IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
You can keep saying that. It doesn't make it so. If your interpretation is correct, then tell me the herb that was used. You can't, because it does not exist.That's completely irrelevant
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
You can keep saying that. It doesn't make it so. If your interpretation is correct, then tell me the herb that was used. You can't, because it does not exist.That's completely irrelevant
Alas you have proved absolutely nothing. Yet you keep repeating the same thing over and over despite trying to help you. Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 obviously describe the use of an abortifacient to abort the pregnancies of adulteresses, and nothing will ever convince me otherwise. And it's your choice if you don't believe what the bible actually says and means.unresponsive to the post you are responding to that has already addressed what you are repeating here. We have proven from both post # 235 linked that the scripture context disagrees with your claim that Numbers 5:22 is God commanding abortion. While post # 350 linked proves from original Hebrew word meanings, in agreement with the Lexicon and Interlinear and parallel translations that the English word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22, וּ֠בָאוּ (H935) הַמַּ֨יִם (H4325) הַמְאָרְרִ֤ים (H779) הָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ (H428) בְּֽמֵעַ֔יִךְ (H4578) לַצְבּ֥וֹת (H6638) בֶּ֖טֶן (H990) וְלַנְפִּ֣ל (H5307) יָרֵ֑ךְ (H3409) וְאָמְרָ֥ה (H559) הָאִשָּׁ֖ה (H802) אָמֵ֥ן ׀ (H543) אָמֵֽן׃ (H543) (check each Hebrew Word number). Does this not concern you? It should because as proven from the scriptures in the linked posts attached both the scripture context, the original Hebrew word meanings, in agreement with the Lexicon and Interlinear and parallel translations that the English word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22 are all in disagreement with your interpretation of a single scripture taken out of its contexts. Yet you keep repeating the same thing over and over despite people trying to help you and ignoring everything that is written only as a help for you.
That's your choice if you believe that the commandment in Numbers 5:22 to abort the pregnancies of pregnant adulteresses is "unbiblical nonsense". But it still it says what it says and means what it means, and I'll never be convinced otherwise.Obviously not.
It could have been any of the herbs used then with varying success, such as silphilium. History of abortion - WikipediaYou can keep saying that. It doesn't make it so. If your interpretation is correct, then tell me the herb that was used. You can't, because it does not exist.
I've never laid on another bloke's breast, nor has another bloke ever laid on mine, and there is no evidence in the bible that Jesus was a heterosexual.No one really knows. It's odd, because one of the laws of Judaism for men is to marry and have children. Certain people are not allowed to do so, such as men who have crushed testicles. Also, some people are severely limited in whom they can marry. A mamzer, for example, can only marry another mamzer. I'm sure it happens a lot that they cannot find someone whom they are allowed to marry.
Do you think that straight guys can't have close intimate friendships? Have you never heard the term bromance?
And despite what the writer of Jude says, the story in Gen 19 says nothing about sexual immorality and perversion and that Lot's future sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two blokes Lot picked up downtown instead of with their future wives. The only sexual immorality and perversion in that story was when Lot sexually assaulted their future wives in a cave and then dishonestly blamed them for his behaviour.Never happened. This legend was added into the gospel in the 4th century. It's a nice story, but that's all it is.
I agree that the sin of Sodom was inhospitality. I never brought this up. It's a red herring. I'm not sure why you think it somehow proves that Jesus was gay.
BTW, just because Genesis has the sin as inhospitality, doesn't mean the New Testament shares that teaching. Jude 1:7 says, "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." I'm a Jew, so what Jude says is irrelevant to me. But it would be relevant to a Christian.
Your response here3rdAngel said: unresponsive to the post you are responding to that has already addressed what you are repeating here. We have proven from both post # 235 linked that the scripture context disagrees with your claim that Numbers 5:22 is God commanding abortion. While post # 350 linked proves from original Hebrew word meanings, in agreement with the Lexicon and Interlinear and parallel translations that the English word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22, וּ֠בָאוּ (H935) הַמַּ֨יִם (H4325) הַמְאָרְרִ֤ים (H779) הָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ (H428) בְּֽמֵעַ֔יִךְ (H4578) לַצְבּ֥וֹת (H6638) בֶּ֖טֶן (H990) וְלַנְפִּ֣ל (H5307) יָרֵ֑ךְ (H3409) וְאָמְרָ֥ה (H559) הָאִשָּׁ֖ה (H802) אָמֵ֥ן ׀ (H543) אָמֵֽן׃ (H543) (check each Hebrew Word number). Does this not concern you? It should because as proven from the scriptures in the linked posts attached both the scripture context, the original Hebrew word meanings, in agreement with the Lexicon and Interlinear and parallel translations that the English word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22 are all in disagreement with your interpretation of a single scripture taken out of its contexts. Yet you keep repeating the same thing over and over despite people trying to help you and ignoring everything that is written only as a help for you.
