• 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!

WHO IS GOD'S TRUE ISRAEL IN THE NEW COVENANT?

Monty

Active Member
unresponsive to the post you are responding to that has already addressed what you are repeating here. We have proven from both post # 235 linked that the scripture context disagrees with your claim that Numbers 5:22 is God commanding abortion. While post # 350 linked proves from original Hebrew word meanings, in agreement with the Lexicon and Interlinear and parallel translations that the English word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22, וּ֠בָאוּ (H935) הַמַּ֨יִם (H4325) הַמְאָרְרִ֤ים (H779) הָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ (H428) בְּֽמֵעַ֔יִךְ (H4578) לַצְבּ֥וֹת (H6638) בֶּ֖טֶן (H990) וְלַנְפִּ֣ל (H5307) יָרֵ֑ךְ (H3409) וְאָמְרָ֥ה (H559) הָאִשָּׁ֖ה (H802) אָמֵ֥ן ׀ (H543) אָמֵֽן׃ (H543) (check each Hebrew Word number). Does this not concern you? It should because as proven from the scriptures in the linked posts attached both the scripture context, the original Hebrew word meanings, in agreement with the Lexicon and Interlinear and parallel translations that the English word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22 are all in disagreement with your interpretation of a single scripture taken out of its contexts. Yet you keep repeating the same thing over and over despite people trying to help you and ignoring everything that is written only as a help for you.
Alas you have proved absolutely nothing. Yet you keep repeating the same thing over and over despite trying to help you. Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 obviously describe the use of an abortifacient to abort the pregnancies of adulteresses, and nothing will ever convince me otherwise. And it's your choice if you don't believe what the bible actually says and means.
 

Monty

Active Member
Obviously not.
That's your choice if you believe that the commandment in Numbers 5:22 to abort the pregnancies of pregnant adulteresses is "unbiblical nonsense". But it still it says what it says and means what it means, and I'll never be convinced otherwise.
 

Monty

Active Member
You can keep saying that. It doesn't make it so. If your interpretation is correct, then tell me the herb that was used. You can't, because it does not exist.
It could have been any of the herbs used then with varying success, such as silphilium. History of abortion - Wikipedia
Regardless of it's success, the intent and purpose of Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 is obviously to describe pregnancy terminations of adulteresses, because of the property rights of men and to ensure legitimate lines of descent and inheritance, in the same way that a new pride lion will kill all the cubs of the previous pride lion. And none of your obfuscations will ever convince me otherwise.
 

Monty

Active Member
No one really knows. It's odd, because one of the laws of Judaism for men is to marry and have children. Certain people are not allowed to do so, such as men who have crushed testicles. Also, some people are severely limited in whom they can marry. A mamzer, for example, can only marry another mamzer. I'm sure it happens a lot that they cannot find someone whom they are allowed to marry.

Do you think that straight guys can't have close intimate friendships? Have you never heard the term bromance?
I've never laid on another bloke's breast, nor has another bloke ever laid on mine, and there is no evidence in the bible that Jesus was a heterosexual.
Never happened. This legend was added into the gospel in the 4th century. It's a nice story, but that's all it is.

I agree that the sin of Sodom was inhospitality. I never brought this up. It's a red herring. I'm not sure why you think it somehow proves that Jesus was gay.

