March 24, 201610 yr Author Are you saying Numbers 5 is appropriate punishment for someone who has caused a miscarriage? Friend, you are the one that brought up Numbers chapter 5:11-31 when you were saying the Bible instructs abortion. Those verses are about what to do if a woman is accused of adultery. If she is found to be a faithful wife, then she can continue to be with her husband and build a family. It has nothing to do with a miscarriage. This was your example. I am the one that brought up Exodus 21. I assumed that Exodus 21:22 was what you were trying to say was an instruction for abortion. Exodus 21:22 is the verse that talks about how to punish a man if he hits a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely. I some cases it is a fine and in some cases it is death. If no serious injury, then a fine. If death, then the man who hit her dies. So could you please give me an example of the bible instructing how abortions are to be used?
March 24, 201610 yr Author I appreciate your honesty. Thanks. The thing is though, I do not give up on my faith because of the things that I cannot explain. Since I believe that God is almighty, amazing, superior, and awesome, then naturally there will be things I do not understand. If I indeed understood every aspect of God and the Bible, then he would not be God because I am not that intelligent.
March 24, 201610 yr Friend, you are the one that brought up Numbers chapter 5:11-31 when you were saying the Bible instructs abortion. Those verses are about what to do if a woman is accused of adultery. If she is found to be a faithful wife, then she can continue to be with her husband and build a family. It has nothing to do with a miscarriage. This was your example. I am the one that brought up Exodus 21. I assumed that Exodus 21:22 was what you were trying to say was an instruction for abortion. Exodus 21:22 is the verse that talks about how to punish a man if he hits a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely. I some cases it is a fine and in some cases it is death. If no serious injury, then a fine. If death, then the man who hit her dies. So could you please give me an example of the bible instructing how abortions are to be used? The passage in numbers are instructions for how to cause a miscarriage. The instructions are in god's words. It starts with a wife suspected of being unfaithful. She is to be given bitter waters or whatever they call it. It's poison. If she has been unfaithful, then she miscarries and is made barren. If she was not unfaithful, then the poison won't affect her. So yes, it is "about what to do if a woman is accused of adultry" and what one is to do is to force her to have a miscarriage.
March 24, 201610 yr Here is the passage: Numbers 5:11-31King James Version (KJV) 11 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, The lord is the one giving the instructions 12 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him, 13 And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner; We have a suspected cheating wife here. 14 And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled: or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled: Husband is jealous, maybe his was defiled, maybe not. What will god tell us to do? 15 Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance. So he brings his wife to the priest, 16 And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the Lord: and the priest brings her before the lord 17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water: 18 And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse: bitter water that causeth the curse, that's the poison. 19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse: If the wife has not been defiled, then she will be free from the poison 20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband: but if you have been defiled....... 21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The Lord make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the Lord doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell; the thigh to rot and thy belly to swell. That is a miscarriage and then the destruction of the uterus. 22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen. 23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water: 24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter. 25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the Lord, and offer it upon the altar: 26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water. 27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. again, if she is guilty of adultery, the bitter water will cause her thigh to rot and her belly to swell. 28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed. In case you want to argue that hey, what does thigh to rot and belly to swell really mean? This verse makes it clear that if the woman is not defiled then she is free and can "conceive seed" The opposite result. 29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled; 30 Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the Lord, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law. 31 Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity. Here is the NIV translation 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 Here is he NRSV translation When he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall discharge, her uterus drop, and the woman shall become an execration among her people. 28 Now what do we call it when a women is given something that 1. causes her abdomen to swell and her womb to miscarry or 2. her womb to discharge and her uterus to drop or 3. her thigh to rot and her belly to swell? Well, I call it an abortion. If you want to call it a forced miscarriage, then fine. But is more than just a "what to do if a wife is unfaithful" For starters, it is what to do if a wife is suspected of being unfaithful. The description makes it clear that some faithful wives will go thru this. And the "what" in the "what to do" is to give her some water to make her miscarry.
