Abortion supporters

[BrotherTony]

2 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

In the case of your or your friend's wife being raped, are you sure you're speaking to her as Jesus would from God's word.

Are you implying that Jesus would condone abortion? Sorry, but, that's a low blow and a shame. God talks about people sacrificing their children on the altar of Molech....Lev  18:21....You're encouraging sacrificing the life of unborn children because of a warped view from science. God cannot go against his own attributes....

2 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

 

Or is it as the Pharisees, from a limited knowledge of God's word and from assumptions you and others have concerning what the texts actually say?

Limited knowledge or not, they knew what the Scriptures said. I believe you mean a limited COMPREHENSION. It's obvious that a majority of them knew exactly what the Scriptures meant, but would rather follow their man-made traditions over the scriptures, elevating them above the scriptures.

2 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

What if you knew it was life-threatening for her to carry?

What if God knew this already? In your question lies a hint of deception. Nobody can know with 100% certainty that someone will die and God won't intervene. It's never right to do wrong to do right, ie, saving a life.

2 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

What of a nine-year-old?

What of a 9-year-old? Do you believe God cannot or will not take care of her? She doesn't necessarily have to raise the child. I believe God would have already known about this situation. 

2 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

And, what of incest?

There's a lot of incest in the Bible. There are many people who have been born because of incest that have been born and gone on to live Godly, productive lives....Do you think Jesus or the people themselves would have wanted to have been aborted? In answer to your positions are some articles refuting them....

https://www.kentuckytoday.com/baptist_life/pastor-s-wife-didn-t-deserve-the-death-penalty-for-how-she-was-conceived/article_c067b200-780a-11ec-9622-6f6f8b0c6ba3.html 

https://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/lead-stories/20180904/culture-death-rape-and-incest-not-enough-justify-abortion-say 

https://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=16-01-019-v 

https://aleteia.org/2016/10/24/a-child-of-rape-asks-why/ 

https://christianindex.org/stories/does-rape-justify-an-abortion,1212 

https://www.texanonline.net/articles/opinion/account-of-mothers-rape-had-personal-implications-for-pastors-abortion-views/ 

https://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/what-does-the-bible-say-about-rape-how-does-this-affect-the-abortion-argument/ 

According to these articles, your arguments don't fly...

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

36 minutes ago, TheGloryLand said:

Off the subject question, do you support gay marriages.

Absolutely not. My biblical reasons are as follows:

Marriage is designed to be between one male and one female.

This is corroborated by the law and in the New Testament that consider homosexuality an iniquity, and the practice of homosexual sex, outright rebellion, sinful, and an abomination.

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

6 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

Are you implying that Jesus would condone abortion? Sorry, but, that's a low blow and a shame. God talks about people sacrificing their children on the altar of Molech....Lev  18:21....You're encouraging sacrificing the life of unborn children because of a warped view from science. God cannot go against his own attributes....

Limited knowledge or not, they knew what the Scriptures said. I believe you mean a limited COMPREHENSION. It's obvious that a majority of them knew exactly what the Scriptures meant, but would rather follow their man-made traditions over the scriptures, elevating them above the scriptures.

What if God knew this already? In your question lies a hint of deception. Nobody can know with 100% certainty that someone will die and God won't intervene. It's never right to do wrong to do right, ie, saving a life.

What of a 9-year-old? Do you believe God cannot or will not take care of her? She doesn't necessarily have to raise the child. I believe God would have already known about this situation. 

There's a lot of incest in the Bible. There are many people who have been born because of incest that have been born and gone on to live Godly, productive lives....Do you think Jesus or the people themselves would have wanted to have been aborted? In answer to your positions are some articles refuting them....

https://www.kentuckytoday.com/baptist_life/pastor-s-wife-didn-t-deserve-the-death-penalty-for-how-she-was-conceived/article_c067b200-780a-11ec-9622-6f6f8b0c6ba3.html 

https://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/lead-stories/20180904/culture-death-rape-and-incest-not-enough-justify-abortion-say 

https://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=16-01-019-v 

https://aleteia.org/2016/10/24/a-child-of-rape-asks-why/ 

https://christianindex.org/stories/does-rape-justify-an-abortion,1212 

https://www.texanonline.net/articles/opinion/account-of-mothers-rape-had-personal-implications-for-pastors-abortion-views/ 

https://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/what-does-the-bible-say-about-rape-how-does-this-affect-the-abortion-argument/ 

According to these articles, your arguments don't fly...

You're not carefully listening to my biblical presentation.

