|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Abortion - 8/24/2008 11:07:05 PM
|
|
|
solo_soprano22
Posts: 2472
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
quote:
Given the miscarriage rate before the second trimester alone (relative to the second trimester), I am under the impression that more steps were taken to protect the fetus (either through guided evolution or intelligent design) in the second trimester than the first. I think science and secular logic seem to lean towards a notion that the fetus is neither fully alive at conception nor inhuman right before birth, and I think the biggest bump we see in the fetus looking like a human seems to come in this one three or four week process- when the embryonic stem cells specialize and neurons rapidly form in the brain.
An embryo (not a fetus) will more than likely abort itself (as opposed to a fetus) because there is some error that can't be corrected.... triploidy, severe genetic defect, etc. A fetus has gone through those big changes already, and is basically just growing in size and function rather than trying to do those really vital things it had to do in the first eight weeks. During the fetal stage a flaw is less likely to be devastating (and deadly) like it would be in the embryo stage. Of course, there are always exceptions.
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/24/2008 11:49:01 PM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 1269
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
quote:
ORIGINAL: ManimalX
The Trinity isn't mentioned in the Bible, so we should abandon that idea. The Rapture isn't mentioned in the Bible, so we should stop expecting Jesus to come for His saints. Dinosaurs aren't in the Bible, so we should probably stop believing that man and dinosaurs walked together. Bologna sammies aren't mentioned in the Bible, so someone should tell Oscar Meyer that they are selling imaginary products.
On the other hand, abortion was a controversial moral issue during the time of the Romans, at the NRLC has noted. One would think that there would be teachings in at least the New Testament considering that abortion was an issue in his time, and he knew it would become an issue in our time.
Blessed... just because every specific thing that could ever happen at any moment in time is not spelled out in the Bible, the principle is there. God didn't have to inspire one of the apostles to write, "Matt, when you are tempted to put extra hours on your time sheet for work, don't do it because this would be dishonest and sinful", because the principle of honesty and being a good employee are already there. God gave us brains and the Holy Ghost to figure out the specifics.
The principle in the Bible is that the giving and taking of life is God's alone. He commands us not to murder, and gives a few specific instances when it IS our prerogative to end a life. The principle in the Bible is that God knows every one of us intimately before we are even formed in the womb, and that He is responsible for the growth that happens from the moment of conception.
The fact that you just dismiss parts of the Bible because they don't fit your preconceived determination of what is good and what is bad is actually really scary. When I first read your post, I almost started cussing in fury about how a professing Christian could so flippantly just dismiss God's PLAIN word.
quote:
Many people take life by eating meat; others take life by hunting. The very act of walking sometimes takes the life of ants. Life is precious and a creation of God that we aren't to take lightly, but not all life is human.
One of the things that makes humans distinct from the other animals what happens inside of our consciousness.
Who gives a flip about hunting? There is a distinct difference between animal life and human life. We are made in the very image of God, while animals aren't. They are placed under our dominion, to use and enjoy as is righteous, and the Bible has specific guidelines for the treatment of animals. Human life is exponentially more important, and we DO NOT have dominion over the ending of it.
quote:
The only thing that is physically different is the presence of cell walls and the DNA. A novice looking in a microscope would have trouble figuring out which is which.
This argument follows from the logical fallacy, "appeal to authority". I don't see any actual explanation for reasoning that human life starts at conception in here, so I am not going to address these arguments.
And your argument follows the the fallacy of being wrong. If you want to read the dissertations, books, and relevant research material of the CREDENTIALED DOCTORS and SCIENTISTS that I quoted, I gave you very specific sources from which to do so. These people are all knowledgeable in the relevant fields to make professional assessments of what constitutes biological life. If you have an authority problem, that is beyond anything I can influence. You have repeatedly been provided evidence from both God's word and professional doctors and scientists that life begins at conception and that the termination of life for convenience is not part of humanity's job description. You can reject man's word, but you should be very careful about elevating your ill-informed subjective opinion to the status of truth while foolishly rejecting God's word.
