Why do Christians oppose abortion?

[Mitty]

Eh? Why would they do that?

So what did Joshua et al do with all that meat after they butchered all the women and children?

They were fed by manna, "The Israelites ate manna forty years, until they came to a land that was settled; they ate manna until they reached the border of Canaan." Ex 16:35.

And how did Moses manage to find five tonne of manna per day to feed his family of five million or so? And where and how did Moses find over five megalitres of water per day for his family in the middle east deserts. Or is that just an imaginary story?

So it is clear that once they reached Canaan, their manna dried up. Who was going to feed all the prisoners of war? You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think you going to create a moral argument by importing the standards and civilization of the 21st century AD into 1500BC warfare.

Is that why Joshua et al butchered all the women and children in order to have a fry-up after their manna dried up?

 

[eik]

So what did Joshua et al do with all that meat after they butchered all the women and children?

You seem to have a fixation with cannibalism that no-one else shares.

And how did Moses manage to find five tonne of manna per day to feed his family of five million or so? And where and how did Moses find over five megalitres of water per day for his family in the middle east deserts. Or is that just an imaginary story?

The most likely candiate for manna is the digestive byproduct of insects that feed on the sap of Haloxylon salicornicum, found all over the middle east, and known as honeydew. The secretion, formed at night, is loaded with sugar. The sweet liquid hardens to the form of white granules.

Water: Moses produced water from a rock. The Israelites also also camped in a place where there were twelve springs and lots of palm trees (Ex. 15:27; Num. 33:9). I don't think you can assume the Israelites traversed the hottest deserts. Boreholes may have been another source. In addition there are various wadis in southern Israel which may have run with water in those days. Also their herds would have produced milk.

Is that why Joshua et al butchered all the women and children in order to have a fry-up after their manna dried up?

See above.

 

[Mitty]

You seem to have a fixation with cannibalism that no-one else shares.

Why not given that Deut 28:53 says that true believers should eat their children if under siege after happily bashing them against stones and saying "so be it, so be it" (Psalm 137:9)

The most likely candiate for manna is the digestive byproduct of insects that feed on the sap of Haloxylon salicornicum, found all over the middle east, and known as honeydew. The secretion, formed at night, is loaded with sugar. The sweet liquid hardens to the form of white granules.

So how long each day did it take Moses and his family to collect the five tonne or so of manna to feed his family of five million or so?

Water: Moses produced water from a rock. The Israelites also also camped in a place where there were twelve springs and lots of palm trees (Ex. 15:27; Num. 33:9). I don't think you can assume the Israelites traversed the hottest deserts. Boreholes may have been another source. In addition there are various wadis in southern Israel which may have run with water in those days. Also their herds would have produced milk.

So how many megalitres of water per day did Moses produce from a rock, and how many tens of megalitres of water did Moses' herds use each day? And how many tonnes of fodder per day did they eat, and where did Moses find it?

And how deep were the water bore holes, and did Moses use diesel engines or electric motors to pump the water?

And how many weeks did it take Moses and his herds and thousands of pregnant women with squawking children to waddle across the Red Sea to the Sinai Peninsula, given that 100 or so were giving birth each hour? And did they waddle across the Red Sea in ranks or in a single file, and how many hundreds of kilometres long was the queue to cross the Red Sea?

Or is that story just an imaginative fantasy in a book about an 80+ year old geriatric and five million of his family wandering aimlessly around the middle east deserts for forty years, given there is not a skerrick of actual evidence for the story?

 

[eik]

Why not given that Deut 28:53 says that true believers should eat their children if under siege after happily bashing them against stones and saying "so be it, so be it" (Psalm 137:9)

It says that it will happen, as a curse for disobedience. It does not say they should (your modification).

So how long each day did it take Moses and his family to collect the five tonne or so of manna to feed his family of five million or so?

Each family collected their own manna, just enough for one day.Ex 16:4

So how many megalitres of water per day did Moses produce from a rock, and how many tens of megalitres of water did Moses' herds use each day? And how many tonnes of fodder per day did they eat, and where did Moses find it?

The Israelites seem to have spent much of the 40 years in Kadesh Barnea (now called Petra in Jordan) which is supplied with water from spings that are still used to provide water to the town.

And how many weeks did it take Moses and his herds and thousands of pregnant women with squawking children to waddle across the Red Sea to the Sinai Peninsula, given that 100 or so were giving birth each hour? And did they waddle across the Red Sea in ranks or in a single file, and how many hundreds of kilometres long was the queue to cross the Red Sea?

If 100 gave birth in an hour, that would be 876,000 in a year whereas all the males only numbered circa 600,000. So your stats are way out.

Or is that story just an imaginative fantasy about an 80+ year old geriatric and five million of his family wandering aimlessly around the middle east deserts for forty years, given there is not a skerrick of actual evidence for the story?