March 25, 201610 yr @oldgrappler Some good posts, a quick response before work duties. I may come back to the posts, but the quick one now. You are setting up your own straw man to argue against. I am not saying christians don't know they should not stab their children. I am saying they have to defer to god to know it, at least under the "moral arbiter" (divine command) theory you stated. But you say, well then, where are the christian child stabbers? Here is what happens. Everyone knows you should not stab children. I accept that there is no god, but I also know I should not stab my children. You believe there is a god, and you also know you should not stab your children. But you then have to open up the bible and come up with a reason for not stabbing your children, (which is in your post, about sacredness of life) and then...viola! God believes that you should not stab your children! (you just have to ignore the part where god tells a dude to stab his child). That's essentially what is happening. We all know not to stab the children, so the lack of christian child stabbers doesn't mean anything, simply not relevant. Thought exercise of proof. This is a thought exercise. Pretend for a second you just learned there is no god. Would you go out and stab your kids, rape people, kill them, and rob them? Would you want to do that? The answer is no. You would be the same person. Just like the rest of us atheists who don't do any of that stuff. I am still have problems with my internet connection. I cannot access BGP on my home computer. I have no idea why. I seem to be able to access any other web site but BGP. Perhaps it is Divine intervention I finally went to another location. This is why my response has been slow in coming. I'd like to pick up where we left off... You were actually the one who created the straw man when you suggested that Christians couldn’t know whether they should kill (stab) their own child or not because perhaps God would permit it. You also said that you as an atheist, could say, “Absolutely, it is wrong to stab your own child.” I then demonstrated how a Christian worldview prohibits the killing (stabbing) of one’s own child. I don’t need to rehash it here, it’s in my previous post. Using a contemporary example of “stabbing one’s own child” I asked the question of whether Christianity or atheism permits abortion. I showed that the Christian worldview does not. However, many atheists agree with Richard Dawkins in saying there “is no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pointless indifference…” in the universe. In such a view of the universe where there is no morality, no right and wrong, no good or evil what if a person reasons that it is in his or her best interest to stab his or her child? Atheism has no rational basis to prevent it, does it? I would like to hear you talk about how an atheist would reason with a woman who is about to kill (stab) her own child that is in her womb. What if she has looked at her circumstance and decided that it is in her best interest not to have a baby at this time and so she decides to terminate her pregnancy. Perhaps she has graduated law school and just got a job at a law firm. She will be working 90 hour weeks in her new position until she gets established. Her career does not allow her to tend to a baby. It just is not convenient right now. Does atheism say that she should not kill her own baby that is now residing in her womb? If so, on what basis? If atheism does permit her to kill her baby, on what basis do you conclude that it is a just and moral action? I look forward to your answer.
March 25, 201610 yr I am still have problems with my internet connection. I cannot access BGP on my home computer. I have no idea why. I seem to be able to access any other web site but BGP. Perhaps it is Divine intervention I finally went to another location. This is why my response has been slow in coming. I'd like to pick up where we left off... You were actually the one who created the straw man when you suggested that Christians couldn’t know whether they should kill (stab) their own child or not because perhaps God would permit it. You also said that you as an atheist, could say, “Absolutely, it is wrong to stab your own child.” I then demonstrated how a Christian worldview prohibits the killing (stabbing) of one’s own child. I don’t need to rehash it here, it’s in my previous post. Using a contemporary example of “stabbing one’s own child” I asked the question of whether Christianity or atheism permits abortion. I showed that the Christian worldview does not. However, many atheists agree with Richard Dawkins in saying there “is no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pointless indifference…” in the universe. In such a view of the universe where there is no morality, no right and wrong, no good or evil what if a person reasons that it is in his or her best interest to stab his or her child? Atheism has no rational basis to prevent it, does it? I would like to hear you talk about how an atheist would reason with a woman who is about to kill (stab) her own child that is in her womb. What if she has looked at her circumstance and decided that it is in her best interest not to have a baby at this time and so