So, when does life begin?

[CVShooter]

This is why I noted earlier...







It's not about 'conservative' vs. 'liberal' or about moral relativism. It's about how you engage in the conversation.

CVShooter is correct to the degree that God allows humans to make their choice and simply condemning and proselytizing isn't the same as persuasion. Plinker is correct in that there is considerable... well... some would call it 'hypocrisy' and others 'blind spots.' Whatever it is, there is a certain amount of... 'inconsistency'... in the arguments presented or, at least, there appears to be.

It is this very 'inconsistency' that I referenced in my first post to this thread and have, repeatedly, come back to. Barang and I are closer than we appear in terms of what we agree on; whether he perceives it that way or not. We agree that abortion is a 'permissible' thing, under certain circumstances. Where we differ is in the approach we promote in terms of how to persuade as to what those circumstances are. As I already stated...



It's the very thing we see in the quotes from CVShooter, plinker202020, and even Barang. What is being reacted to, the condemnation, isn't even the topic, which is abortion. CVShooter doesn't want to be 'preached' to. Plinker abhors the 'inconsistency.' Barang wants the fire and brimstone, but resists when it is observed that he is more accommodating than he wants to come across.

Where do you find an opportunity for discourse and persuasion in that if you 'preach' (start with the fire and brimstone Bible verses), appear to be inconsistent with what the Bible itself teaches (as I have demonstrated), and don't or refuse to recognize how what you just said comes across?

That's the real starting point and topic of discussion when speaking about abortion. Things like when Life begins, what is considered acceptable/unacceptable to the Lord and to you, personally, etc. come later. Otherwise, all you end up with is what we've seen in this thread... discord. As I also observed... Patiently explaining why you believe the way you do and demonstrating how those beliefs are not necessarily antithetical to the other person's Life or the choices they are confronted with is and happens to be what 'testimony' is all about.

There are no two lives which are identical, yet there is no new thing under the sun. It's not so much about 'finding common ground' as it is about accepting that 'common' isn't represented by the extremes we often see or are consistently shown. As such, we should look to address the 'middle' and work outward. Put another way, you don't 'cure' a disease by killing the patient.

@Trapped -- you are an extremely patient and articulate person. I'm here mainly for entertainment purposes. But you are taking this very seriously and doing a fine job at expressing your thoughts. Kudos to you, my friend. Share my campfire anytime.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

@Trapped -- you are an extremely patient and articulate person. I'm here mainly for entertainment purposes. But you are taking this very seriously and doing a fine job at expressing your thoughts. Kudos to you, my friend. Share my campfire anytime.

Thanks.

I've got a supply of hot dogs in the freezer which have been there long enough that they're verging on 'freezer burn.' They might just need to be cooked over a fire rather than boiled in a pot so as to induce a proper texture. I'm gonna have to think about that.

[Barang]

So, you know what everyone in those 'large groups' is protesting, not to mention what's in their hearts because of "some of their signs" and the words of some??? As I said...

the answer is the same. they're out there protesting, giving interviews, signs and mantra "my body my choice." no guessing required.
how many have you heard from that group that they have other reason than selfishness. i am yet to hear one but maybe after reading this thread they'd start including that in their mantra to make it look like their just normal people.

According to FOX News last year... Over 63 million abortions have occurred in the US since Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. If you read the article, that's based on an analysis by The Right To Life Committee, which automatically means it can be questioned in terms of just the numbers in that even they acknowledge that the number is an estimate. Then there's the fact that the report doesn't speak to the 'motivations' behind the abortions, just the idea that technology has made abortions 'easier.' It is the FOX News piece which throws out some statistics, then lets readers infer the motivations.

On the other hand, The Washington Post, also last year... No, there are not 63 million abortions a year in the U.S. Okay. That's not what FOX News said, it's what one of the 'personalities' said...



The reason I point to that piece isn't the 'correction' it is issuing, but because it too doesn't deal with motivation, but also because...



Which is something I also noted and that's without differentiating between 'legal' abortions done with proper, medical assistance and 'illegal' abortions with all the problems which stem from them.

even if you slash the number 63 million to 30 million, the number of those who wants to kill their babies is overwhelmingly high. it doesn't diminish the staggering number of selfish people who aborted their babies due to:
1- too young to have a baby.
2- one night stand.
3- promiscuity.
4- adultery.
5- burdensome.
6- in the way of career.
7- unplanned.
8 - selfishness.
that's a lot of women with lots of reasons to kill their unwanted babies.