Given your own fantasies and inaccuracies, it is unlikely you will ever discover the truth.

 

[Mitty]

It says that it will happen, as a curse for disobedience. It does not say they should (your modification).

Cool!!!

Each family collected their own manna, just enough for one day.Ex 16:4

So where did Moses and his five million relatives find five tonne of manna per day?

The Israelites seem to have spent much of the 40 years in Kadesh Barnea (now called Petra in Jordan) which is supplied with water from spings that are still used to provide water to the town.

And did the five million relatives of Moses build houses in Petra or did they just sleep rough for 40 years? And how did Moses find the ten megalitres of water per day for his relatives and their herds before they reached Petra and during the weeks that it took them to cross the Red Sea?

If 100 gave birth in an hour, that would be 876,000 in a year whereas all the males only numbered circa 600,000. So your stats are way out.

So what evidence do you have that each of those adult males didn't have more than one wife and that they only had single births every nine months or so (ie 89 per hour), and is that why Numbers 5:20-28 commands the abortions of adulteresses? Either way, it still would have taken Moses and his five million relatives and their herds weeks to cross the Red Sea, or months if they were in single file with 100 or so births each hour.

Given your own fantasies and inaccuracies, it is unlikely you will ever discover the truth.

In other words you don't have a skerrick of evidence that the geriatric Moses wandered around the Middle East deserts for 40 years with five million members of his family.

And what fantasies do you claim that I have, given that I stopped believing in Santa and fairies and magic over 65 years ago?

 

[GardenLady]

Why is it not correct? Just because some affirm themselves to be Christians does not mean that it is legitimate for others to call them "Christian".

The law of Christ is the rule of faith. If my faith precludes me from calling another a Christian, then it is the correct thing to do, howsoever they may want to be labelled. The rule of the herd has no application to Christianity, which contrary to supposition, is a very discriminating religion (cf. 1 Cor 5).

And who are you to decide and how do you decide? Can you see into others' souls? I am a Lutheran. Do you get to decide that Lutherans are not Christian if your outside perception of our faith doesn't fit your perception of the law of Christ? How about Methodists? Episcopalians? Catholics? Orthodox? If someone proclaims Jesus as redeemer, and calls themselves a Christian, I am content for it to be so. The details are between them and God and none of my business.

I was formerly a Catholic (in fact, the first 50 years of my life). I heard things from fundamentalists and evangelicals about Catholicism that were not only ludicrously wrong but slanderous. And they confidently claimed Catholics are not Christian.

So what is your position to judge whether another is to be called Christian?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

And who are you to decide and how do you decide? Can you see into others' souls? I am a Lutheran. Do you get to decide that Lutherans are not Christian if your outside perception of our faith doesn't fit your perception of the law of Christ? How about Methodists? Episcopalians? Catholics? Orthodox? If someone proclaims Jesus as redeemer, and calls themselves a Christian, I am content for it to be so. The details are between them and God and none of my business.

I was formerly a Catholic (in fact, the first 50 years of my life). I heard things from fundamentalists and evangelicals about Catholicism that were not only ludicrously wrong but slanderous. And they confidently claimed Catholics are not Christian.

So what is your position to judge whether another is to be called Christian?

John 13:34-35; John 15:17.
If they don’t try hard living in a way that shows concern for others (and I say “try”, because we all fall short), then are they really following Christ, ie., Christian?
Matthew 5:44 comes into play, too.

BTW, welcome to RF, my cousin.

 

[eik]

In other words you don't have a skerrick of evidence that the geriatric Moses wandered around the Middle East deserts for 40 years with five million members of his family.

Nothing that says Moses was related to all the other Israelites. 5 million is total conjecture, give the number of males quoted in circa 600,000.

And what fantasies do you claim that I have, given that I stopped believing in Santa and fairies and magic over 65 years ago?

Everything you utter is one long line of inveterate anti-biblical drivel. It's getting boring. You have no interest in religion. You're only here to create trouble.

 

[eik]

And who are you to decide and how do you decide? Can you see into others' souls?

John 14:15 "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

I am a Lutheran. Do you get to decide that Lutherans are not Christian if your outside perception of our faith doesn't fit your perception of the law of Christ? How about Methodists? Episcopalians? Catholics? Orthodox? If someone proclaims Jesus as redeemer, and calls themselves a Christian, I am content for it to be so. The details are between them and God and none of my business.

But in this you are ignoring the command of the apostle to make necessary and critical judgements:

1 Cor 5:11 "But now I am writing you not to associate with anyone who claims to be a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a verbal abuser, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. 12What business of mine is it to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?"

And there are other commands refraining from divisiveness:

Titus 3:10 "Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. 11 You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned."