1) I have given a biblical case that we don't know know when ensoulment occurs.

2) I have presented biblical evidence of a two stage process in human formation.

3) I've suggested this means we have a window in which to act.

Consequently, I don't believe Jesus would have us kill any human being in the womb.

[BrotherTony]

15 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

You're not carefully listening to my biblical presentation.

1) I have given a biblical case that we don't know know when ensoulment occurs.

2) I have presented biblical evidence of a two stage process in human formation.

3) I've suggested this means we have a window in which to act.

Consequently, I don't believe Jesus would have us kill any human being in the womb.

I don't agree with your timing/interpretation of when "ensoulment" occurs. I believe you're trying to find a way to justify your beliefs. I'm listening very carefully to what you say, and with all due respect, don't agree with your exegesis.

Edited April 27, 2023 by BrotherTony
Auto correct changed ensoulmment to enjoyment.

[TheGloryLand]

5 minutes ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

You're not carefully listening to my biblical presentation.

1) I have given a biblical case that we don't know know when ensoulment occurs.

2) I have presented biblical evidence of a two stage process in human formation.

3) I've suggested this means we have a window in which to act.

Consequently, I don't believe Jesus would have us kill any human being in the womb.

Thank you for serving answering my questions, you’re getting closer to becoming a conservative.

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

5 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

I don't agree with your timing/interpretation of when "enjoyment" occurs. I believe you're trying to find a way to justify your beliefs. I'm listening very carefully to what you say, and with all due respect, don't agree with your exegesis.

I prefer to consider Scripture than find a hundred internet articles that back my view.

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

1 hour ago, BrotherTony said:

Limited knowledge or not, they knew what the Scriptures said. I believe you mean a limited COMPREHENSION. It's obvious that a majority of them knew exactly what the Scriptures meant, but would rather follow their man-made traditions over the scriptures, elevating them above the scriptures.

My comment to TGL - "Or is it as the Pharisees, from a limited knowledge of God's word and from assumptions you and others have concerning what the texts actually say?" - was rhetorical.

And, yes, a limited "COMPREHENSION" is what I meant when I said they had limited knowledge. Jesus spoke similarly when He said, "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matt. 22:29). Perhaps you want to create a TOV (Tony-Only Version) where you correct the KJV interpreters? 

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Dr. Robert S. Morley
added emoji to show jest

[BrotherTony]

20 minutes ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

My comment to TGL - "Or is it as the Pharisees, from a limited knowledge of God's word and from assumptions you and others have concerning what the texts actually say?" - was rhetorical.

And, yes, a limited "COMPREHENSION" is what I meant when I said they had limited knowledge. Jesus spoke similarly when He said, "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God" (Matt. 22:29). Perhaps you want to create a TOV (Tony-Only Version) where you correct the KJV interpreters? 

 

Funny. I'll stick with the KJV.

37 minutes ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

I prefer to consider Scripture than find a hundred internet articles that back my view.

Scripture is throughout those articles, and they don't agree with your exegesis of scripture either. But, if you'd have bothered to read them you'd know that.

[HappyChristian]

Apparently Benson doesn't understand the difference between soul and spirit. And I removed your oblique reference to the ESV...please do not try to get around forum rules by bringing in other  versions - EVEN IN JUST A PASSING COMMENT.

Psalm51:5 is NOT referring to the sin of the parents. Good grief - David's parents were married to each other. There was no  sin on their parts. Context is key...David is obviously talking about the fact that we are all born sinners.

You are twisting scripture and trying to apply where it does not. The Valley of Dry Bones has nothing to do with birth/conception/abortion. When God created Adam, He was not setting a precedent for conception. He created both Adam and Eve as grown adults. To try and apply their creation to conception is eisegesis at its worst.

Oh, and just another caution: do not presume that those who oppose your viewpoint are being prideful. 

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

6 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

Funny. I'll stick with the KJV.

Scripture is throughout those articles, and they don't agree with your exegesis of scripture either. But, if you'd have bothered to read them you'd know that.

Having written a book on the topic, I am aware of the biblical texts and the views other Christians have. I include some in my book. I am also aware of what many would like to have legislated based on their exegesis. That said, I am open to discussing anything on the subject, for we all see in part. It would, however, be more constructive for discussion purposes, and for those who might be following and/or interacting on the thread, if rather than filling the comment box with links, you present points from those articles that you agree with (even several points at a time). In that context, links would be a welcome reference.

