Abortion In Christianity

[mecca]

Do you want to have sympathy for women who want to murder their babies? They do it because they are murderers. Let them speak for themselves, cause they sure in hell do a great job!

That's not a feminist. That's a crazy person.

 

[Aero]

That's true.

Well I could of worded it better but that's how I feel. Being pro-life seems to naturally carry contradictions with it. When it means you are also Pro things like saving death row inmates, and pro saving sick people with health care. Than we can talk about joining forces.

 

[mecca]

Well I could of worded it better but that's how I feel. Being pro-life seems to naturally carry contradictions with it. When it means you are also Pro things like saving death row inmates, and pro saving sick people with health care. Than we can talk about joining forces.

Also pro vegan/vegetarian.

 

[Aero]

Also pro vegan/vegetarian.

Omg I forgot about the animals. I believe they euthanize too many animals. And yeah the meat industry is especially terrible when you actually look into it.

 

[mecca]

Omg I forgot about the animals. I believe they euthanize too many animals. And yeah the meat industry is especially terrible when you actually look into it.

True... people breed too many animals and are unable to even care for them so they just let them suffer and murder so many pets that could have had a happy life. That's why people should "adopt" their pets from shelters.

And yeah, factory farms are terrible and they aren't humane at all, the animals suffer a lot there. It's very depressing when you see the videos captured inside factory farms.

 

[Illuminized]

And, commanded by the LORD,
Exodus 20:13
13 Thou shalt not kill.

If Thou shalt not kill were taken to it's logical extreme, all life would become unsustainable. Would you let moths, lice, mosquitoes, cockroaches, flies, wasps, termites, etc. freely roam your house (inside and outside) and let them damage your property and clothing, contaminate your food/water, and bite/sting you?

I quoted the Source of life. He says, "thou shall not kill."
I will not argue with Him.
Do you not think this might also be something to consider: God holds LIFE as sacred. Humans and all living things alike. Here is a verse from Matthew 10,
29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.
30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.

Does this not speak to you of how God values and loves living things?

You left out verse 31, which plainly states that humans are worth more than many sparrows. Judeo-Christian morals always leave animals out of consideration when humans are concerned.

The Catholic Church has never once changed it's stance on abortion, contraception, etc. because it's power rests upon the dogma of sin and the accompanying inventions of redemption, grace, and forgiveness. A world filled with degenerates and criminals is the very condition for the existence of all churches.

 

[Lady]

I left out verse 31 in order to make the point that God values ALL living things. I did not want to raise human life above other living things to make that point.

However, if I were back to the discussion of how MUCH God raises the value of human life above other living things, Matthew 10:31 would be very appropriate!
Thanks for nudging me to state it now:
31 Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

 

[manama]

 

[Lady]

Sometimes it has to be stated plainly just what killing a baby entails. Horrific murder!
Thanks, Manama.

 

[Illuminized]

I left out verse 31 in order to make the point that God values ALL living things. I did not want to raise human life above other living things to make that point.

Such a point can only find it's supporters in a worldview which posits one life only. Never mind heaven and hell. The Bible plainly states that it is appointed for man to die once (Hebrews 9:27). This makes Christianity a mere Jewish sect. The concepts of heaven and hell would have been foreign to Jesus' hearers. Nowhere in the Old Testament is it even elaborated on. Julian points out how Moses left many things unanswered in his account of creation (Genesis 1-11).

The fact that the Western world and it's churches and sciences bow down to a linear view of history shows that they are still under Judeo-Christian influence. People can call themselves atheists, agnostics, whatever. It's all the same if they have not adopted a cyclic conception of life.

 

[Damien50]

@Etagloc
I don't know what the hell your wall of text had to do with the relevancy of abortion in scripture and the individual I was discussing this with had already read the got questions perspective and found it inconclusive.

Read the link http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/bible.shtml

@anyone else
So does no one have scripture or an argument to actually stand against the points raised in the article? All I wanted was a biblical perspective to be able to fully endorse one position or the other.

 

[Damien50]

It was in the Didache. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-lightfoot.html
See 2.2.

I am intrigued. Upon further investigation I find that there were essentially two lines of thinking. The first being that there was no soul until the child took its first breath and the second being that there was no differentiation and that the fetus had the right to life.

If we are to take @Yahda and her view that it was previously omitted, then to what end does it serve?

 

[Etagloc]

That's not a feminist. That's a crazy person.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

 

[Lady]

Read the link http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/bible.shtml

@anyone else
So does no one have scripture or an argument to actually stand against the points raised in the article? All I wanted was a biblical perspective to be able to fully endorse one position or the other.[/QUOTE]


Sorry, D. I didn't read the article. I guess I fail the class, huh?
It might be better to post it specifically in the OP. I responded to the question posed there, as I think the majority of us did.

 

[Damien50]

Possibly, if I had more information from you about your view, I would be able to understand it better. I have an idea of where you are coming from because we have had others here who have come with similar messages.

Regarding Judaism, Christ attempted to reveal the Kingdom to the Jews first, but was rejected by them and only a handful were converted.. They are of their fat



Sorry, D. I didn't read the article. I guess I fail the class, huh?
It might be better to post it specifically in the OP. I responded to the question posed there, as I think the majority of us did.

Character limit won't allow it. You didn't fail and I don't have a personal stance on the subject just playing devils advocate.

 

[Lady]

I see. I like it when we all keep it casual. I was feeling stressed by your professorial-like demands!

 

[Damien50]

I see. I like it when we all keep it casual. I was feeling stressed by your professorial-like demands!

Casual is fine but it was a serious question I would have liked a biblical answer too. The vast majority have emotion filled responses so I add the link because my co worker sent it to maintain the positron that it wasn't a sin.

Apologies.

 

[mecca]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

If a self proclaimed feminist doesn't follow what feminism stands for, they're not a real feminist. lol it's not hard to understand

 

[Lady]

This is where I agree with etagloc's point in which he quite emotionally defended emotionalism.

In real life, one needs to make connections with people in order to affect them. The lack of emotion is not synonymous with logic. Maybe in a science or math class the lack of this human quality is ideal, but not when dealing with real people in real life issues.
Of course, emotions should be checked, but not at the point where one appears to lack empathy or compassion.
Let's not lose our unique ability that we humans share as we empathize with one another in order to minister to each other.

 

[Damien50]

This is where I agree with etagloc's point in which he quite emotionally defended emotionalism.

In real life, one needs to make connections with people in order to affect them. The lack of emotion is not synonymous with logic. Maybe in a science or math class the lack of this human quality is ideal, but not when dealing with real people in real life issues.
Of course, emotions should be checked, but not at the point where one appears to lack empathy or compassion.
Let's not lose our unique ability that we humans share as we empathize with one another in order to minister to each other.

That's fine and all but as Aero said we become vehement seething beast of rage on the topic of abortion but there are people dying constantly and we're seemingly mute.

I'm not concerned with the emotion of man, I'm not. I want to know and understand God's stance on it. If God specifically says it's bad then it is bad to me but I can't find the Hebrew word for abortion in any bible and only in the diadech.

My spirituality was never about my personal emotion but gaining the mind and heart that God would want.

I can see reasons why one might get an abortion and I can see why one might be against it but I want conclusive scripture in regards to the topic otherwise I feel it is a decision between the woman and man and to the judgement of God.

So unless someone has conclusive scripture and or enough historical evidence to stand I remain neutral to the choice and unable to properly advise my co worker on the nature of it.