The history of Christian dominations from the Council of Chalcedon is that they are divisive because distinguished on philosophical and political principles. Thus it was the Roman Catholic church excommunicated all other denominations after the Council of Chacedon in AD 451 except Eastern Orthodox because they would not accept the hypostatic union of two non-blendable persons (or natures) within Christ to form one person, equally God and equally man.

The (heretical) Nestorian principle of perceving the humanity of Christ, and restricting the divinity of the human Christ to his being the "face" of God, was precluded. Nestorians went on to evangelize Asia and the east. The divisiveness of the Roman Catholic church in respect to Nestorian "heretics" is one of the primary reasons why Islam exists in the world at all. Were it not for this opposition, Islam would have been wiped out in the 13th century or before. In fact Catholics would rather abide muslims than Nestorians.

Why then should the Catholic hierarchy be seen as axiomatically Christian? Their anathemas are dished out on other Christians but no longer on muslims. They need to prove their Christianity as much as anyone else.

Transubstantiation is another highly divisive principle, where it is obvious that the tokens of bread and wine are used figuratively so as not to imply metamorphosis. There are many others, such as in permitting ladies not to cover their heads in church, which was condemned by Paul in 1 Cor 11:1-16. This heretical practice is now allowed both by Catholic and Lutherans.

For all these reasons, a Christian can bring another into judgement.

I was formerly a Catholic (in fact, the first 50 years of my life). I heard things from fundamentalists and evangelicals about Catholicism that were not only ludicrously wrong but slanderous. And they confidently claimed Catholics are not Christian.

I would not go that far. But a Catholic may not be a christian if the only evidence of faith lies in the holding of philosophical positions. Many Catholics suffer from a lack of faith but in this I do not single out Catholics from others.

So what is your position to judge whether another is to be called Christian?

Whether they are serious about obeying Christ's commands, which would include being seen to refrain from polluting the doctrines of Christianity with man-made teachings rooted in human philosophy, and in human politics. To these things not only Catholics but many others are increasingly prone, but equally members of most denominations can refrain from such to prove themselves a Christian, although some denominations are quite beyond the pale of orthodoxy now.

 

[Mitty]

Nothing that says Moses was related to all the other Israelites.

Of course Moses was related to them all since they were descendants from Abraham's grandson, Jacob, and belonged to one of the family groups of Jacob's sons.

5 million is total conjecture, give the number of males quoted in circa 600,000.

OK - over 10 million if each of the 600,000 adult males had two or more wives and over a dozen children, given the fecundity of Jacob's descendants. Afterall Jacob had 12 sons and presumably also 12 daughters or more.

Everything you utter is one long line of inveterate anti-biblical drivel. It's getting boring. You have no interest in religion. You're only here to create trouble.

That's because the bible has many fantasy stories and I stopped believing in Santa and fantasies over 65 years ago, and because I've never had a face to face discussion with a god like Abraham did when they shared a meal together (Gen 18). Nor have I ever had a wrestling match with a god like Jacob did when he was touched up in his thigh hollow by a god (Gen 32:22-31). Have you??

 

[Mitty]

John 14:15 "If ye love me, keep my commandments."


But in this you are ignoring the command of the apostle to make necessary and critical judgements:

1 Cor 5:11 "But now I am writing you not to associate with anyone who claims to be a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a verbal abuser, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. 12What business of mine is it to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?"

And there are other commands refraining from divisiveness:

Titus 3:10 "Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. 11 You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned."

The history of Christian dominations from the Council of Chalcedon is that they are divisive because distinguished on philosophical and political principles. Thus it was the Roman Catholic church excommunicated all other denominations after the Council of Chacedon in AD 451 except Eastern Orthodox because they would not accept the hypostatic union of two non-blendable persons (or natures) within Christ to form one person, equally God and equally man.

The (heretical) Nestorian principle of perceving the humanity of Christ, and restricting the divinity of the human Christ to his being the "face" of God, was precluded. Nestorians went on to evangelize Asia and the east. The divisiveness of the Roman Catholic church in respect to Nestorian "heretics" is one of the primary reasons why Islam exists in the world at all. Were it not for this opposition, Islam would have been wiped out in the 13th century or before. In fact Catholics would rather abide muslims than Nestorians.

Why then should the Catholic hierarchy be seen as axiomatically Christian? Their anathemas are dished out on other Christians but no longer on muslims. They need to prove their Christianity as much as anyone else.

Transubstantiation is another highly divisive principle, where it is obvious that the tokens of bread and wine are used figuratively so as not to imply metamorphosis. There are many others, such as in permitting ladies not to cover their heads in church, which was condemned by Paul in 1 Cor 11:1-16. This heretical practice is now allowed both by Catholic and Lutherans.

For all these reasons, a Christian can bring another into judgement.



