RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 4:09:11 PM)

Can we keep this... mannerly? I will try.
First, a parable of sorts.

You live in a secluded home overlooking a field. You see a man you know to have committed many murders carrying a shotgun sneaking up on children from the cover of a small rise. He is carrying a shotgun. You call this madman on his cellphone (deus ex machina, sure, but it's my "parable") and he admits- even brags- about his intention to murder these children. As is always the case when life expectancies are measured in seconds, the police are mere tens of minutes away. You, an expert marksman, retrieve a suitable high-powered rifle. The madman is on top of the rise, raising the shotgun. Do you kill him?

Second, a verse.
James 4:17 (New International Version)
Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins.
I have heard this verse used in a sermon as a reason to protect the innocent.

See, the truth is that I feel convicted for not taking action against abortion. Call it cowardice, call it respect for the law, but I suspect that there are tens if not hundreds of thousands who feel as I do, and that whatever you call it, it's what's keeping the abortionists alive.

Let me put it this way. If the government made it legal to kill them, how many do you think would live to see sundown tomorrow?





pogo4pres -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 4:22:33 PM)

quote:


You, an expert marksman, retrieve a suitable high-powered rifle. The madman is on top of the rise, raising the shotgun. Do you kill him?



Answer no, I do not kill, but I blow both his fucking kneecaps off though.  Then let the police & EMS deal with the aftermath.


Non-judgmentally,
Some Knucklehead in NJ



Aneirin -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 6:00:25 PM)

I don't know whether anyone else goes with this thought, but perhaps it is worth bearing in mind;

I look at it this way, I am not in the situation of deciding whether a foetus is to be born or aborted, so my thoughts are to those that have to decide, it is their choice not mine and forever it will remain so, for they have their own lives to lead and pains to deal with and with that I wish them well with whatever they decide.

Now, if it should ever happen that medics who perform abortions start advertising their skills on tv or other, then I will have a problem, for they then have become antagonists of another sort, for they could then be seen as suggesting to ignore birth control for they will sort out the results of any discretions for money which is soaked in death and an insult to nature.

But I find it kind of wrong when someone fights for the rights of a foetus yet to be born, but wishes the death of others, if they love life, why commit murder, ah, ok, I get it, because some religious bullshit from the ancient past says so, but others think not.



FullCircle -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 6:46:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave
Let me put it this way. If the government made it legal to kill them, how many do you think would live to see sundown tomorrow?

Most people would avoid killing, law or no law.

Only the few zealots here and there would feel otherwise. You are saying some pretty dramatic things but in the end you conclude earthly law supersedes your religious desires. This is strange considering you feel a higher power is acting as ultimate arbiter so could in theory give you a free pass.

Isn't it more likely you just don't like killing people and don't need the law or the bible to guide you in this respect? The things you do right or wrong and the things others do right or wrong are two things unconnected until one day you take it upon yourself to be judge.




truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 6:48:29 PM)

Truthfully? It's cowardice.



FullCircle -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 6:59:58 PM)

Such cowardice could stop the pain suffered by family members I don't know what good the bravery of killing would get in measurable terms? People think about individuals without much thought to the wider implications of their crimes.



OrionTheWolf -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 7:04:52 PM)

The justification often used is this:

Genisis 9:5-6

"And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man."

This passage has been the point of much contention.



Owner59 -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 7:26:31 PM)

Hey Orion,

Hope you`re well.



truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 8:00:15 PM)

Cuts both ways. People don't think about the wider consequences of abortion.



Aneirin -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 8:47:31 PM)

If god made man in his own image, he must be pretty fucked up given that man is fucked up following gods words which seem to contradict each other to the point that if a psychological assessment was made on god, in this country at least it only takes two professionals to commit a person for eratic beliefs or actions. Or is it those who apparently have recorded gods words have got it wrong, for they all heard different things, in which case why do people take such words to be the word of god when it is clear by the fact that they are different, they are the recorders words not gods. If the scriptures are not to be trusted due to contradiction, then there is no word of god so how do people believe what they believe, do they get it from a controversial book or do they feel it in their hearts, if the latter, then I can understand, but the former it is what one is taught by others, not what one has found for themselves.

Perhaps we should not be taught religion, taught to think in one belief, but be allowed to find whatever makes sense to ourselves and there perhaps of the people that say they believe in something, if they found it themselves, the god in their hearts then they have found their god, the others, because they were brought up with it, taught it at school, they were in effect brain washed into that belief.



popeye1250 -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/22/2010 9:25:43 PM)

JLF, wouldn't that be in St. Nunzio or St. Rocco?



Elisabella -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 4:44:35 AM)

quote:

Or is it those who apparently have recorded gods words have got it wrong, for they all heard different things, in which case why do people take such words to be the word of god when it is clear by the fact that they are different, they are the recorders words not gods. If the scriptures are not to be trusted due to contradiction, then there is no word of god so how do people believe what they believe, do they get it from a controversial book or do they feel it in their hearts, if the latter, then I can understand, but the former it is what one is taught by others, not what one has found for themselves.


IMO the contradictions between the old and new testaments make sense...humanity changed quite a bit from Genesis to Matthew.

It's sort of like how you tell your 4 year old "don't touch the stove at all" then tell your 14 year old "this is how you use the stove" - you're not actually contradicting yourself, you're just tailoring the rules to fit the child.