BTW, just because Genesis has the sin as inhospitality, doesn't mean the New Testament shares that teaching. Jude 1:7 says, "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." I'm a Jew, so what Jude says is irrelevant to me. But it would be relevant to a Christian.
And despite what the writer of Jude says, the story in Gen 19 says nothing about sexual immorality and perversion and that Lot's future sons-in-law wanted to have sex with the two blokes Lot picked up downtown instead of with their future wives. The only sexual immorality and perversion in that story was when Lot sexually assaulted their future wives in a cave and then dishonestly blamed them for his behaviour.
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
3rdAngel said: unresponsive to the post you are responding to that has already addressed what you are repeating here. We have proven from both post # 235 linked that the scripture context disagrees with your claim that Numbers 5:22 is God commanding abortion. While post # 350 linked proves from original Hebrew word meanings, in agreement with the Lexicon and Interlinear and parallel translations that the English word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22, וּ֠בָאוּ (H935) הַמַּ֨יִם (H4325) הַמְאָרְרִ֤ים (H779) הָאֵ֙לֶּה֙ (H428) בְּֽמֵעַ֔יִךְ (H4578) לַצְבּ֥וֹת (H6638) בֶּ֖טֶן (H990) וְלַנְפִּ֣ל (H5307) יָרֵ֑ךְ (H3409) וְאָמְרָ֥ה (H559) הָאִשָּׁ֖ה (H802) אָמֵ֥ן ׀ (H543) אָמֵֽן׃ (H543) (check each Hebrew Word number). Does this not concern you? It should because as proven from the scriptures in the linked posts attached both the scripture context, the original Hebrew word meanings, in agreement with the Lexicon and Interlinear and parallel translations that the English word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22 are all in disagreement with your interpretation of a single scripture taken out of its contexts. Yet you keep repeating the same thing over and over despite people trying to help you and ignoring everything that is written only as a help for you.
Your response here
Alas you have proved absolutely nothing. Yet you keep repeating the same thing over and over despite trying to help you. Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 obviously describe the use of an abortifacient to abort the pregnancies of adulteresses, and nothing will ever convince me otherwise. And it's your choice if you don't believe what the bible actually says and means.
So I guess that is a no then. You are unable to prove your claims and address the linked posts and scriptures in the post you are quoting from that proves why your teachings are unbiblical. Its ok I did not think you would be able to. The post above proves that you disregarded the scripture context, disregarded the original Hebrew and the Lexicon, Interlinear and parallel translations are all in agreement together that the Hebrew word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22. Everything is in disagreement with you interpretation of a single scripture taken from its context. If you do not want to believe what the bible actually says. I am sorry friend I cannot help you. Ignoring Gods Word does not make it disappear.
 
Last edited:

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
That's your choice if you believe that the commandment in Numbers 5:22 to abort the pregnancies of pregnant adulteresses is "unbiblical nonsense". But it still it says what it says and means what it means, and I'll never be convinced otherwise.
There is no abortion commandment as proven in the linked posts provided in post # 358 linked that you are unwilling to respond to. Yes it says what it says. Unfortunately it does not say what you are claiming it says as already proven in scripture context and the original Hebrew.
 
Last edited:

Monty

Active Member
Your response here

So I guess that is a no then.
That's because you are unable to prove your claims that Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 is only about sore thighs and stomach aches, nor why male adulterers aren't also commanded to drink a "bitter water" abortifacient and say "so be it, so be it" if you claim that commandment is only about sore thighs and stomach aches.
Nor have you been able to present evidence that pregnant adulteresses are not commanded to be executed and their pregnancies consequently aborted (Lev 20:10).
Your Sunday School score is an F-
 
Last edited:

Monty

Active Member
Yes it says what it says.
And that Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 describe the termination of pregnancies using "bitter water" abortifacients and as used for thousands of years with varying success.
And that the pregnancies of pregnant adulteresses are aborted when they executed as commanded in Lev 20:10.
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
That's because you are unable to prove your claims that Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 is only about sore thighs and stomach aches, nor why male adulterers aren't also commanded to drink a "bitter water" abortifacient and say "so be it, so be it" if you claim that commandment is only about sore thighs and stomach aches.
Nor have you been able to present evidence that pregnant adulteresses are not commanded to be executed and their pregnancies consequently aborted (Lev 20:10).
Your Sunday School score is an F-
Your post is unresponsive repetition again that does not address anything in the post you are responding to. Please forgive me but I do not believe you. For a detailed scripture response proving why your teachings are unbiblical please see the contexts and the original Hebrew with Interlinear and Lexicon comments and parallel translations linked in post # 358 linked. The linked post above proves that you disregard scripture context, disregard the original Hebrew and the Lexicon, Interlinear and parallel translations that all prove and are all in agreement together that the Hebrew word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22. I am sorry dear friend I cannot help you if you want to ignore what scripture says.
 
Last edited:

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
And that Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 describe the termination of pregnancies using "bitter water" abortifacients and as used for thousands of years with varying success.
And that the pregnancies of pregnant adulteresses are aborted when they executed as commanded in Lev 20:10.
Unresponsive repetition already addressed. Please see post # 358 linked you ignored it.
 
Last edited:

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
It could have been any of the herbs used then with varying success, such as silphilium. History of abortion - Wikipedia
Regardless of it's success, the intent and purpose of Numbers 5:22 & 5:27 is obviously to describe pregnancy terminations of adulteresses, because of the property rights of men and to ensure legitimate lines of descent and inheritance, in the same way that a new pride lion will kill all the cubs of the previous pride lion. And none of your obfuscations will ever convince me otherwise.
I ran a google search on "silphilium rotting thighs" and nothing came up. Would you like to try again?
 

