-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How Bad Can Abortions Be If God Sanctions Them?
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
sooda
Veteran Member
Why? God would have known whether she was an adulteress or not.
Jollybear
Hey
Thats true, GOD would know. But, society would not know.
And God also knew that most people are separated and out of tune with him to hear.
Plus, God set up the chain of authority. Moses had a direct link to God, Arron linked with moses, ect.
sooda
Veteran Member
Don't you think its a rather stupid test? I mean for God and all.
Jollybear
Hey
No, why would it be stupid? Its a lie detector test.
And why in the world did dan press like to your post when he suppose to be a christian? That means he believes in Jesus, and Jesus believes in the old testament.
Whats going on with that bunny rabbit?
God dont need the test, he knows, but society dont know.
Last edited:
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
So abortion is okay, if the wife cheated and the husband wants the abortion?
Jollybear
Hey
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
A lie detector where a fetus dies if the wife cheated. It appears that you do not understand the passage.
Jollybear
Hey
Right, the fetus dies if she cheated.
Which means she can confess and not have the fetus die.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And if she does not then the abortion is justified? Those are some very strange morals.
By the way, do you remember the punishment for cheating?
EDIT: Just in case you forgot the penalty is death. Either way, if she admits to cheating, or if she is caught both her and the fetus will die. Her only hope for both is that the test does not work.
Last edited:
Jollybear
Hey
No, its not justified. By not confessing, shes basically murdering her unborn child. All in the name of her pride and not trusting that the test will do anything.
Yes, death.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No she is not. She is giving her fetus the only chance it has. As you admitted, the punishment is death. Either way both die, unless the "test" does not work. Her best strategy and her fetus's best strategy is to always say that she did not cheat.
Jollybear
Hey
Whos saying she dies before the baby is born?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You don't know much about "justice" back then.
Skwim
Veteran Member
When a person can act to rectify a harmful situation, but chooses not to, it amounts to an act of omission. It's like standing on the shore watching someone drown when you could easily stop the drowning. I believe that to a significant degree you deserve to be held responsible for the drowning. Now, if you don't believe god has any obligation to act in a loving and merciful way, preventing a miscarriage, then you obviously feel god isn't responsible; however, I believe that preventing the miscarriage would be the loving and merciful thing to do, and failing to do so makes him irresponsible, to say the very least.
Your choice:
A) To qualify as a loving and merciful being requires one to act in a loving and merciful way where ever possible.
B) To qualify as a loving and merciful being does not require one to act in a loving and merciful way, ever.
C) God is not a loving and merciful being, and whatever he does, good or bad, is in keeping with his character.
B) To qualify as a loving and merciful being does not require one to act in a loving and merciful way, ever.
C) God is not a loving and merciful being, and whatever he does, good or bad, is in keeping with his character.
Yup. It's his ballgame. He decided that humans would be inclined to murder and rape, and act on that inclination.
Why wouldn't you expect a supreme loving, just, and merciful god to be just that; loving, just, and merciful?
That's where we part company. I don't believe freewill exists, so any point predicated on it is moot.
Then just how does he qualify as loving, just, and merciful? That sometimes he's a nice guy?
.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
You think that but since you are not God, you are not All-Knowing, so you do not KNOW what the loving and merciful thing to do would be. There are reasons for everything, and we cannot know what they all are, because we are not God. Moreover, you do not know what happens to those souls who are miscarried in the spiritual world.
Moreover, if God intervened to do everything you think a loving and merciful God should do, that would turn everything upside down, topsy-turvy, because God created a world in which people would be responsible for their own actions, which is why we have free will. Also, God created a world in which some things would happen even if we do not choose them, accidents and injuries, for reasons we cannot understand.
It is A, but you are not All-Knowing, so you have no idea what constitutes “acting in a loving and merciful way,” only God knows that. God acts in our best interest at all times because God is loving and merciful. We do not know what is best for us, only God knows that, because God is All-Knowing and All-Wise and God knows us better than we know our own selves.
If we do suffer and God does not prevent it, it is in our best interest in the long run because it helps us grow spiritually, unless we resent God for it, or become bitter and angry, in which case we fail to make good use of it. That is a tough pill to swallow, so I suggest remaining a nonbeliever if you cannot swallow it. I was a believer for all of my adult life and only swallowed it about five years ago, and it still does not always go down very well.
Stay tuned: I have a new thread coming up on God and Suffering
No, it is our ballgame. Humans are like chess pieces on a chess board moving around. God gave us the chess board to move around on but God is not IN the game. God gave man two natures, not just a nature that is inclined to murder and rape, but also a nature that is inclined to love, mercy, kindness, truth and justice.
“In man there are two natures; his spiritual or higher nature and his material or lower nature. In one he approaches God, in the other he lives for the world alone. Signs of both these natures are to be found in men. In his material aspect he expresses untruth, cruelty and injustice; all these are the outcome of his lower nature. The attributes of his Divine nature are shown forth in love, mercy, kindness, truth and justice, one and all being expressions of his higher nature. Every good habit, every noble quality belongs to man’s spiritual nature, whereas all his imperfections and sinful actions are born of his material nature. If a man’s Divine nature dominates his human nature, we have a saint.” Paris Talks, p. 60
I do expect that and He is. But sometimes we do not see it because your ego gets in the way.
Just because you do not believe in free will does not mean it does not exist. How do you think anything happens if people do not make choices according to their will? How free we are to make choices we might want to make is another matter.
I do not think that we can do “anything” we want to do. Free will is constrained by many factors such as childhood upbringing, heredity, education, adult experiences, and present life circumstances. How free we are varies with every given situation we find ourselves in. However, because we have two natures we are free to make moral choices according to one or the other nature. Otherwise, we would just be at the mercy of our past and present experiences and our heredity.
If humans did not have free will how could we be responsible for our actions and held accountable in a court of law? We are held accountable because we are responsible since it is assumed that we had a choice.
Being a nice guy, or beneficent, means God is loving, just and merciful, but that does not necessarily look the way we think it should look, because we do not know what is in our best interest, only God knows that, so what we want is not always what is best for us. That is a difficult pill to swallow because it does not always give us what we want. But those of us who have been to hell and back doing it “our way” finally realized that God’s way works better.
Jollybear
Hey
Justice is met out due to a hurt done.
A hurt is made a crime, in this case, adultery.
Justice is a pubishment to the crime.
Jollybear
Hey
Question: does the cheating woman have any responsibility in her miscarriage?
If you dont believe free will exists, then why do you hold God responsible, or the man on the shore responsible to save the drowning? There just doing what there predetermined to do, they cant help it, right? So why hold them responsible to do that which you know they cannot do, since they have no will?
Skwim
Veteran Member
No more so than a woman who doesn't cheat.
Because, in order to show what I believe are the errors in an opponent's thinking it's often necessary to assume the position they're coming from, one wherein freewill is the operative agent. It's comparable to debating Biblical issues on the basis that the relevant components are true when I don't believe they actually are. An example is the problem of fitting earth's 8.7 million species on the ark when I don't believe the ark really existed, but to show the absurdity of it all I have to assume it did
.
.
Last edited:
Jollybear
Hey
No more so? How is that? The cheater has a clear option to save her child, wilst a non cheater the child will be saved gaurenteed after she drinks the liquid.
I see......so, God has free will, ok, so that makes God responsible?
Why?