NationStates Jolt Archive

While the Bible does in parts outright condemn hompsexuality, what exactly does it say about abortion? Does it condem it as well? Let's take a look at a few select quotes, shall we?

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life. -- Exodus 21:22-23

According to Exodus, a fetus is not considered a human life.

One quote not enough?

And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. -- Leviticus 27:6

Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD. -- Numbers 3:15-16

The Bible puts no value on child under the age of one month; the child is considered worthless, and these same children are not considered persons.

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. -- Numbers 31:15-17

Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. -- Hosea 9:14

Yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb. -- Hosea 9:16

Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up. -- Hosea 13:16

So... it seems that even the all loving God does approve of the killing of unborn children in some cases. It seems that God practices his own form of Eugenics.

So... Conservatives aren't the only ones who can quote the Bible to suppoirt their agenda. Liberals can do, and how do you like these quotes? These one ssupport the abortion cause, contrary to the belief that God says that abortion is a sin...

Hooray for proving conserv. Christians wrong :p

Oh, that wacky bible! :)

While the Bible does in parts outright condemn hompsexuality, what exactly does it say about abortion? Does it condem it as well? Let's take a look at a few select quotes, shall we?

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life. -- Exodus 21:22-23

According to Exodus, a fetus is not considered a human life.

One quote not enough?

And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. -- Leviticus 27:6

Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD. -- Numbers 3:15-16

The Bible puts no value on child under the age of one month; the child is considered worthless, and these same children are not considered persons.

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. -- Numbers 31:15-17

Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. -- Hosea 9:14

Yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb. -- Hosea 9:16

Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up. -- Hosea 13:16

So... it seems that even the all loving God does approve of the killing of unborn children in some cases. It seems that God practices his own form of Eugenics.

So... Conservatives aren't the only ones who can quote the Bible to suppoirt their agenda. Liberals can do, and how do you like these quotes? These one ssupport the abortion cause, contrary to the belief that God says that abortion is a sin...
http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5700

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life. -- Exodus 21:22-23

According to Exodus, a fetus is not considered a human life.

And how does this support abortion? It says that if there is harm (not to the mother, not to the baby, just harm in general) than the penalty is to be life for life, stripe for stripe... And this is the result of an accident. Should the penalty be any less if it is intentional?


And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. -- Leviticus 27:6

Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD. -- Numbers 3:15-16

The Bible puts no value on child under the age of one month; the child is considered worthless, and these same children are not considered persons.

Women weren't counted. Does the Bible teach that they are valueless, also? And as for the estimations, why does that matter? Different roles and different rules /=/ different worth.

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. -- Numbers 31:15-17

Give them, O LORD: what wilt thou give? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. -- Hosea 9:14

Yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb. -- Hosea 9:16

Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up. -- Hosea 13:16

So... it seems that even the all loving God does approve of the killing of unborn children in some cases. It seems that God practices his own form of Eugenics.

Or, as I said before, the Israelites could have been God's vessels of judgement on an unrepentent people. Genesis 15:16 "And they [Abraham's descendents] shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete."

So... Conservatives aren't the only ones who can quote the Bible to suppoirt their agenda. Liberals can do, and how do you like these quotes? These one ssupport the abortion cause, contrary to the belief that God says that abortion is a sin...

YOu can twist Scripture all sorts of ways. That doesn't mean it actually says that though.

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5700

Oooo! Stand to Reason. I like them. Steve Wagner, one of their speakers came to a confrence I was at this summer. He was a very good speaker.

Gosh, good thing most of the Old Testament was out of date about...ohhhhh, 2,000 years ago :P
It IS fun to point out to 'godhatesfags' people that 'the meek will inherit the earth' and various other bible passages which basically tell people to 'shut the fuck up you idiots, God works in his own ways.'
But yeah, most non-idiotic Christians dont follow the Old Testament now. The few who do usually dont follow it completly and often enjoy shellfish, from what I can see.

Gosh, good thing most of the Old Testament was out of date about...ohhhhh, 2,000 years ago :P
It IS fun to point out to 'godhatesfags' people that 'the meek will inherit the earth' and various other bible passages which basically tell people to 'shut the fuck up you idiots, God works in his own ways.'
But yeah, most non-idiotic Christians dont follow the Old Testament now. The few who do usually dont follow it completly and often enjoy shellfish, from what I can see.
while I don't like Phelps and his crew, the word "meek" doesn't mean "STFU"

I do not see what's between homosexuality and abortion.
Or to prove both bad I would remember the eleven commandment.
The hardest line to translate was Exodus 35.11: "And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply." . Mankind must survive and, in order to survive, grow, and multiply.
Grow and Multiply Then, after the first humans spread across the surface of the earth, and the presence of the Elohim was no longer indispensable, the creators left the earth in order to let humans grow and multiply, as it is written in Genesis.

Make it simple I should understand better.

To multiply means you shalt not kill the baby in the womb and you are not homosexual.
To grow is more difficult for you... see you in some 24 000 years.

