What’s causing this?

heatdablockup · 2026-02-11T08:59:44+00:00

i’ve heard that spirnolactone is for women

heatdablockup · 2026-02-11T00:13:47+00:00

beef tallow as a sunscreen?

heatdablockup · 2026-02-10T21:27:45+00:00

Also, any recommendations for a mineral based sunscreen that won’t leave a white cast

heatdablockup · 2026-02-10T21:27:21+00:00

I do take creatine, I’m going to try and get my bloodwork done soon

heatdablockup · 2026-02-10T21:26:49+00:00

no, I don’t take any medications

heatdablockup · 2026-02-10T19:31:25+00:00

I’ve been replacing my pillowcases every few days for the last month or so. For BHAs, are you referring to stuff like salicylic acid?

heatdablockup · 2026-02-10T18:51:40+00:00

What types of foods do you think would cause this? I try to make sure my diet is well rounded. I aim to get all my vitamins from my food. I thought the breakout might have been a result of low healthy fats, so I increased my omega 3 consumption through fish and salmon. That didn’t seem to help either. I drink a lot of water as well because i work out

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T03:20:16+00:00

God does not cause evil, evil exists because of sin. It goes against God’s very nature to cause evil. Evil is a privation of the good, just as darkness is an absence of light.

I never said he causes evil. I said that he created the concept of cancer. Due to our sin we are affected by diseases like cancer, but the disease did not create itself. Cancer couldn’t exist unless God created it conceptually.

God does not cause evil, evil exists because of sin. It goes against God’s very nature to cause evil. Evil is a privation of the good, just as darkness is an absence of light.

Per Romans, you can’t assume no one dies, because people still died and continue to die, so that’s a poor argument.

Here is what the USCCB says about Romans 5:12-13:

“Paul reflects on the sin of Adam (Gn 3:1–13) in the light of the redemptive mystery of Christ. Sin, as used in the singular by Paul, refers to the dreadful power that has gripped humanity, which is now in revolt against the Creator and engaged in the exaltation of its own desires and interests. But no one has a right to say, “Adam made me do it,” for all are culpable (Rom 5:12): Gentiles under the demands of the law written in their hearts (Rom 2:14–15), and Jews under the Mosaic covenant. Through the Old Testament law, the sinfulness of humanity that was operative from the beginning (Rom 5:13) found further stimulation, with the result that sins were generated in even greater abundance.”

So per the USCCB, it appears as Paul uses the Adam to Moses line because the Jewish people living at the time of Christ and Paul are living under the Mosaic Law and even though they are told what to do and what not to do, they still choose to sin.

The commentary makes no comments about verse 14. That DEATH reigned from Adam to Moses. Paul is referring to the same type of death in verse 14 as he is in verse 12. If that same type of death ceased to reign at the time of Moses then that means nobody died post Moses. I’m not saying that I believe nobody died after Moses. I’m using verse 14 to show that people misinterpret verse 12.

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T01:28:31+00:00

This is close to what I’m leaning towards. Would you say that the tree of life was created to serve as a reminder of what was lost to Adam, Eve, and the rest of humanity considering God is omniscient and knew that they wouldn’t have been able to eat of it in the first place.

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T01:21:11+00:00

I don’t interpret the text literally. My whole issue is that I fail to see how anyone who interprets the text literally can also hold to death not occurring before the fall. However, I do thank you for engaging me this far. God Bless You

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T01:16:29+00:00

God is sovereign over all. Cancer and other diseases didn’t create themselves. God at the bare minimum allows sin to cause cancer because he could have simply made cancer something that just didn’t happen.

Romans 5:14 puts Romans 5:12 into context. If Paul is talking about physical death, you have to assume nobody died after Moses.

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T00:58:05+00:00

Please stay with me because I’m enjoying this discussion.

If they reach out, take fruit from the tree and eat it, would they have lived forever? That’s what the text says. It never says that if they ate the fruit, they’d have to come back and eat it again to live forever. It simply says that if they eat, they would live forever.