EternalHoH -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 5:56:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

You live in a secluded home overlooking a field. You see a man you know to have committed many murders carrying a shotgun sneaking up on children from the cover of a small rise. He is carrying a shotgun. You call this madman on his cellphone (deus ex machina, sure, but it's my "parable") and he admits- even brags- about his intention to murder these children. As is always the case when life expectancies are measured in seconds, the police are mere tens of minutes away. You, an expert marksman, retrieve a suitable high-powered rifle. The madman is on top of the rise, raising the shotgun. Do you kill him?

See, the truth is that I feel convicted for not taking action against abortion. Call it cowardice, call it respect for the law, but I suspect that there are tens if not hundreds of thousands who feel as I do, and that whatever you call it, it's what's keeping the abortionists alive.



The trouble with this analogy is you are wrongly equating a fetus to be a full grown child romping around in a field. Secular law does not make such an analogy. Your religious law, which again comes second in the equation, does.

So instead of a story about a man taking aim at innocent children, make that story about a man taking aim at a tadpole. Do you feel you are equally convicted for not taking action to take him down then?

You are defining your need to act based only on religious definitions, not secular law definitions. Yet, those religious definitions do not rule this land. When you feel the need to take the man down before he injures those tadpoles, you are being driven by your beliefs in the laws of the nether regions.




strippedwarrior -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 6:45:48 AM)

Elisabelle, Surely there are conflicting attitudes and moral's from the Old Testament to the New? Jesus preached that the Old Testament was excessive in its vengeance. Surely murdering someone who practices Abortion (for an undisclosed reason) goes against Matthew 5:38-39 "You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

There is also the fact you have to consider the reason why abortion was chosen as an option. Did it affect the life of the woman? In the sense that she may have died during childbirth. Would the child have been raised in a safe home? Has there been cases of abuse inthe house hold. Could the parents cope financially enough to be able to support a child? There are many more reasons to question why Abortion was the chosen solution. Likewise There are the potential risks involved with Abortion. I'm not a docter, so I cannot comment on what might happen when you remove the foetus premeturly. Out of curiosity,what is the standing point for those who are radically anti-abortion, on natural (non-induced) miscarriages?

Also, much of the Old Testament reads like a health and safety manual for constructing a basic society.  People should not need to be told, don't murder, don't covet other people's belongings, don't cheat on your spouse, don't steal etc. Why? Because people should understand that these actions hurt society and if you hapen to do them to someone bigger than you well, you need to hope he believes in turning the other cheek, and doesn't harm/maim/kill the transgressor.

For comparison;
OT: Deuteronomy 19:21 "And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot."
NT: Matthew 5:38-39 "You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also."

If you are to accept the Old Testament as the only part that is relevant, then you will agree to murder anyone who kills, and seek relevant injury for anything that occurs. If you are to accept the New Testament as relevant, then you will moderate your behaivour accordingly. You will follow the teachings of Jesus and allow them to modify how you interpret the Old Testament.





strippedwarrior -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 7:25:14 AM)

OT: Deuteronomy 19:21 'And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.'
NT: Matthew 5:38-39 'You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also'

Elisabelle, surely these two passages are conciderably more than the later being a better explanation of the former. The first, says get even, the second, resist getting one over. The other quotes you make in advocating taking the medical professionals life are also Old Testament. You say humanity changed between the OT and the NT, then why start out using these as a source to condone murder?

There are other people quoting the OT as well, have you seen which way it tends to view things? Any injury should be returned upon the transgressor, in equal measure or in excess.
Numbers 35:31 - 'Moreover, you shall not take ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death.'
Genesis 9:6 - 'Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.'
Leviticus 24:17 - 'And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death.'
Deuteronomy 17:7 'The hands of the witnesses must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. You must purge the evil from among you.'

The way I see it, if you follow the Old Testament as the only relevant religious law, then you will kill a murder, an abortionist, and any doctor or surgeon that makes a mistake on the operating table or in diagnosis and medication.

If you follow the New Testament and allow it to influence you, well lets consider another set of quotations:
Luke 6:37 "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.
Romans 13:1-2 'Let every soul be in subjection to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those who exist are ordained by God. Therefore he who resists the authority, withstands the ordinance of God; and those who withstand will receive to themselves judgment.'

So, there is no biblical (NT) defense for murdering someone who operates within the law of the land. But there is if you claim the OT to over rule the law of the land.



FullCircle -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 7:32:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave
Cuts both ways. People don't think about the wider consequences of abortion.

The consequences of abortion are only measurable by the imagination.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

The justification often used is this:

Genisis 9:5-6

"And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man."

This passage has been the point of much contention.


I don't see where it says who is permitted to do the killing? The problem is some people take it upon themselves to decide this. You could obviously say the same of abortion but there is more doubt as to what constitutes a life. You'd think the pro-lifers would be able to get their point across without contradicting themselves.



truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 7:48:18 AM)

quote:

The consequences of abortion are only measurable by the imagination.


Fully as quantifiable as ... "the pain suffered by family members...."



tazzygirl -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 7:54:16 AM)

Are we speaking of pre-abotion laws or post?



FullCircle -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 7:57:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave
quote:

The consequences of abortion are only measurable by the imagination.

Fully as quantifiable as ... "the pain suffered by family members...."


One you can see with your own eyes if you care to look whilst the other is pure speculation. For all you know they just aborted the next Hitler or Einstein. It's a game of pure speculation as to what the greater good/bad of any such act is.



truckinslave -> RE: Some one want to explain which part of the Bible promotes this? (10/23/2010 8:03:46 AM)

Post.
There can be no doubt of the guilt and remorse suffered by some women who have abortions. Roe herself, of course, for starters.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625