I do not see what's between homosexuality and abortion.
Or to prove both bad I would remember the eleven commandment.
The hardest line to translate was Exodus 35.11: "And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply." . Mankind must survive and, in order to survive, grow, and multiply.
Grow and Multiply Then, after the first humans spread across the surface of the earth, and the presence of the Elohim was no longer indispensable, the creators left the earth in order to let humans grow and multiply, as it is written in Genesis.

Make it simple I should understand better.

To multiply means you shalt not kill the baby in the womb and you are not homosexual.
To grow is more difficult for you... see you in some 24 000 years.

That is an amazingly interesting interpretation of that verse.

And how does this support abortion? It says that if there is harm (not to the mother, not to the baby, just harm in general) than the penalty is to be life for life, stripe for stripe...

That is what this translation says. Other translations do explicitly distinguish between fetus and mother - making clear that the "life for life" part only refers to her. And of course, yet other translations just as explicitly state that it refers to both of them.

Isn't translating wonderful ?

And this is the result of an accident. Should the penalty be any less if it is intentional?
It seems that is up to the father to determine. He is the one being harmed by the death of the fetus in Gods eyes. Not the mother or the fetus itself.
All according to some translations of course. Though it fits nicely with the rest of the Bibles attitude on women that have children with men other than their husbands.

Women weren't counted. Does the Bible teach that they are valueless, also?

Arguably, yes. Women serve as sperm recipticles for their husbands and mothers for their husbands children. Nothing more.
There are plenty of Christians - including women - that actually believe that.

Ah yes... this thread is about to become deliciously evil.

I love taking something and twisting the context...

And then watching the Christians come along and say that I'm wrong, but then if they used variations on this quotes to prove the inverse, they'd be all uppity when they are disproven.

Moral? Bored liberals aren't a good thing.

My objective? To prove that quoting means nothing without the whole context.

The whole book's gender-biased. A woman's responsible for original sin. A woman cuts Samson's coif of power. A woman asks for the head of John the Baptist. Read that book again sometime. Women are painted as bigger antagonists than the Egyptians and Romans combined

[QUOTE]That is what this translation says. Other translations do explicitly distinguish between fetus and mother - making clear that the "life for life" part only refers to her. And of course, yet other translations just as explicitly state that it refers to both of them.

Isn't translating wonderful ?

I have never seen a serious translation (one where they didn't admit trying to update the content) distinguish between the two.

It seems that is up to the father to determine. He is the one being harmed by the death of the fetus in Gods eyes. Not the mother or the fetus itself. All according to some translations of course. Though it fits nicely with the rest of the Bibles attitude on women that have children with men other than their husbands.

No, he is not. The fine for the miscarriage would go to the husband, because he was the head of the household and therefore in charge of the money. That doesn't mean harm to the woman or child is unimportant to God.

Arguably, yes. Women serve as sperm recipticles for their husbands and mothers for their husbands children. Nothing more.
There are plenty of Christians - including women - that actually believe that.

Arguably, no. If the men are the ones working and going to war, why would we care how many women there are if they can't be taxed or fight. Things have changed (arguable whether for good or not) so they can now do both. So now we care how many there are. Also, the mind set was different. Why do we need to know more than is needed to run the country? We need to know about taxes and army strength, but not how many homes have "soccer-moms." Sociology didn't exist yet.

My objective? To prove that quoting means nothing without the whole context.

Which both sides are good at doing.

The whole book's gender-biased. A woman's responsible for original sin. A woman cuts Samson's coif of power. A woman asks for the head of John the Baptist. Read that book again sometime. Women are painted as bigger antagonists than the Egyptians and Romans combined

There are a lot of evil men and good women, though. Ahab, Barabas, Herod, Simon the magician were all evil. Esther, Rahab, Deborah, Ruth were all good. Esther and Ruth have whole books devoted to them. You're over generalizing.

Which both sides are good at doing.
Precisely. That's why I have started this thread.

http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5700


Ya know, nothing against you Smunk but I find it remarkably telling that in this case, as many others, someone would bend over backwards making obscure linguistic references to try to prove that "miscarriage" really means "premature birth" but the same group of people will scream at the top of their lungs that the bible is "god's divine word!!!!111oneoneone!" when someone suggest that maybe some other parts of it (say the prohibition against homosexuality) just MIGHT not mean what they think it means.

In other words it's holy and unquestionable writ when it seems to mean one thing, and a horribly poor translation when something seems to go against preconceived notions.

Saying gays are bad? well that's god's divine word, god hates gays. Suggesting that a fetus might not be life? Well that MUST be a translation mistake

I do not see what's between homosexuality and abortion.
Or to prove both bad I would remember the eleven commandment.
The hardest line to translate was Exodus 35.11: "And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply." . Mankind must survive and, in order to survive, grow, and multiply.
Grow and Multiply Then, after the first humans spread across the surface of the earth, and the presence of the Elohim was no longer indispensable, the creators left the earth in order to let humans grow and multiply, as it is written in Genesis.