He's using 'extremism' to address 'extremists;' i.e., Pharisees and Sadducees. He's recounting the deeds of the Devil and where they are headed on that basis. Particularly in those days, the Pharisees and Sadducees were hardly the 'norm' or the 'common people.'

both. some addressed to pharisees and some to common people.

Mark 9:42-48 nkjv
42 ?But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me [a]to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea. 43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life [b]maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to [c]hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched? 44 [d]where

?Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.?

45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into [e]hell, [f]into the fire that shall never be quenched? 46 where

?Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.?

47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into [g]hell fire? 48 where

?Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.?

Matthew 13:40-42 nkjv
40 Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. 41 The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, 42 and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I never said to tone down the message. I've been advising that you tone down the delivery of your testimony, particularly at the beginning. Come on too strong and they are unlikely to hear the testimony, only the tone.

it's not abrasive, it is direct, truthful and from the source (Bible).
i will defend the babies in the womb unabashed and unapologetic.
what's more innocent than a baby in the womb.
Proverbs 6:16-19 nkjv
16
These six things the Lord hates,
Yes, seven are an abomination to [a]Him:
17
A[b] proud look,
A lying tongue,
Hands that shed innocent blood,
18
A heart that devises wicked plans,
Feet that are swift in running to evil,
19
A false witness who speaks lies,
And one who sows discord among brethren.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

the answer is the same. they're out there protesting, giving interviews, signs and mantra "my body my choice." no guessing required.
how many have you heard from that group that they have other reason than selfishness. i am yet to hear one but maybe after reading this thread they'd start including that in their mantra to make it look like their just normal people.

Ever hear of the 'Silent Majority' on our side? The bottom line is that the media goes by their own mantra of "If it bleeds, it leads" - a sensationalist approach to creating headlines to induce readers/views/clicks. As a result, you are going to be presented with extremes/extremism rather than the average.

Oh, by the way, what have I repeatedly advised about hubris? "Maybe after reading this they'd start including...???" Gimme a break.

even if you slash the number 63 million to 30 million, the number of those who wants to kill their babies is overwhelmingly high. it doesn't diminish the staggering number of selfish people who aborted their babies due to:
1- too young to have a baby.
2- one night stand.
3- promiscuity.
4- adultery.
5- burdensome.
6- in the way of career.
7- unplanned.
8 - selfishness.
that's a lot of women with lots of reasons to kill their unwanted babies.

Remember, the time frame presented was 50 years. So, on an annual basis, that's just over 1 million per year. Now, how many can you, definitively, place under each of the 'limited number' of rationale labels you provide? How many might be or are placed under other rationale headings? The truth is, you have no way of knowing and neither do I. Such is the very essence of why we've been told to "Judge not."

That's without even addressing the idea that many of your own categories - selfishness, unplanned, adultery, promiscuity, etc. - are indicative of human behavior and not 'murderous intent' or 'laziness' or many of the other epithets you use on a near continuous and near universal basis. Perhaps, if you want to lessen the number of abortions, rather than blaring the anti-abortion trumpet and denouncing such things as (bed) defilement, un-Christian, et al., you might focus on educating them in better, alternative ways of living/acting.

both. some addressed to pharisees and some to common people.

Mark 9:42-48 nkjv
42 ?But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me [a]to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea. 43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life [b]maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to [c]hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched? 44 [d]where

?Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.?

45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into [e]hell, [f]into the fire that shall never be quenched? 46 where

?Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.?

47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into [g]hell fire? 48 where

?Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.?

Matthew 13:40-42 nkjv
40 Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. 41 The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, 42 and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Where is abortion mentioned in the versus to which you are inferring applicability? Causing a child to 'falter' or 'stumble' in their faith through inappropriate teachings or exhibited behaviors is a far cry from abortion of a child before it is born. Likewise, many of your previous passages were directly addressed to Pharisees and Sadducees; not to mention the rest noting what would happen in the End Times. Do you consider yourself an 'avenging angel' in the End Times? Living life with an infirmity being better than living a sin filled life is, again, not a reference to abortion or a 'righteous superiority' in raising a child born with a physical deformity.