she decides to terminate her pregnancy. Perhaps she has graduated law school and just got a job at a law firm. She will be working 90 hour weeks in her new position until she gets established. Her career does not allow her to tend to a baby. It just is not convenient right now. Does atheism say that she should not kill her own baby that is now residing in her womb? If so, on what basis? If atheism does permit her to kill her baby, on what basis do you conclude that it is a just and moral action? I look forward to your answer. I've no idea exactly what MayfieldFan will say in response to your question, but If I may, for starters I'm glad that I'm not a woman who would have to ponder such things. I personally don't delight in the idea for it's a difficult dilemma for someone to be in, but It would not be my place to tell someone else that it's the right or wrong thing to do. I'm coming from more of an Existential or Camus-like Absurdism standpoint where I try to accept my human limitations of understanding ultimate truth, if there is such a thing, and accept the possible meaninglessness of our existence, and make the best of a life with no answers, and to live it as freely as i can by my own rules the best I can. I'm not always perfect in adapting to this for it's tempting at times to be pulled into society's mindsets, or find myself judging others when it's not my place to do so. Religion aims to dictate morality and lead people to their decisions. Existentiality would leave that decision up the the individual, and though I can't speak for others, I would guess that so would Atheism. MayfieldFan is better at articulating his answers that I, so I'm interested in hearing how he might address this question.
March 25, 201610 yr I am still have problems with my internet connection. I cannot access BGP on my home computer. I have no idea why. I seem to be able to access any other web site but BGP. Perhaps it is Divine intervention I finally went to another location. This is why my response has been slow in coming. I'd like to pick up where we left off... You were actually the one who created the straw man when you suggested that Christians couldn’t know whether they should kill (stab) their own child or not because perhaps God would permit it. You also said that you as an atheist, could say, “Absolutely, it is wrong to stab your own child.” I then demonstrated how a Christian worldview prohibits the killing (stabbing) of one’s own child. I don’t need to rehash it here, it’s in my previous post. Using a contemporary example of “stabbing one’s own child” I asked the question of whether Christianity or atheism permits abortion. I showed that the Christian worldview does not. However, many atheists agree with Richard Dawkins in saying there “is no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pointless indifference…” in the universe. In such a view of the universe where there is no morality, no right and wrong, no good or evil what if a person reasons that it is in his or her best interest to stab his or her child? Atheism has no rational basis to prevent it, does it? I would like to hear you talk about how an atheist would reason with a woman who is about to kill (stab) her own child that is in her womb. What if she has looked at her circumstance and decided that it is in her best interest not to have a baby at this time and so she decides to terminate her pregnancy. Perhaps she has graduated law school and just got a job at a law firm. She will be working 90 hour weeks in her new position until she gets established. Her career does not allow her to tend to a baby. It just is not convenient right now. Does atheism say that she should not kill her own baby that is now residing in her womb? If so, on what basis? If atheism does permit her to kill her baby, on what basis do you conclude that it is a just and moral action? I look forward to your answer. I respect your views @oldgrappler , but basically think the opposite of you. I think the way you conceive of god and morality is immoral and, ironically, it is essentially what you attribute to atheism. I will elaborate, but to restate it a bit differently, your criticisms of atheism are misguided and actually more descriptive for the moral system you have put forward. How could that be you might be asking.....here's how. There are two basic options. 1. Things are moral because god says they are. (that's divine command theory) OR 2. Things are moral because they are and god "chooses" them because they are moral. As I understand your previous posts, they seemed to clearly rely upon option 1, the divine command theory. Under DC, things are not independently moral, to know morality, one must know god. God tells me to love my child. So the moral nugget is to "love your child" But loving my child is not independently moral, it needs god's say so. And, if god changes his mind, and tells me to stab my child, then it is now moral for me to do so. This strikes me as decidedly immoral situation. My child has no value, except whatever value god says he has. This divine command theory means we live in a nihilistic world, waiting for word to come down from on high. I will grant you that DC has one benefit, and it is one that you have trumpeted, but this