You have yet to provide any Scripture at all that shows how it is OK for a Christian to help elevate a ruler who calls "evil" "good".
I really hope that God keeps putting this in front of you until you get it, because we need all of the Christians we can standing up for truth in these dark days.
This may be my last post for a while, as I am back to working on my degree as of Monday. I will try to post when possible, but my work load will be quite demanding when added in with full-time work, full-time parenting and full-time husbanding. As it is written in Numbers 6, may the lLord bless and keep you, and make His face to shine upon, and be gracious, and give you peace.
_____________________________
"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed." - 2nd Peter 3:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 1:50:27 AM
|
|
|
tracydolls
Posts: 1839
Joined: 3/30/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
The fact that government sanctions such an act is sinful as well. Those in authority are held accountable... The fact that something is law doesn't grant it immunity from God's law.
Same thing with the Death Penalty and numerous other laws we have on the books.
But we love this Civlil Gov't I thought ?
quote:
Is there some verse that says not to defend one's actions with the bible? Where the world wants God's people to conform to the world we cannot use the bible to defend maintaining our faith in Christ? Very interesting view...
My faith in Christ has nothing to do with defending ones political points of view. Especially a man I have made clear I'm not voting for.
I said what I believe. If we are basing it on someones sins, NONE of them should be elected. Liars won't be in Heaven. So therefore none of them should be elected.
quote:
Strange, you seem to be attempting to use the bible to defend someone....
Who? I made it clear I would'nt defend Bo or you or anyone else.
We are all sinners.
quote:
It takes some serious pride to believe one can take life unjustly and God will not deal with it accordingly... Not a speck of the fear of God spoken of in His word...
Tell me how does one TAKE life unjustly? The Good Lord deals with us all accordingly! Just like you or I have to answer for our sins, so does BO.
And it's all whom God choses.
At this point with me, you are singing to the choir.
_____________________________
Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 8:12:07 AM
|
|
|
huskarine
Posts: 444
Joined: 7/31/2008
From: Wheaton, IL
Status: offline
|
it is realistically impossible to biblically defend abortion...
we don't know when life begins, so it is best not to take it in the beginning at all...
for me, abortion is the most important issue to me, and the first i consider in a vote...
but here is another thing to consider: is it possible to separate morality from the Bible? can ypi separate our laws from morality? this will determine the amount of impact moral laws should have personally when voting...
personally, i think they are inseparable, and America has been in decline since we have been trying to do so...and issues as abortion and gay marriage (which were once non-issues, now dominate our minds) have to have relevance in our vote in order to preserve the inherent morality in our laws.
but on a different tangent, it is truly sad about our country's direction...here we are facing these issues...imagine if they were non-issues (in other words, banned), where would our focus and direction be??? shouldn't that be our outlook??? can we get there without morality??? i believe not. (which is why abortion and gay marriage have to have relevance now when voting, but this is all to the side comparing to the atrocity that abortion is in itself)...
_____________________________
"Success is equated with excess/the ambition for excess wrecks us/as the top of the mind becomes the bottom line/when success is equated with excess" -Switchfoot "American Dream"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Biblically Defend Obama: Abortion - 8/25/2008 10:06:03 AM
|
|
|
CCCdnt
Posts: 359
Joined: 3/10/2006
Status: offline
|
I have not read much further than this in this thread and do not have a lot of time at the moment, but I wanted to comment on this.
quote:
ORIGINAL: saved9201
As despicable as it may be to some of us, that life inside the mother is part of the mothers body, and some have chosen at some point that they don't want that part of their body anymore.
It is really quite amazing that this argument is still used. The baby is not in any way a part of the mother's body. This is easily refuted. For one, the unborn baby can have a different blood type from the mother which would not be possible if the baby were a part of the woman’s body. This article - How the unborn child defends itself against its mother, confirming that it is a separate human being from the start – shows without question why the unborn baby is not a part of the mother’s body.