So I guess that is a no then. You are unable to prove your claims and address the linked posts and scriptures in the post you are quoting from that proves why your teachings are unbiblical. Its ok I did not think you would be able to. The post above proves that you disregarded the scripture context, disregarded the original Hebrew and the Lexicon, Interlinear and parallel translations are all in agreement together that the Hebrew word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22. Everything is in disagreement with you interpretation of a single scripture taken from its context. If you do not want to believe what the bible actually says. I am sorry friend I cannot help you. Ignoring Gods Word does not make it disappear.Alas you have proved absolutely nothing. Yet you keep repeating the same thing over and over despite trying to help you. Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 obviously describe the use of an abortifacient to abort the pregnancies of adulteresses, and nothing will ever convince me otherwise. And it's your choice if you don't believe what the bible actually says and means.
There is no abortion commandment as proven in the linked posts provided in post # 358 linked that you are unwilling to respond to. Yes it says what it says. Unfortunately it does not say what you are claiming it says as already proven in scripture context and the original Hebrew.That's your choice if you believe that the commandment in Numbers 5:22 to abort the pregnancies of pregnant adulteresses is "unbiblical nonsense". But it still it says what it says and means what it means, and I'll never be convinced otherwise.
That's because you are unable to prove your claims that Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 is only about sore thighs and stomach aches, nor why male adulterers aren't also commanded to drink a "bitter water" abortifacient and say "so be it, so be it" if you claim that commandment is only about sore thighs and stomach aches.Your response here
So I guess that is a no then.
And that Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 describe the termination of pregnancies using "bitter water" abortifacients and as used for thousands of years with varying success.Yes it says what it says.
Your post is unresponsive repetition again that does not address anything in the post you are responding to. Please forgive me but I do not believe you. For a detailed scripture response proving why your teachings are unbiblical please see the contexts and the original Hebrew with Interlinear and Lexicon comments and parallel translations linked in post # 358 linked. The linked post above proves that you disregard scripture context, disregard the original Hebrew and the Lexicon, Interlinear and parallel translations that all prove and are all in agreement together that the Hebrew word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22. I am sorry dear friend I cannot help you if you want to ignore what scripture says.That's because you are unable to prove your claims that Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 is only about sore thighs and stomach aches, nor why male adulterers aren't also commanded to drink a "bitter water" abortifacient and say "so be it, so be it" if you claim that commandment is only about sore thighs and stomach aches.
Nor have you been able to present evidence that pregnant adulteresses are not commanded to be executed and their pregnancies consequently aborted (Lev 20:10).
Your Sunday School score is an F-
Unresponsive repetition already addressed. Please see post # 358 linked you ignored it.And that Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 describe the termination of pregnancies using "bitter water" abortifacients and as used for thousands of years with varying success.
And that the pregnancies of pregnant adulteresses are aborted when they executed as commanded in Lev 20:10.
I ran a google search on "silphilium rotting thighs" and nothing came up. Would you like to try again?It could have been any of the herbs used then with varying success, such as silphilium. History of abortion - Wikipedia
Regardless of it's success, the intent and purpose of Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 is obviously to describe pregnancy terminations of adulteresses, because of the property rights of men and to ensure legitimate lines of descent and inheritance, in the same way that a new pride lion will kill all the cubs of the previous pride lion. And none of your obfuscations will ever convince me otherwise.
Just more irrelevant repetition given that Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 clearly commands the pregnancy terminations of pregnant adulteresses using "bitter water" medication.Unresponsive repetition already addressed.
That's because the term "rotting thighs" is just an archaic term describing pregnancy abortions. Silphium - WikipediaI ran a google search on "silphilium rotting thighs" and nothing came up. Would you like to try again?
Unresponsive repetition already addressed. Please see post # 358 linked you ignored it.Just more irrelevant repetition given that Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 clearly commands the pregnancy terminations of pregnant adulteresses using "bitter water" medication.
Your post is unresponsive repetition again that does not address anything, given Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 clearly describes the termination of pregnancies of adulteresses using "bitter water" abortifacients such as silphium. Silphium - WikipediaYour post is unresponsive repetition again that does not address anything in the post you are responding to. Please forgive me but I do not believe you. For a detailed scripture response proving why your teachings are unbiblical please see the contexts and the original Hebrew with Interlinear and Lexicon comments and parallel translations linked in post # 358 linked. The linked post above proves that you disregard scripture context, disregard the original Hebrew and the Lexicon, Interlinear and parallel translations that all prove and are all in agreement together that the Hebrew word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22. I am sorry dear friend I cannot help you if you want to ignore what scripture says.
Unresponsive repetition already addressed.Unresponsive repetition already addressed.
Unresponsive repetition already addressed. Please see post # 358 linked you ignored it.Your post is unresponsive repetition again that does not address anything, given Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 clearly describes the termination of pregnancies of adulteresses using "bitter water" abortifacients such as silphium. Silphium - Wikipedia
Unresponsive repetition already addressed.Unresponsive repetition already addressed.