I would not go that far. But a Catholic may not be a christian if the only evidence of faith lies in the holding of philosophical positions. Many Catholics suffer from a lack of faith but in this I do not single out Catholics from others.


Whether they are serious about obeying Christ's commands, which would include being seen to refrain from polluting the doctrines of Christianity with man-made teachings rooted in human philosophy, and in human politics. To these things not only Catholics but many others are increasingly prone, but equally members of most denominations can refrain from such to prove themselves a Christian, although some denominations are quite beyond the pale of orthodoxy now.

Have you ever had a face to face discussion with your god about your religious hypotheses?

 

[eik]

Have you ever had a face to face discussion with your god about your religious hypotheses?

Have you ever spoken a single word of truth on the subject or religion?

 

[eik]

Of course Moses was related to them all since they were descendants from Abraham's grandson, Jacob, and belonged to one of the family groups of Jacob's sons. OK - over 10 million if each of the 600,000 adult males had two or more wives and over a dozen children, given the fecundity of Jacob's descendants. Afterall Jacob had 12 sons and presumably also 12 daughters or more.

Again you're wrong. Abraham was a tribal leader and when he emigrated from Ur, came with a whole load of others. In Gen 14 Abraham took 318 of these men to war.

That's because the bible has many fantasy stories and I stopped believing in Santa and fantasies over 65 years ago, and because I've never had a face to face discussion with a god like Abraham did when they shared a meal together (Gen 18). Nor have I ever had a wrestling match with a god like Jacob did when he was touched up in his thigh hollow by a god (Gen 32:22-31). Have you??

This isn't about Santa. The reason you'll never have a discussion with God is because God has no plan to have a discussion with you, commoner. "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?" Rom 9:21.

 

[1213]

That biblical law only applies to those who have been born and taken the first breath of life and does not apply to foetuses or embryos, given that Numbers 5:20-28 commands the abortions of adulteresses because of the property rights of men. And Deut 7:16 commands genocide, including butchering children and the unborn.

Deut 7:16 says:

You shall consume all the peoples who Yahweh your God shall deliver to you; your eye shall not pity them: neither shall you serve their gods; for that will be a snare to you.
Deut 7:16

Was that the scripture you meant? Sounds different than your version.

And, Numbers 5:20-28, if you think that is abortion, I can accept that as method for abortion.

 

[Mitty]

Again you're wrong. Abraham was a tribal leader and when he emigrated from Ur, came with a whole load of others. In Gen 14 Abraham took 318 of these men to war.

So what evidence do you have that the members of the 12 family tribes in the exodus story weren't all related to Moses?

And can you tell us how many millions of women and children also wandered aimlessly around the Middle East deserts with Moses for 40 years?

And can you tell us how many women gave birth per hour during those 40 years before Joshua and his murderous thugs committed genocide and butchered all the women and children and stole their land?

And can you tell us how many of those women gave birth while crossing the Red Sea?

This isn't about Santa. The reason you'll never have a discussion with God is because God has no plan to have a discussion with you, commoner. "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?" Rom 9:21.

Have you ever had a face to face discussion with a god and/or shared a meal with one like Abraham did when they discussed the number of righteous children in Gomorrah, and how the god then walked down to Gomorrah to count them for itself since it was neither an omniscient or omnipresent type of god? Or was that just another fantasy story?

 

[Mitty]

Deut 7:16 says:

You shall consume all the peoples who Yahweh your God shall deliver to you; your eye shall not pity them: neither shall you serve their gods; for that will be a snare to you.
Deut 7:16

Was that the scripture you meant? Sounds different than your version.

Which is why Joshua et al committed genocide and butchered all the women and children and consumed them.

And, Numbers 5:20-28, if you think that is abortion, I can accept that as method for abortion.

And that's obviously what the biblical writers were describing and as interpreteted in the biblical translations/versions.

 

[Mitty]

Have you ever spoken a single word of truth on the subject or religion?

Have you ever read the bible?

 

[eik]

Have you ever read the bible?

Many times.

 

[Mitty]

Many times.

Hmmmm!!!

 

[eik]

So what evidence do you have that the members of the 12 family tribes in the exodus story weren't all related to Moses?

And can you tell us how many millions of women and children also wandered aimlessly around the Middle East deserts with Moses for 40 years?

And can you tell us how many women gave birth per hour during those 40 years before Joshua and his murderous thugs committed genocide and butchered all the women and children and stole their land?

And can you tell us how many of those women gave birth while crossing the Red Sea?

All land belongs to God. And your other questions are pointless.

Have you ever had a face to face discussion with a god and/or shared a meal with one like Abraham did when they discussed the number of righteous children in Gomorrah, and how the god then walked down to Gomorrah to count them for itself since it was neither an omniscient or omnipresent type of god? Or was that just another fantasy story?

Actually it was an angel, because the whole of the OT deals with angels acting as God's agents.