was no evil. There was only good and better.

God works in everything, because none of it would work at all if God did not work it. Since there wasn't any evil originally, there was no reason for God to NOT move in full force with the thing He was doing... bringing to birth children.

Then evil entered through the children and the devil selecting evil rather than good. But God was already moving in the direction of maintaining all things. You don't simply tell God to put on the brakes when He does something with His strength. The thing He did with His strength was to maintain everything... some of it with free choice, some of it evil, and some good.

The thing that God is doing to get rid of evil is, God is making a new universe where evil will not be allowed to enter. This present universe will crash, and once it does, there will be no remembrance of either the good or evil here. So, God is destroying the evil in His own way, even though a few people must live in pain for a hundred years here. When it is done, there will be no remembrance that it even happened.

God will take the people who are on His side - in favor of Him - to the new universe. The others will be destroyed in Hell, because they are the evil that God is getting rid of. Of course, because of the kind of beings people are, it will take all eternity for them to be destroyed. But they asked for it.

Birth defects are caused by many things they can be a result of genetics, lifestyle choices and behaviors, exposure to certain medications and chemicals, infections during pregnancy, a combination of these factors, ect.

Many of these drug use, alcohol consumption, smoking during pregnancy, inadequate prenatal care,
untreated bacterial infections can be traced to deliberate human action or inaction. Others like family history of birth defects or other genetic disorders are currently outside the realm of human choice. These are hopefully problems of ignorance and will be resolvable in the near future with our increasing knowledge.

You are correct that you can trace the ultimate cause of all events good and bad to God.  
So why did God create a universe where evil, horror, and suffering exist? The problem of evil is a deep question. Here is a short video on the subject I agree with.

Why Does God Allow Evil?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAexl_loCfg

I didn't watch all of the video , but it seemed that there were multiple issues involved.

The first one is fraud. If a person purchases a drink believing it to be alcoholic, and it isn't, then that is fraud in my opinion. If you don't want to do it, then state that you can only serve that person with an alcohol free drink.

The alcohol may not be the worst element in the drink. Some of the other ingredients may contain more damaging chemicals

Cheap alcohol is poison, and I don't think anybody should drink it.

I'm not a doctor, but I would have thought that a single glass of red wine could relax a pregnant woman, and provide her with an iron supplement that could be beneficial to both her and the baby. As with most things, moderation is the key - pregnant women shouldn't get drunk.

Lack of knowledge and education is another factor here. The mother should have sufficient knowledge, and care for the baby enough to avoid excessive alcohol, McDonalds food, sugary drinks, drugs or other harmful products.

Also I believe that more damage is done by the administration of pharmaceutical drugs to both the parent and the baby. I understand that the US now has a population where over 50% is sick or diseased, and is dependent on so called health aids.

Indeed, since the probability always reset whenever you spin.  The chance of winning the next bet isn't accumulating if we lost.  So there is always a possibility that we wont win in a 100 bet even if the chance is 50%.

And, if you (OP) are suspicious about the game, you can always ask the authority to inspect the softaware for you.  I bet you have the money to pay for these inspectors. 


Even with a low house edge, this is not an assurance that a player can win the roll.  Remember  it is still a game of chance and chance favors the house so there is a bigger possibility that player will lose.

Newborns clearly have not sinned. They may suffer however do to the choices made outside of their control. Children born with HIV are suffering because of the choices of the elder generation usually their father or mother. Human choices do harm the innocent.

Children with cancer are dying because a part of them has broken away and defected. It no longer acts in its assigned role for the greater good but instead strengths itself over the short run via unrestrained growth. Left unchecked that growth will eventually disrupt the delicate balance necessary for life and will end in death.

God can’t fail we can. We can fail because we have been given freedom. Our choices are not compelled.

This article had a nice summary on this topic.

God’s Anger
by Caleb Colley Ph.D.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1462

If you want to check if you are within the statistic, do the following:

1) Ask Bitcasino for the house edge of the slots you played

2) Calculate the total amount of all your bets

Example: If your total bets are 20 million Euro and the house edge is 3,5%, then you statistically lost 700,000 Euro.

So in summary, you have no retort to my points, and your argument consists of the narrative is true because that's what the official story is?

OOOh, of couuuurse... the comments. The comments are well known to be a reliable part of any article right? You seem to have an infatuation with trying to use comments as part of the argument of the substance of the article itself as if they are the same unit, and not created by random 3rd parties. I have scripts blocked so I don't read them anyway, and the comments are not part of my source.

"you always come up with some weird conspiracy shit, every time a famous actor/singer etc dies..."

What the fuck are you talking about? Oh right, you are projecting other people's actions on to me and collectivizing it as if I said these things I never actually said. Sorry but I am not responsible for the theorizing of other people. I am only responsible for my own statements.