benefit "masks" the immorality of the whole DC setup. It has the benefit of having an "ultimate" decider. The moral arbiter you spoke of. The arbiter may change his mind, and his standards may be convoluted and indecipherable, but they would be some sort of "ultimate" standard. But that doesn't the values moral. The arbiter in this set up could be a real jerk and a dictator. His standards may be "ultimate" but not moral. His choices have absolutely nothing to recommend themselves to us but for the fact that he is powerful. Because things are not moral in and of themselves, we have no basis by which we can even judge the "morality" of god, we can only submit and hope for the best. Now, many christians do not subscribe to DC theory. They say things are moral in and of themselves, and god "chooses" these things, and tells us to do them, because they are moral. God chooses the good so to speak. So, for example, honesty is a moral good. Independent of god. God may want to help us out, by pointing this out for us, and declaring so. But god is not making honesty moral, he is just declaring what is independently true. Under option 2, the world we live in is filled with moral values. They may not be "ultimate" and we may not understand them, and their origins, but they exist, we live in them, and they are independent of god. So, when I say, there is no god, I am not rejecting morality. I don't need god to tell me right from wrong, I don't need him to tell me to love my children. I know my children have value without him, or his word. You have brought this up several times, the idea that there is no morality if one does not believe. I kinda feel like your DC theory has you constantly brushing up against the idea of nihilism because under that theory, the world really is nihilistic but for what god says. So I can kinda see how you might think that letting go of that would drop one right in that type of world. But there are other ways of seeing the whole thing, even for believers and non-believers.
March 27, 201610 yr Author @MayfieldFan I appreciate you giving me a verse and an explanation. I disagree with our interpretation that it condones and instructs abortion. I see where you get it though. I see it more as a punishment for parents, kind of like what happened to David and Bathsheba. Also I hope you know that the Old Testament is Judaism. Christianity does not live by the OT Law. Christianity believes that the old testament/written code/law of moses was nailed to the cross with Jesus. IT says that in Colossians. Since Christians believe in the New Testament, then naturally they would believe what Colossians says about this topic. I'm sitting here watching the Passion of the Christ on TV. Its been about ten years or so since I saw it. I forgot how good it is.
March 27, 201610 yr @MayfieldFan I appreciate you giving me a verse and an explanation. I disagree with our interpretation that it condones and instructs abortion. I see where you get it though. I see it more as a punishment for parents, kind of like what happened to David and Bathsheba. Also I hope you know that the Old Testament is Judaism. Christianity does not live by the OT Law. Christianity believes that the old testament/written code/law of moses was nailed to the cross with Jesus. IT says that in Colossians. Since Christians believe in the New Testament, then naturally they would believe what Colossians says about this topic. I'm sitting here watching the Passion of the Christ on TV. Its been about ten years or so since I saw it. I forgot how good it is. I hope you don't see this anytime soon, (you should be in church ) but happy Easter.
March 27, 201610 yr I've enjoyed reading this thread. There's been really good and civil discussion between knowledgeable people on this touchy topic.
March 27, 201610 yr I will concede that my description of this idea as "bizarre" is an opinion, but I stand by it. You claim it's consistent, but consistency doesn't mean it is not bizarre. I am glad that many humans seem capable of exercising a more reasonable and loving forgiveness than god. On the second part, about being terrified to live in a world where people could just sin and then be saved automatically. That is precisely the system you espouse. Take the world's worst child rapist. He can spend his entire life raping, torturing and killing children and need only to believe in his last moment on his deathbed. Meanwhile, if the parents of his victims lose their faith in the depression and suffering they feel upon the murder of their children, well, they go to hell. The system you believe in is not just or moral. It is not based on forgiveness, which is freely given out of love, but rather on subservience, claimed by a jealous and vengeful god. God gave all men free will, it's up to us on how we use it. It's not up to anyone to judge another, only God on Judgment day. It's hard to practice what you preach but I never stop trying. Sometimes I fall, but I always get back up. Like my Mother used to say, sweep your own doorstep before you criticize how another's sweeping theirs. Yes, my Mother was a wise woman and I try each day to be like her, falling short sometimes. Easter Blessings to you all.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.