_____________________________
http://www.abort73.com
See for Yourself
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Biblically Defend Obama: Abortion - 8/25/2008 10:41:33 AM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 1269
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CCCdnt
I have not read much further than this in this thread and do not have a lot of time at the moment, but I wanted to comment on this.
quote:
ORIGINAL: saved9201
As despicable as it may be to some of us, that life inside the mother is part of the mothers body, and some have chosen at some point that they don't want that part of their body anymore.
It is really quite amazing that this argument is still used. The baby is not in any way a part of the mother's body. This is easily refuted. For one, the unborn baby can have a different blood type from the mother which would not be possible if the baby were a part of the woman’s body. This article - How the unborn child defends itself against its mother, confirming that it is a separate human being from the start – shows without question why the unborn baby is not a part of the mother’s body.
Thanks for pointing that out CCC. I didn't respond to this flawed argument earlier because I didn't have time, but I am glad you were on the ball :)
_____________________________
"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed." - 2nd Peter 3:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 11:10:36 AM
|
|
|
solo_soprano22
Posts: 2472
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
quote:
If you want to read the dissertations, books, and relevant research material of the CREDENTIALED DOCTORS and SCIENTISTS that I quoted, I gave you very specific sources from which to do so. These people are all knowledgeable in the relevant fields to make professional assessments of what constitutes biological life. If you have an authority problem, that is beyond anything I can influence. You have repeatedly been provided evidence from both God's word and professional doctors and scientists that life begins at conception and that the termination of life for convenience is not part of humanity's job description.
You're completely misconstruing what some of us say and mean.
No one is disagreeing with your "DOCTORS" and "SCIENTISTS," BUT, science CANNOT tell us what is moral. I'm a scientist (biologist), and I AGREE with what they say. NO ONE here is disagreeing with the doctors and scientists. No scientist can definitively use science to tell us what's moral. I can't; the next scientist/doctor can't.... if he has a PhD in biology, physiology, chemistry, biophysics, pharmacology, etc. and an MD-- he still can't tell us what's moral from what he studies or observes in his lab. You can see a zygote under a light microscope (and agree that it is biologically/genetically human). I guess these "special" doctors/scientists you quote can also look into their special microscopes and tell us at what point a biological human has a soul (attains personhood).
What we're saying is that biological life, which we all DO agree begins at conception, does not even tell us when personhood begins. That's all.
You can quote science until you're blue in the face; science does not have the ability to tell us what is moral and ethical. What you're doing is attempting to use science to do just that. That's not its job. It just isn't. I know you can't see that (from your posts), but that's what some of us are trying to get across. Now, if you think that conception=personhood (we ALL DO agree that biological life begins at conception), then that's your personal belief. But biology doesn't tell us what's moral. There's not been a time when it could, and I suspect that the bioethics I spend a great deal of time studying would have been by the wayside if I could use what I learn in labs to tell me what is moral and ethical. Doesn't work that way, but Christians on this point try to force it to to "prove" their stance.
But I guess that's why so many Christians.... whatever field they're in, just don't use science to tell us what's moral on this point. That's not what it's for, and science has never been able to tell us when ensoulment occurs. It tells us biology, and we all can agree on that. It can only take us so far.
As far as voting is concerned, I don't like Obama.  But, from what I see, both support abortion.
< Message edited by solo_soprano22 -- 8/25/2008 1:06:41 PM >
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 11:25:33 AM
|
|
|
huskarine
Posts: 444
Joined: 7/31/2008
From: Wheaton, IL
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: solo_soprano22
quote:
If you want to read the dissertations, books, and relevant research material of the CREDENTIALED DOCTORS and SCIENTISTS that I quoted, I gave you very specific sources from which to do so. These people are all knowledgeable in the relevant fields to make professional assessments of what constitutes biological life. If you have an authority problem, that is beyond anything I can influence. You have repeatedly been provided evidence from both God's word and professional doctors and scientists that life begins at conception and that the termination of life for convenience is not part of humanity's job description.