BTW what the fuck does Sandy Hook have to do with ANY of this other than that they were both shootings? I never brought up Sandy Hook. This is more projection on your part, and totally off topic.

Everyone notice how he totally avoided responding to my very valid points in favor of this collective blame?

Common sense? Lets talk about common sense. Lets examine police protocol. Is it common sense that a police officer is firing at a target he can not see? No, police officers are trained to first identify a target before firing. It is not like the movies. They are not supposed to do things like fire into houses, through doors, or walls. If they can't see it they aren't supposed to be firing at it. Second of all one of the other things they drill into any gun owners head in any basic safety training is to always know what is behind your target. You might be aiming for an armed assailant, but if there are a bunch of kids 30ft behind him, shooting is not an option. This to a large degree also rules out a cop firing into what is basically a crowd of people running in every direction. Also as far as I remember in the report there was no mention of police on the ground firing. That is why I used the term "wildly" because if in fact your argument that "police aren't gods" and they make mistakes, and lets say one was just freaking out, that's exactly what he would be doing, firing wildly. Sound implausible? I agree, but the sad part is that is the most plausible explanation that makes any sense for it to be a police officer, your premise.

You made one quote in your statement other than quoting me directly. That quote. I know where my words came from. What did your quote come from? Give me a URL.

Thanks for all the responses. I would just like to say that I do not have a gambling problem. I just can't see how one person can deposit 700k EURO in 4 months and not win a single jackpot when I'm continuously playing max bet. There are thousands of videos on the net of people winning 20k EURO+ on 2 dollar bets. I bet 100 EURO for 500 spins and win maximums of 20x in bonus games or nothing at all. Does this make sense to anyone? I keep depositing because I'm hoping to actually get lucky once.

I am playing high bets every single day on bitcasino and I never manage to win anything. I think I won 5000 EURO on a 40 euro bet this month on reactoonz after loosing 10k euro. So 50% of my cash back. I buy huge bonuses all the time like 3 x 1 BTC (14,000 USD at the time per btc) bonus buys on some of the highest RTP slots and I just get dead spins and no wins.

I simply feel that I'm being taking advantage of because I'm a "High roller" as they call me on bitcasino. My VIP points were at 20 million for 10 days before I asked them to remove my loyalty program because the bonuses were terrible. You lose 30k EURO and you get 10 free spins on one of their slots. Its a joke really.

Here are a few of the bonuses I've gotten on max bets: https://imgur.com/a/x62Kcce

Look how many high bet free spins pay 0. How is that in any way fair?

I'm betting 200 EURO, get 24 free spins and win 10% of my initial bet back. This game only gives 8 free spins when its triggered. So I re triggered the bonus twice within the bonus. Still only a 30 EURO win.

I am convinced that something is wrong on my account and that I am destined to lose on this site. Taking from me to pay everyone else is what it feels like.

Please elaborate.

At the moment you do not need to enter payment id for Monero deposits.

Hey man, you're not very familiar with the Clinton case. Anyway, Trump also perjuried himself and covered up the evidence. It's pretty clear case of obstruction.

The best part of the whole thing is Mueller openly admitted Trump could be charged with obstruction if he wasn't president.

Of course, you don't care about evidence. You just like your conspiracies

God created life from dirt.

Was the Bible RIGHT about the origins of life? Scientists believe that we may have had our beginnings in CLAY
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2488467/Scientists-believe-beginnings-CLAY.html

God created man from life over time. So yes God created Adam from dirt. It probably took a long time for that dirt to go through various shapes and forms until it became Adam.

You should read up on how new species are thought to form. They probably initially exists as subsets within a larger population before branching off so yes the very first of what we would call human beings would presumably have existed among a larger planet wide population of prehumans they could breed with. Read the article on speciation I linked upthread.

At some point prehumans who did not have knowledge of good and evil obtained it and became the fallen creatures we refer to today as humans. The first two prehumans to "eat from the tree of knowledge" and the beginnings of our species are referred to as Adam and Eve.

Anyways that's my opinion on the matter. Other interpretations are out there and people should think about the issue for themselves.

There cannot be evidence against God. That is impossible as I highlighted above. One can make the case that there is evidence against the Bible. Its a very weak case. The more one dives into that text the more depth and complexity one finds. Like layers of an onion,

^^^ I only need an approximate value for the distance to the Sun to prove my point. However, since all of you Satan worshipping degenerates keep harping on about accuracy I'll give it some thought, perhaps I can devise a more accurate measure with modern equipment.

So in your mind police firing wildly at  "suspects" when we know the shooter was hundreds of yards away at an elevated position makes sense to you? First of all a police officer would never return fire up into a hotel like that for risk of hitting bystanders. Second of all, police don't just get to randomly shoot people they suspect. How does any of your explanation make any sense?

I would love to see where in my link you found that quote, I don't see it there. It is impossible for me to know the context of the words as a result. Also you are hinging your argument on handwriting writing analysis? Really?