Make it simple I should understand better.

To multiply means you shalt not kill the baby in the womb and you are not homosexual.
To grow is more difficult for you... see you in some 24 000 years.

Of course, if we are to survive, there's this small matter of the carying capacity of the planet.

There are a lot of evil men and good women, though. Ahab, Barabas, Herod, Simon the magician were all evil. Esther, Rahab, Deborah, Ruth were all good. Esther and Ruth have whole books devoted to them. You're over generalizing.

Actually I'm quoting. A cookie if you figure out the source.

Precisely. That's why I have started this thread.

oh, well if that's your purpose, you might want to latch on to

Ecc 10:19 A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.

Actually I'm quoting. A cookie if you figure out the source.

I really don't know. If it's something from Dan Browne's heresy, I'll throw myself out the window.

[QUOTE=The Alma Mater;11735254]I have never seen a serious translation (one where they didn't admit trying to update the content) distinguish between the two.

I have. In several countries it is even the default translation.

No, he is not. The fine for the miscarriage would go to the husband, because he was the head of the household and therefore in charge of the money. That doesn't mean harm to the woman or child is unimportant to God.

That is an interpretation. Just as mine. Both are equally valid.

Aside: how do you explain that a woman who has had sex with another man than her husband should be put to death, without any comments on how people should wait 9 months, if God cares about the fetus ?

Arguably, no. If the men are the ones working and going to war, why would we care how many women there are if they can't be taxed or fight.
My comment refers to the general undertone of the Bible. Which really is interpreted this way by several Christian groups. Look up the Dutch SGP political party for an excellent example.

oh, well if that's your purpose, you might want to latch on to

Ecc 10:19 A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.
Are you saying I'm a leech? Because I'm not! I'll have you know gentle lady that I am a weasel!

That is an interpretation. Just as mine. Both are equally valid.

There may be many applications, but there can only be one interpretation. Or rather, only one correct interpretation.

Aside: how do you explain that a woman who has had sex with another man than her husband should be put to death, without any comments on how people should wait 9 months, if God cares about the fetus ?

Never thought of that and I don't know. I would think that the thought is "Purge society. I [God] will deal with the issue of pregnancy." But God doesn't say and I'm not God.

The whole book's gender-biased. A woman's responsible for original sin. A woman cuts Samson's coif of power. A woman asks for the head of John the Baptist. Read that book again sometime. Women are painted as bigger antagonists than the Egyptians and Romans combined

Hey Rufus, see you in three years.

-Jesus

GREAT movie. One I'm not terribly surprised Ed hasn't seen.

Are you saying I'm a leech? Because I'm not! I'll have you know gentle lady that I am a weasel!

:eek: no.

I was just saying that taken out of context that's a verse that you could use, you know to prove how things taken out of context may not mean what they mean in context.

You know?

:eek: no.

I was just saying that taken out of context that's a verse that you could use, you know to prove how things taken out of context may not mean what they mean in context.

You know?
I understand, which is precisely why I didn't reply and instead took your words and make my own little stupid remark. I do that.

But, yes, it can be taken way out of context.

YOu can twist Scripture all sorts of ways. That doesn't mean it actually says that though.

That's rather the point. There is no section of the Bible that specifically prohibits abortion. The conservative anti-abortion argument depends on arguing one of two things.

A) It's unchristian.
B) It is the taking of a human life.

As you point out, scripture can be twisted in all sorts of ways, so how, in the absense of any clear prohibition on abortion, can we be expected to accept that it's unchristian.

You're resorting to some pretty shakey ground in arguing human value. The sections in the Bible really do say that lives less than a month old are worthless. If you're someone who believes that morality comes from the Bible, like it or not, then you can't resort to intuitive arguments like "well if you interpret it to mean that, then we must also interpret it to mean this, which I don't," then all you're going is saying that you don't believe that the Bible should be followed strictly. Some parts are to be overlooked because they are imcompatible wtih modern life, or because moral understanding has advanced since Biblical times.

You're resorting to some pretty shakey ground in arguing human value. The sections in the Bible really do say that lives less than a month old are worthless. If you're someone who believes that morality comes from the Bible, like it or not, then you can't resort to intuitive arguments like "well if you interpret it to mean that, then we must also interpret it to mean this, which I don't," then all you're going is saying that you don't believe that the Bible should be followed strictly. Some parts are to be overlooked because they are imcompatible wtih modern life, or because moral understanding has advanced since Biblical times.

No where does it say that they are worthless. I don't know why they are no counted, but counting and monies do not equal worth.

There is no part which is to be overlooked. Even those parts of the Law repealed (by Scripture, not Man) can be used to learn.

Why are all Christians assumed to be conservatives?

OT: Gay marriage should be allowed, and abortion is equivalent to murder and accordingly should be discouraged and illegal.