Such is the very definition of acontextualism; i.e., taking things out of context to bolster a point unrelated to the actual text or saying or event. Worse. It's not taking and applying what God said. It's taking what God (and others) said and 'spinning' it to fit an agenda unrelated to the point being made. It's something I have been regularly warning you about.

it's not abrasive, it is direct, truthful and from the source (Bible).
i will defend the babies in the womb unabashed and unapologetic.
what's more innocent than a baby in the womb.
Proverbs 6:16-19 nkjv
16
These six things the Lord hates,
Yes, seven are an abomination to [a]Him:
17
A[b] proud look,
A lying tongue,
Hands that shed innocent blood,
18
A heart that devises wicked plans,
Feet that are swift in running to evil,
19
A false witness who speaks lies,
And one who sows discord among brethren.

Rather than an honest and humble servant attempting to offer testimony and aid, you continue to attempt representing yourself as a zealot at war. Not abrasive?! We've seen in this very thread responses indicating that it is that and more. Further, we've seen at least one example of how your approach 'closes avenues of communication' by offending the sensibilities needlessly and, as I have indicated, ill-advisedly by declaring certain extremes to be the norm while failing to acknowledge the more prevalent reasons women seek abortions. Worse. You then proceed as if they should be condemned or will meet everlasting fire as a result of various epithets you use to describe their motives, despite not being able to accurately ascribe those motives to other than the 'loudest' and most publicly visible.

As I have suggested, you are likely not accomplishing the purpose intended and, in fact, your chosen methods could very well be counterproductive to that purpose. As with the Third Servant, it's not about what you do, but why you do it. It is one thing to be zealous for God. It is something else to allow that zealousness to become zealotry used to skewer those you deem to be in error when we have been given instruction on doing it other ways due to a specific role we have in relation to spreading the Word.

You see, there is a difference in being 'zealous for the Lord' where you have an abundance of enthusiasm and zealotry where you cast yourself as being 'superior' in the beliefs you espouse (which, as you have demonstrated earlier in the thread, are not as 'absolute' as you attempt to portray them), demanding that all who hear you apply them or reap the punishments of defiance and sinfulness with no allowance of forgiveness.

At this juncture, as we've discussed, I have not been suggesting you change the message that abortion is not a good thing. I have been suggesting a needed change in your delivery. I have testified and offered aid in understanding. It is up to you to 'hear' it and apply it to what you are doing. If you choose not to, that is not within my control and it is not my responsibility to force you to. As I have said...

Just some thoughts to consider and if you deem them not worthy of consideration, ultimately, that's between you and someone with a bit higher rank than I have. (ahem)

[CVShooter]

Thanks.

I've got a supply of hot dogs in the freezer which have been there long enough that they're verging on 'freezer burn.' They might just need to be cooked over a fire rather than boiled in a pot so as to induce a proper texture. I'm gonna have to think about that.

Eh, keep your hotdogs or save them for the canines. I just put some venison in the freezer and have half a steer on the way. Much better table fare & fantastic over a hardwood fire. Death bringing life -- the first sacrament is the hunt

[Barang]

Ever hear of the 'Silent Majority' on our side? The bottom line is that the media goes by their own mantra of "If it bleeds, it leads" - a sensationalist approach to creating headlines to induce readers/views/clicks. As a result, you are going to be presented with extremes/extremism rather than the average.

there's no silent majority in abortion group much like no silent majority in pro-life group. each group represents what they're fighting for openly.
there's a silent majority in america as a whole, yes! but not when it comes to organizations/groups/ministries.

*** i don't include mothers who are at risk of dying during pregnancy. they are not the same as the selfish abortion group ***

Oh, by the way, what have I repeatedly advised about hubris? "Maybe after reading this they'd start including...???" Gimme a break.

that's why i added the wink at the end to lighten up the debate.

Remember, the time frame presented was 50 years. So, on an annual basis, that's just over 1 million per year. Now, how many can you, definitively, place under each of the 'limited number' of rationale labels you provide? How many might be or are placed under other rationale headings? The truth is, you have no way of knowing and neither do I. Such is the very essence of why we've been told to "Judge not."

when they are out there shouting "my body my choice" and demanding no restrictions on abortion. are you gonna tell me that they're concern about them dying giving birth? or is it selfishness?

[QUOTE]
That's without even addressing the idea that many of your own categories - selfishness, unplanned, adultery, promiscuity, etc. - are indicative of human behavior and not 'murderous intent' or 'laziness' or many of the other epithets you use on a near continuous and near universal basis. Perhaps, if you want to lessen the number of abortions, rather than blaring the anti-abortion trumpet and denouncing such things as (bed) defilement, un-Christian, et al., you might focus on educating them in better, alternative ways of living/acting.

the murderous intent is when the baby is in the picture by killing it due to selfish reasons.
i let you "educate them in better, alternative ways of living/acting." i wish you good luck.