You're completely misconstruing what some of us say and mean.
No one is disagreeing with your "DOCTORS" and "SCIENTISTS," BUT, science CANNOT tell us what is moral. I'm a scientist (biologist), and I AGREE with what they say. NO ONE here is disagreeing with the doctors and scientists. No scientist can definitively use science to tell us what's moral. I can't; the next scientist/doctor can't.... if he has a PhD in biology, physsiology, chemistry, biophysics, pharmacology, etc. and an MD-- he still can't tell us what's moral from what he studies or observes in his lab. You can see a zygote under a light microscope (and agree that it is biologically/genetically human). I guess these "special" doctors/scientists you quote can also look into their special microscopes and tell us at what point a biological human has a soul (attains personhood).
What we're saying is that biological life, which we all DO agree begins at conception, does not even tell us when personhood begins. That's all.
You can quote science until you're blue in the face; science does not have the ability to tell us what is moral and ethical. What you're doing is attempting to use science to do just that. That's not its job. It just isn't. I know you can't see that (from your posts), but that's what some of us are trying to get across. Now, if you think that conception=personhood (we ALL DO agree that biological life begins at conception), then that's your personal belief. But biology doesn't tell us what's moral. There's not been a time when it could, and I suspect that the bioethics I spend a great deal of time studying would have been by the wayside if I could use what I learn in labs to tell me what is moral and ethical. Doesn't work that way, but Christians on this point try to force it to to "prove" their stance.
But I guess that's why so many Christians.... whatever field they're in, just don't use science to tell us what's moral on this point. That's not what it's for, and science has never been able to tell us when ensoulment occurs. It tells us biology, and we all can agree on that. It can only take us so far.
As far as voting is concerned, I don't like Obama. But, from what I see, both support abortion.
so true...nice...
absolutely correct...we are different. we have souls...so when is the soul created??? can we judge that??? we can't, and we still don't know. Only God does.
_____________________________
"Success is equated with excess/the ambition for excess wrecks us/as the top of the mind becomes the bottom line/when success is equated with excess" -Switchfoot "American Dream"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 12:20:57 PM
|
|
|
davemiller7
Posts: 1058
Joined: 3/5/2008
From: NC via NY
Status: offline
|
You can argue your zygote/embryo/fetus/personhood/consciousness all you want, but if you believe, as you say you do, that life begins at conception, then how can you say that abortion is not murder? The life that begins at conception (from a human egg and human sperm) is going to go through the various stages you mention (barring anything natural halting it). The sperm-egg combination is going to be a human being. It isn't going to be algae, a tree, a fish, a dog, or even a monkey. Intentionally aborting that combination of sperm-egg at any point is denying the sperm-egg the opportunity of being a human being and has to be considered murder, because it is alive.
-Dave
quote:
ORIGINAL: solo_soprano22
quote:
If you want to read the dissertations, books, and relevant research material of the CREDENTIALED DOCTORS and SCIENTISTS that I quoted, I gave you very specific sources from which to do so. These people are all knowledgeable in the relevant fields to make professional assessments of what constitutes biological life. If you have an authority problem, that is beyond anything I can influence. You have repeatedly been provided evidence from both God's word and professional doctors and scientists that life begins at conception and that the termination of life for convenience is not part of humanity's job description.
You're completely misconstruing what some of us say and mean.
No one is disagreeing with your "DOCTORS" and "SCIENTISTS," BUT, science CANNOT tell us what is moral. I'm a scientist (biologist), and I AGREE with what they say. NO ONE here is disagreeing with the doctors and scientists. No scientist can definitively use science to tell us what's moral. I can't; the next scientist/doctor can't.... if he has a PhD in biology, physsiology, chemistry, biophysics, pharmacology, etc. and an MD-- he still can't tell us what's moral from what he studies or observes in his lab. You can see a zygote under a light microscope (and agree that it is biologically/genetically human). I guess these "special" doctors/scientists you quote can also look into their special microscopes and tell us at what point a biological human has a soul (attains personhood).