Monty

Active Member
I ran a google search on "silphilium rotting thighs" and nothing came up. Would you like to try again?
That's because the term "rotting thighs" is just an archaic term describing pregnancy abortions. Silphium - Wikipedia
But it's your choice if you refuse to believe what the bible says and means, given the bible does not condemn abortions of adulteresses (Lev 20:10).
 
Last edited:

Monty

Active Member
Your post is unresponsive repetition again that does not address anything in the post you are responding to. Please forgive me but I do not believe you. For a detailed scripture response proving why your teachings are unbiblical please see the contexts and the original Hebrew with Interlinear and Lexicon comments and parallel translations linked in post # 358 linked. The linked post above proves that you disregard scripture context, disregard the original Hebrew and the Lexicon, Interlinear and parallel translations that all prove and are all in agreement together that the Hebrew word for "miscarry" or "abortion" is never used in the original Hebrew in Numbers 5:22. I am sorry dear friend I cannot help you if you want to ignore what scripture says.
Your post is unresponsive repetition again that does not address anything, given Numbers 5:22 and 5:27 clearly describes the termination of pregnancies of adulteresses using "bitter water" abortifacients such as silphium. Silphium - Wikipedia
 

Monty

Active Member
Unresponsive repetition already addressed.
Unresponsive repetition already addressed.
What type of meal did you and your god eat today, and which of your unresponsive repetitions did you discuss together and how silphium was used as a "bitter water" abortifacient?
 
Last edited:

Spiderman

Veteran Member
Israel originally meant "contender with God. One who fights with God.

He also had loyalty to one person with blind obedience, who is not god, his mother rebecca, and it was her plans of fixing Isaac his favorite dish, getting him drunk, pulling the right strings, dressing him up like his twin, and she said let the curse and punishment he gives to you be upon me if he finds out. So he received the greatest blessing in scripture " blessed are those who bless you cursed are those who curse you in and through you all people will find their blessing". The greatest blessing in scripture was stolen through deception, dishonoring his father, breaking multiple commandments, and placing his mother above God (which is Idolatry)...

He was enormously rewarded for sinning the right way , and serving the right person/woman, telling him to oppose God's laws, oppose the most anointed man on earth

Jacob, someone who went on to get in a physical fight with God and refuse to let go when God asked him to, and get blessed for defeating God.

It says man, Angel, and God he fought with. God can be all three.

The religion of Israel is to oppose God with the virgin mary, Rebecca, or the right Queen in heaven who knows God's heart, to get you more than you deserve.

Fight God and win as Jacob did, by obedience to a certified Rebecca... the lady of the rosary is one.

Defeat God's desires to leave people blind, let devil's deceive, defeat his desire to kill people like when he tempted Eve , to lay a snare, and let the serpent ruin his daughter.

Then God murdered his son and daughter over an apple, killed billions of people because of the snare he laid ( to have an excuse to kill people, have wars, bring death....)

The serpent never killed her or her descendants.

The Jacob spirituality is opposition against God's plans for evil and disaster, by knowing the right Rebecca's or Queens in heaven, who know how to stop his wrathful genocides.

Like Moses saving Israel by fighting God's plans (plans for killing more than 99% of the Jews in the world ) because some of them were complaining.

God needs serious help, when you consider he killed 70,000 Jews because he didn't like a census David took.

The victims were not the ones who chose to do it. The justice of God needs to be replaced.

Take away his license to kill children and hold him accountable for tempting Adam and eve and murdering their descendants.

The virgin Mary works most amazing modern miracles. Her messages are never the proud, angry, narcissist the bible says God is.

She says she wants all the wicked , who are tortured souls, to not be tortured in a lake of fire, all lead to heaven, and she got Jesus to work his first miracle, before his father told him to begin public miracles,

....he complained, then turned water into wine.

Jesus works miracles he doesn't want to work, even when his father told him it isn't the appointed time, because his mother asks him to do what he doesn't want to, or care about. She does.

She is more humble than him or his father, she loves us more, he said his father abandoned him on the cross "why have you forsaken me"
, but she was there.

God is omnipotent, so did not need his son to die violently , because he is not in debt to anyone.

Mary wants holiness to be fun, easy, not depression, heartache, suicides, doubt, martyrdom, the ways God prefers it. She was concerned about wine running out. Jesus didn't care.

Jacob got far more going to Rebecca , loyalty to her above God and his anointed. I get far more going to Mary, Queen Esther, Deborah, Elizabeth, heavenly Queens, and she is the attorney who knows how to get from God what I cannot.
 
Last edited:
Top