Where is abortion mentioned in the versus to which you are inferring applicability? Causing a child to 'falter' or 'stumble' in their faith through inappropriate teachings or exhibited behaviors is a far cry from abortion of a child before it is born. Likewise, many of your previous passages were directly addressed to Pharisees and Sadducees; not to mention the rest noting what would happen in the End Times. Do you consider yourself an 'avenging angel' in the End Times? Living life with an infirmity being better than living a sin filled life is, again, not a reference to abortion or a 'righteous superiority' in raising a child born with a physical deformity.

Such is the very definition of acontextualism; i.e., taking things out of context to bolster a point unrelated to the actual text or saying or event. Worse. It's not taking and applying what God said. It's taking what God (and others) said and 'spinning' it to fit an agenda unrelated to the point being made. It's something I have been regularly warning you about.

that was a different subject. those verses showed how Jesus dealt with pharisees and common people with "strong words."

Rather than an honest and humble servant attempting to offer testimony and aid, you continue to attempt representing yourself as a zealot at war. Not abrasive?! We've seen in this very thread responses indicating that it is that and more. Further, we've seen at least one example of how your approach 'closes avenues of communication' by offending the sensibilities needlessly and, as I have indicated, ill-advisedly by declaring certain extremes to be the norm while failing to acknowledge the more prevalent reasons women seek abortions. Worse. You then proceed as if they should be condemned or will meet everlasting fire as a result of various epithets you use to describe their motives, despite not being able to accurately ascribe those motives to other than the 'loudest' and most publicly visible.

As I have suggested, you are likely not accomplishing the purpose intended and, in fact, your chosen methods could very well be counterproductive to that purpose. As with the Third Servant, it's not about what you do, but why you do it. It is one thing to be zealous for God. It is something else to allow that zealousness to become zealotry used to skewer those you deem to be in error when we have been given instruction on doing it other ways due to a specific role we have in relation to spreading the Word.

You see, there is a difference in being 'zealous for the Lord' where you have an abundance of enthusiasm and zealotry where you cast yourself as being 'superior' in the beliefs you espouse (which, as you have demonstrated earlier in the thread, are not as 'absolute' as you attempt to portray them), demanding that all who hear you apply them or reap the punishments of defiance and sinfulness with no allowance of forgiveness.

At this juncture, as we've discussed, I have not been suggesting you change the message that abortion is not a good thing. I have been suggesting a needed change in your delivery. I have testified and offered aid in understanding. It is up to you to 'hear' it and apply it to what you are doing. If you choose not to, that is not within my control and it is not my responsibility to force you to. As I have said...

Just some thoughts to consider and if you deem them not worthy of consideration, ultimately, that's between you and someone with a bit higher rank than I have. (ahem)

i'd like to reiterate my position before the end of the line.
Genesis 9:6 nkjv
?Whoever sheds man?s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed;
For in the image of God
He made man.

Exodus 21:22-23 nkjv
22 ?If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman?s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,

Exodus 23:7 nkjv
7 Keep yourself far from a false matter; do not kill the innocent and righteous. For I will not justify the wicked.

Psalm 127:3 nkjv
Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.

Psalm 139:13 nkjv
For You formed my inward parts;
You [a]covered me in my mother?s womb.

Proverbs 6:16-19 nkjv
16 These six things the Lord hates, Yes, seven are an abomination to [a]Him:
17 A[b] proud look,
A lying tongue,
Hands that shed innocent blood,
18 A heart that devises wicked plans,
Feet that are swift in running to evil,
19 A false witness who speaks lies,
And one who sows discord among brethren.

what is more innocent than a helpless baby in the womb.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

there's no silent majority in abortion group much like no silent majority in pro-life group. each group represents what they're fighting for openly.
there's a silent majority in america as a whole, yes! but not when it comes to organizations/groups/ministries.

*** i don't include mothers who are at risk of dying during pregnancy. they are not the same as the selfish abortion group ***

Okay. You know the motive for everyone of the over 1 million per year average and it's represented by those who protest. Got it. They're just all selfish, blasphemers, intent on murdering the innocent, and wanting to practice bed defilement wantonly. Going back through the thread, that appears to be your assessment. (Meanwhile, you continue to play down the fact that you do make 'allowances' for some abortions; despite, as I noted before, that there are those who claim a mother 'saving' her Life at the cost of her unborn child's, for whatever reason, is an inherently 'selfish' act.)

when they are out there shouting "my body my choice" and demanding no restrictions on abortion. are you gonna tell me that they're concern about them dying giving birth? or is it selfishness?