What we're saying is that biological life, which we all DO agree begins at conception, does not even tell us when personhood begins. That's all.
You can quote science until you're blue in the face; science does not have the ability to tell us what is moral and ethical. What you're doing is attempting to use science to do just that. That's not its job. It just isn't. I know you can't see that (from your posts), but that's what some of us are trying to get across. Now, if you think that conception=personhood (we ALL DO agree that biological life begins at conception), then that's your personal belief. But biology doesn't tell us what's moral. There's not been a time when it could, and I suspect that the bioethics I spend a great deal of time studying would have been by the wayside if I could use what I learn in labs to tell me what is moral and ethical. Doesn't work that way, but Christians on this point try to force it to to "prove" their stance.
But I guess that's why so many Christians.... whatever field they're in, just don't use science to tell us what's moral on this point. That's not what it's for, and science has never been able to tell us when ensoulment occurs. It tells us biology, and we all can agree on that. It can only take us so far.
As far as voting is concerned, I don't like Obama. But, from what I see, both support abortion.
_____________________________
-Dave
The Prayer of Protection
The light of God surrounds me,
The love of God enfolds me,
The power of God protects me,
The presence of God watches over me.
Wherever I am, God is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 2:23:03 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
My whole point is that there is no defense that is required. Something should be permissible until and unless we have relatively hard evidence for why it shouldn't be permissible.
From a Biblical perspective, there is nothing anywhere that states that abortion is a sin, and any evidence that life/personhood starts before conception is extremely hazy at best. In this country, we want to be relatively sure of things before we prohibit them, and I don't see the Bible stating in clear prose that life begins at conception.
Strange that you can't see that yet you attempted to say the bible said one cannot drink when in fact it doesn't say that... As well you seem to doubt Christ turned water into wine...
quote:
So I think I've provided a strong secular argument, and since I don't see any clear Biblical evidence to contradict this, the secular argument should stand. I respect the views of those who see things differently, and I guess I can't provide a Biblical argument for people to change their minds, but they can't provide a Biblical argument to the contrary.
Given your biblical argument regarding drinking that you used here I am not convince you can recognize the Biblical argument regarding abortion. If you think the Biblical arguments given were hazy I can't think of the right word to describe your secular arguments...
Of course this doesn't count yet when Mr. Obama has to answer for this to God no secular argument will suffice...
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 29:12 If a ruler hearken to lies, all his servants are wicked.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 2:42:39 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tracydolls
Same thing with the Death Penalty and numerous other laws we have on the books.
According to what? Where does the bible say the Death Penalty is sinful?
quote:
But we love this Civlil Gov't I thought ?
We do?
quote:
I said what I believe. If we are basing it on someones sins, NONE of them should be elected. Liars won't be in Heaven. So therefore none of them should be elected.
So Jimmy Carter was an evil ruler like Stalin for instance?
quote:
Who? I made it clear I would'nt defend Bo or you or anyone else.
Yet you made a case right after saying that... After saying you wouldn't defend anyone you posted...
WE all fall short. There are worse sins than abortions.
quote:
We are all sinners.
Who are you defending with this?
quote:
Tell me how does one TAKE life unjustly?
I think it's called murder... Abortion is good example... Unless you can conjure up a just reason for taking the life of the unborn
quote:
The Good Lord deals with us all accordingly! Just like you or I have to answer for our sins, so does BO.
Actually some people have an Advocate and some don't....
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 29:12 If a ruler hearken to lies, all his servants are wicked.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 2:48:02 PM
|
|
|
Psalms274
Posts: 1355
Joined: 8/13/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
quote:
What we're saying is that biological life, which we all DO agree begins at conception, does not even tell us when personhood begins. That's all.