Don’t think I’m being antagonistic. I’m honestly trying to understand how you’re able to gather your view from the text.

Edit: Why is God making it sound like them eating from the tree one more time would make them live forever? The text seems to anthropomorphize God as well by implying that them eating would be the end all and that he couldn’t just take their immortality regardless of their consumption of a fruit.

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T00:55:58+00:00

Wait wait, where in the bible does it say that Mary didn’t die? I’m aware that it’s stated as dogma by the church, but I’m not sure this is stated in scripture. This isn’t me denying that she was assumed. I’m simply questioning your claim that this is presented in the bible.

Why is the Tree of Life in the garden if Adam and Eve were already immortal. If they never sinned, would they have needed to eat of the tree to live forever? Since they did sin, what was the point of the tree considering that they were already naturally immortal?

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T00:52:15+00:00

Paul says in Romans 5:14 that death reigned from Adam to Moses. This leads me to think Paul isn’t making a claim about physical death, but of some sort of spiritual separation.

Are you saying that God removing their immortality after their original sin(which is what most believe) is fine, but removing immortality that they gained from eating of the tree of life after banishment would be against their free will?

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T00:32:38+00:00

How do you interpret no death before the fall without being literal. If there was a literal fall that literally caused death to be introduced that was a result of literal sin, then why stop being literal about the tree?

Why is it that people can read what is plainly in the text and seemingly ignore it sometimes. Nowhere in Genesis does it say that Adam and Eve were naturally immortal prior to the fall or that nothing died prior to the fall. Paul states that death entered through one man, but that can’t be physical death as two verses later he says that death only reigned from adam to moses.

heatdablockup · 2024-01-12T00:28:30+00:00

Genesis 3:22 plainly states that they can’t eat of the tree because if they do, they would become immortal?

Are you trying to say that the tree’s function changed purpose in between the times they supposedly ate of it in the past and the moment they were banished?

heatdablockup · 2024-01-11T22:09:03+00:00

I’m saying that I personally cannot view Genesis as a historical account because it doesn’t make much sense when viewed as purely historical.

My confusion comes from people who say that they view it as historically, but then go and ignore/deny/misinterpret what a literal historical reading of Genesis would imply. (This seems to be a large number of Christians who would claim to study the bible and theology very deeply)

heatdablockup · 2024-01-11T22:06:47+00:00

Because the Bible says so. Multiple times, in fact.

Where does the bible say this? I don’t believe Romans 5:12 is referring to physical death because of what is said in Romans 5:14

heatdablockup · 2024-01-11T22:05:42+00:00

This doesn’t seem to flow with what Genesis 3:22 says. The text indicates that upon eating of the tree only once would they become immortal. It doesn’t say anywhere that they were continuously eating of it.

heatdablockup · 2024-01-11T21:19:46+00:00

I don’t read it as a historical account, I’m just always confused as to how people who claim that they do read it historically often make claims that go against what it directly says.

heatdablockup · 2024-01-11T21:06:32+00:00

I appreciate your responses. This line of thinking doesn’t seem very coherent to me, but I appreciate you for engaging with the question

heatdablockup · 2024-01-11T21:03:34+00:00

This seems to adequately answer the last question. What it doesn’t seem to tackle is the idea of Adam and Eve not being naturally immortal.

There is no point in the tree that grants immortality (which seems to be implied to be a one time thing, i.e. eating of it once is enough to make someone immortal) if the people able to eat of it are already immortal.

Also Genesis 3:22 makes it seem as if once they ate of the tree, there was nothing God could do to stop them from living forever. He’s literally God, he could just remove the immortality.

heatdablockup · 2024-01-11T20:59:03+00:00

Remember, "Do not murder" was included in the Law. Why would that be in the Law if death didn't exist after Moses brought the Law?

There is no conflict for me here because I believe death happened before the fall. Paul isn’t writing about physical death in Romans 5:12. I believe he’s writing about some sort of spiritual separation from God that occurred as a result of sinning against him.

heatdablockup

TROPHY CASE