First, you're ducking the point, which is that neither you nor I have any way of knowing the motivation/rationale for over 1 million abortions per year. In a very real sense, you are simply and 'arbitrarily' assigned a motivation based on the 'loudest' and 'most visible' when we know that there are many others with myriad motivations which, ultimately, are not always 'selfish.' Second, as I have said a number of times now, you are ascribing the motives of a few to all and then denouncing the group's actions based on what readers know to be a false attribution of motivation being ascribed to all. It's the very definition of creating a stereotype, then playing against the stereotype to justify your own attitudes/actions.

the murderous intent is when the baby is in the picture by killing it due to selfish reasons.
i let you "educate them in better, alternative ways of living/acting." i wish you good luck.

Finally. We have an admission that you have no interest in 'testimony and aid.' Put another way, you have no interest in 'educating' them (and yourself) in the ways of the Lord. You simply want to condemn the vast majority of them as 'murderous, selfish sinners' and stop what you deem to be wanton killing. Such is why I have asked you things like whether you consider yourself to be an 'avenging angel' and similar. It's another way of demonstrating whether you are motivated by His glory or your own. The problem is that you are so blinded by your own zealotry, you can't see or even perceive it.

that was a different subject. those verses showed how Jesus dealt with pharisees and common people with "strong words."

As I pointed out, the exemplars you chose are not analogous. You are 'reaching' in an attempt to justify your own approach and it ain't working. When Jesus addressed the Pharisees and Sadducees with 'strong language,' he did so due to their extreme positions and behaviors. Like you, they pushed a standard which, in many respects, even they did not adhere to strictly or consistently; yet, they were in a position of 'authority' to 'punish' those who did not tow their mark. Yet, to illustrate the problem to the 'common people,' Jesus used 'gentler' language and exemplars.

Not everyone requires Fire and Brimstone remonstration. Not everyone will be responsive to it either. But, as you said above, you have no interest in 'educating' them. Condemnation is your bag and to do it, you use the Word acontextually and selectively; infusing your own 'thinking' into God's message rather than adhering to what He wanted relayed.

Don't see it that way? Well... It's not my problem to force you to see the obvious. It was simply my duty to point it out. I have done so. As I indicated, the rest is up to someone with a bit higher rank, power, and authority than I. My peace remains with me and, while I don't favor sandals, my boots are on and I'll...



By the way, the same artist who came up with that also did... 'Genesis': R. Crumb Illustrates The Bible.

[Barang]

Okay. You know the motive for everyone of the over 1 million per year average and it's represented by those who protest. Got it. They're just all selfish, blasphemers, intent on murdering the innocent, and wanting to practice bed defilement wantonly.

get real! how many of those protesting regarding their pregnancy are life threatening? how many of them give a hell about the baby's life when they are proudly screaming "my body my choice!"
even by observation, from childhood to present, i didn't know anyone who had problem giving birth except for two people.
those who are affected by health risks associated with pregnancy are in tiny minority

abby johnson who used to worked for planned parenthood quit because she couldn't stand the killing of the babies anymore! these women go to pp to dump their unwanted babies!

Going back through the thread, that appears to be your assessment. (Meanwhile, you continue to play down the fact that yo u do make 'allowances' for some abortions; despite, as I noted before, that there are those who claim a mother 'saving' her Life at the cost of her unborn child's, for whatever reason, is an inherently 'selfish' act.)

i don't know what to tell you if you cannot see the difference between women who are killing their babies because of (selfish) unwanted pregnancy and mother whose life is threaten by pregnancy.

First, you're ducking the point, which is that neither you nor I have any way of knowing the motivation/rationale for over 1 million abortions per year. In a very real sense, you are simply and 'arbitrarily' assigned a motivation based on the 'loudest' and 'most visible' when we know that there are many others with myriad motivations which, ultimately, are not always 'selfish.' Second, as I have said a number of times now, you are ascribing the motives of a few to all and then denouncing the group's actions based on what readers know to be a false attribution of motivation being ascribed to all. It's the very definition of creating a stereotype, then playing against the stereotype to justify your own attitudes/actions.

you're telling me that it's possible to have an equal amount of abortion between pro abort women and mother's with life threatening pregnancy since we don't know the motivation/rationale?

if you have eyes and ears, you can see the women in the pro abort group who are demanding "my body my choice" and i don't see sickly mothers who are demanding abortion due to their life threatening condition because that group are all about me!me!me!