But Sunshine, the Word of God is very clear that "personhood" begins even before conception:
Jer. 1 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." This passage, and many others are very clear. God sees you as a fully formed human before you had entered that womb. Everything that He created you to be today was there when that sperm entered the egg. In His eyes, that is a baby, a child He has plans for ... He says so a number of times in His Word, and I am not one to argue with God on this matter, or any other for that point.
I have seen at least one person here argue on how these passages cannot be taken literally ... but MOST of the bible CAN be taken literally .... and when you examine all the commentaries on these particular passages, not one biblical scholar presents an alternate meaning.
_____________________________
I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ.
< Linus w/ a friends baby!
http://piswa.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 2:59:02 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2069
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
I have seen at least one person here argue on how these passages cannot be taken literally ... but MOST of the bible CAN be taken literally .... and when you examine all the commentaries on these particular passages, not one biblical scholar presents an alternate meaning.
Unfortunately, the pro-death crowd cannot afford to take this passage literally, or else their entire argument falls apart...
_____________________________
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' - Ronald Reagan
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 3:12:21 PM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1967
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
Strange that you can't see that yet you attempted to say the bible said one cannot drink when in fact it doesn't say that... As well you seem to doubt Christ turned water into wine...
Now you understand my ironic humor!
quote:
Of course this doesn't count yet when Mr. Obama has to answer for this to God no secular argument will suffice...
Of course it does. God obeys logic. In fact, Wesley held reason to be just as valid as scripture. The only difference is that reason helps us answer questions that scripture doesn't address.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 3:18:54 PM
|
|
|
SwedishCovenant
Posts: 606
Joined: 8/8/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: tracydolls
Same thing with the Death Penalty and numerous other laws we have on the books.
According to what? Where does the bible say the Death Penalty is sinful?
Quite right, of course, the Bible doesn't declare the death sentence to be sinful. It simply declares that only he who is without sin can carry out execution.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 3:20:27 PM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1967
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Psalms274
I have seen at least one person here argue on how these passages cannot be taken literally ... but MOST of the bible CAN be taken literally .... and when you examine all the commentaries on these particular passages, not one biblical scholar presents an alternate meaning.
So do you allow these biblical scholars to interpret the Bible for you? I don't. Although they sometimes provide insight when I get confused, everyone is capable of understanding the Bible for themselves.
One thing that's important when reading the Bible is context. Psalm 139, among others, uses a fair amount of hyperbole. It states:
-All wicked people are bloodthirsty.
-All wicked people take God's name in vain and speak of God with evil intent.
-The author hates all wicked people.
-There is not an offensive way in the author.
-God has laid His hand upon the author. (I guess this was Moses!)
-The author's only enemies are God's enemies.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 3:21:51 PM
|
|
|
blessedinnyc
Posts: 1967
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Unfortunately, the pro-death crowd cannot afford to take this passage literally, or else their entire argument falls apart...
You mean the "didn't sleep through literary interpretation of poetry" crowd?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 3:28:07 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7785
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
So do you allow these biblical scholars to interpret the Bible for you? I don't. Although they sometimes provide insight when I get confused, everyone is capable of understanding the Bible for themselves.
One thing that's important when reading the Bible is context. Psalm 139, among others, uses a fair amount of hyperbole. It states:
-All wicked people are bloodthirsty.
-All wicked people take God's name in vain and speak of God with evil intent.
-The author hates all wicked people.
-There is not an offensive way in the author.
-God has laid His hand upon the author. (I guess this was Moses!)
-The author's only enemies are God's enemies.
While the Bible certainly employs hyperbole in places, and the Psalms are certainly poetic, the verses in questions say no such thing:
139:19 - 22
O that You would slay the wicked, O God; Depart from me, therefore, men of bloodshed. For they speak against You wickedly, And Your enemies take Your name in vain. Do I not hate those who hate You, O LORD ? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? I hate them with the utmost hatred; They have become my enemies.
It is speaking fairly directly about the wicked, who are clarified as 'men of bloodshed' who speak against God, take up His name, and rise up against Him.