Finally. We have an admission that you have no interest in 'testimony and aid.' Put another way, you have no interest in 'educating' them (and yourself) in the ways of the Lord. You simply want to condemn the vast majority of them as 'murderous, selfish sinners' and stop what you deem to be wanton killing. Such is why I have asked you things like whether you consider yourself to be an 'avenging angel' and similar. It's another way of demonstrating whether you are motivated by His glory or your own. The problem is that you are so blinded by your own zealotry, you can't see or even perceive it.

you go ahead and witness to them and then try witnessing to lgbtqwxyz group. come back to tell us your story.
these people are not stupid and retarded. they knew what want and they have no interest in hearing the other side except theirs because they are selfish! it's all about me!me!me!

As I pointed out, the exemplars you chose are not analogous. You are 'reaching' in an attempt to justify your own approach and it ain't working. When Jesus addressed the Pharisees and Sadducees with 'strong language,' he did so due to their extreme positions and behaviors. Like you, they pushed a standard which, in many respects, even they did not adhere to strictly or consistently; yet, they were in a position of 'authority' to 'punish' those who did not tow their mark. Yet, to illustrate the problem to the 'common people,' Jesus used 'gentler' language and exemplars.

Not everyone requires Fire and Brimstone remonstration. Not everyone will be responsive to it either. But, as you said above, you have no interest in 'educating' them. Condemnation is your bag and to do it, you use the Word acontextually and selectively; infusing your own 'thinking' into God's message rather than adhering to what He wanted relayed.

that's you opinion and you are entitled to it. you call it fire and brimstone i call it direct from the Bible verses.

Don't see it that way? Well... It's not my problem to force you to see the obvious. It was simply my duty to point it out. I have done so. As I indicated, the rest is up to someone with a bit higher rank, power, and authority than I. My peace remains with me and, while I don't favor sandals, my boots are on and I'll...



By the way, the same artist who came up with that also did... 'Genesis': R. Crumb Illustrates The Bible.

you go your way and i'll go my way. stay off the broad way and stay on the narrow path. peace, brother.

[Wordupmybrotha]

Holy wall of text Batman! 😳

[viragoman]

https://www.hli.org/resources/what-percentage-of-abortions-are-medically-necessary/

There is really no such thing as a medically necessary abortion.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[cyphr02]

? And one who sows discord among brethren.

what is more innocent than a helpless baby in the womb.
Last edited by Barang; 09-20-2023 at 11:25 AM..?

And who sows more discord amongst brothers than a men who sling scripture at each other, about abortion, on a gun forum? 😂

Just for fun though? since every life and soul is precious and spilling blood is an abomination? we can all agree to be consistent and have the same position on execution that we do on abortion, right? 🫣

[Barang]

? And one who sows discord among brethren.

what is more innocent than a helpless baby in the womb.
Last edited by Barang; 09-20-2023 at 11:25 AM..?

And who sows more discord amongst brothers than a men who sling scripture at each other, about abortion, on a gun forum? ��

duh! your in "Faith forum."

Just for fun though? since every life and soul is precious and spilling blood is an abomination? we can all agree to be consistent and have the same position on execution that we do on abortion, right? ��

another duh! do you even know the difference between innocent and guilty. better yet, do you even know what the Bible says about capital punishment?

[Wordupmybrotha]

^^^This

[cyphr02]

I must have missed the part in the 2nd half where the people were told that they were to be the arbiters of vengeance. The irony is how many cling to lines and phrases from OT to justify their condemnation like democrats cling to dicta to support their own tyrannical rules? completely ignoring the command (you know, the NT text in the red font).
If you aren?t of the chosen people and live by The Law, you are to live a life full of love? and there is no room for true brotherly love to reside in a heart that is so prepared to judge.

[Barang]

I must have missed the part in the 2nd half where the people were told that they were to be the arbiters of vengeance. The irony is how many cling to lines and phrases from OT to justify their condemnation like democrats cling to dicta to support their own tyrannical rules? completely ignoring the command (you know, the NT text in the red font).
If you aren?t of the chosen people and live by The Law, you are to live a life full of love? and there is no room for true brotherly love to reside in a heart that is so prepared to judge.

typical liberal deflection. why even have police to arrest looters, arsonists, rapist, murderers, thieves, child molesters because hey! that's not brotherly love!
christians must exhibit love all the time because that's what nt teaches. you can't judge criminals because that's hateful and vengeful!