In context, presuming a Davidic authorship, the enemies of which he speaks are almost certainly those enemies of Israel whose opposition usually consisted of physical battle against the tribes of Israel. None of this is particuarly metaphoric in that sense.
_____________________________
Jack
It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first..
- Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 4:32:56 PM
|
|
|
Psalms274
Posts: 1355
Joined: 8/13/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
quote:
So do you allow these biblical scholars to interpret the Bible for you? I don't.
Actually, no I do not ... I talk to God about the scripture. But when I see someone is interpreting it in way I have never seen before, part of my process is to go back to it, Ask the Holy Spirit if there was something I missed and then look at what others have stated and wait to see what God had to say on the matter. The passage in question (Jeremiah 1) is not a hyperbole.
When God says " Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." He is clearly stating that before anyone even knew that you were ... I knew you." He knew whose womb Jeremiah would developed in ... and He knew the plans He had for Jeremiah's life.
What do you think this passage of scripture is saying? (I would ask that you remember that since you call yourself a Christian, I am assuming you choose to follow Christ with your life ... and therefore please try to refrain from sarcasm ..., I am not sure if you are aware that you are coming across as such,and I am sure you do not intend to do so as a representative of Christ on this forum.)
_____________________________
I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ.
< Linus w/ a friends baby!
http://piswa.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 4:33:59 PM
|
|
|
Psalms274
Posts: 1355
Joined: 8/13/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
So do you allow these biblical scholars to interpret the Bible for you? I don't. Although they sometimes provide insight when I get confused, everyone is capable of understanding the Bible for themselves.
One thing that's important when reading the Bible is context. Psalm 139, among others, uses a fair amount of hyperbole. It states:
-All wicked people are bloodthirsty.
-All wicked people take God's name in vain and speak of God with evil intent.
-The author hates all wicked people.
-There is not an offensive way in the author.
-God has laid His hand upon the author. (I guess this was Moses!)
-The author's only enemies are God's enemies.
While the Bible certainly employs hyperbole in places, and the Psalms are certainly poetic, the verses in questions say no such thing:
139:19 - 22
O that You would slay the wicked, O God; Depart from me, therefore, men of bloodshed. For they speak against You wickedly, And Your enemies take Your name in vain. Do I not hate those who hate You, O LORD ? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? I hate them with the utmost hatred; They have become my enemies.
It is speaking fairly directly about the wicked, who are clarified as 'men of bloodshed' who speak against God, take up His name, and rise up against Him.
In context, presuming a Davidic authorship, the enemies of which he speaks are almost certainly those enemies of Israel whose opposition usually consisted of physical battle against the tribes of Israel. None of this is particuarly metaphoric in that sense.
I concur! 
_____________________________
I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ.
< Linus w/ a friends baby!
http://piswa.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/25/2008 10:39:14 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: blessedinnyc
Now you understand my ironic humor!
That was humor? When you take a wild stab in the dark regarding scripture it's humor? I will agree it was funny, but I have my doubts you were trying to be funny...
quote:
Of course it does. God obeys logic.
For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom
quote:
In fact, Wesley held reason to be just as valid as scripture.
Just one of the many things Wesley that was wrong...
quote:
The only difference is that reason helps us answer questions that scripture doesn't address.
Who is us? I for one don't wish to be included in that group...
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 29:12 If a ruler hearken to lies, all his servants are wicked.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Abortion - 8/27/2008 9:34:51 PM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 1269
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
Three pages of flawed reason and still no biblical argument to support poor Barry.
I wish I could say I was surprised.
_____________________________
"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed." - 2nd Peter 3:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Biblically Defend Obama: Abortion - 9/2/2008 3:03:05 PM
|
|
|
ta_mosquito
Posts: 11497
Joined: 3/31/2005
From: from MN, now in Ontario :D
Status: offline
|
I'm combining some threads that are alike. Please continue this discussion HERE.
Thanks!
Tricia
Forums Moderator
Please do not reply to this message within the forums or chat.
Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns.
Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