[BrotherTony]

17 minutes ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

Having written a book on the topic, I am aware of the biblical texts and the views other Christians have. I include some in my book. I am also aware of what many would like to have legislated based on their exegesis. That said, I am open to discussing anything on the subject, for we all see in part. It would, however, be more constructive for discussion purposes, and for those who might be following and/or interacting on the thread, if rather than filling the comment box with links, you present points from those articles that you agree with (even several points at a time). In that context, links would be a welcome reference.

It would be helpful as well, at least for me, that you cease making reference to your books. It may not be your intent, but to me it comes across as self aggrandizement. Other sources would be welcome. Just a suggestion. 

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

12 minutes ago, HappyChristian said:

Apparently Benson doesn't understand the difference between soul and spirit. And I removed your oblique reference to the ESV...please do not try to get around forum rules by bringing in other  versions - EVEN IN JUST A PASSING COMMENT.

Psalm51:5 is NOT referring to the sin of the parents. Good grief - David's parents were married to each other. There was no  sin on their parts. Context is key...David is obviously talking about the fact that we are all born sinners.

You are twisting scripture and trying to apply where it does not. The Valley of Dry Bones has nothing to do with birth/conception/abortion. When God created Adam, He was not setting a precedent for conception. He created both Adam and Eve as grown adults. To try and apply their creation to conception is eisegesis at its worst.

Oh, and just another caution: do not presume that those who oppose your viewpoint are being prideful. 

You should ask a question rather than judge me. I was not trying to get around anything.

As for Psalm 51, "Good grief" (as you'd say), I am not saying that the parents were in any particular sin as you assume. We are born sinners because sin is passed down generationally. David recognized this innate human condition was passed down to him at conception.

The accounts of creation and of the valley dry bones show a two-stage process. First, the physical is brought together and then the breath of life is given. These don't stand alone but are corroborated by what I have shown elsewhere. For example, Ecclesiastes 11:5.

Believe what you will, but the burden of proof lies with those who claim that ensoulment is immediate. 

Btw, where have I presumed anyone is prideful? I would love to apologize if I did (and if they hadn't been). I cannot remember. Or are you perhaps presuming something of me again? You have already judged me twice in this comment of yours I'm responding to.

[BrotherTony]

11 minutes ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

You should ask a question rather than judge me. I was not trying to get around anything.

As for Psalm 51, "Good grief" (as you'd say), I am not saying that the parents were in any particular sin as you assume. We are born sinners because sin is passed down generationally. David recognized this innate human condition was passed down to him at conception.

The accounts of creation and of the valley dry bones show a two-stage process. First, the physical is brought together and then the breath of life is given. These don't stand alone but are corroborated by what I have shown elsewhere. For example, Ecclesiastes 11:5.

Believe what you will, but the burden of proof lies with those who claim that ensoulment is immediate. 

Btw, where have I presumed anyone is prideful? I would love to apologize if I did (and if they hadn't been). I cannot remember. Or are you perhaps presuming something of me again? You have already judged me twice in this comment of yours I'm responding to.

You would have us to believe that God is just sitting around on his throne waiting to drop a soul into a body at the right time.... laughable.

[HappyChristian]

37 minutes ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

You should ask a question rather than judge me. I was not trying to get around anything.

As for Psalm 51, "Good grief" (as you'd say), I am not saying that the parents were in any particular sin as you assume. We are born sinners because sin is passed down generationally. David recognized this innate human condition was passed down to him at conception.

The accounts of creation and of the valley dry bones show a two-stage process. First, the physical is brought together and then the breath of life is given. These don't stand alone but are corroborated by what I have shown elsewhere. For example, Ecclesiastes 11:5.

Believe what you will, but the burden of proof lies with those who claim that ensoulment is immediate. 

Btw, where have I presumed anyone is prideful? I would love to apologize if I did (and if they hadn't been). I cannot remember. Or are you perhaps presuming something of me again? You have already judged me twice in this comment of yours I'm responding to.

Oh, knock off the whining about being judged. In a discussion forum, ALL comments are judged. Just as you judged me as possibly presuming. I should ask a question? I don't need to, thanks. When you make reference to something you've been asked not to, it is obviously a work around, whether or not you say it is. Just don't do it anymore and that aspect of "judging" will be over.

No, you didn't say his parents were in "any particular sin," but you did say "This verse appears to refer to the sin of the parents carried through at conception..." Context shows that to be wrong. I know why we are born sinners. And I know that David recognized it as being passed down via conception. You know, kinda like what I said when I said he was talking about we are all born sinners...perhaps that is what you intended with your comment about the sin of the parents, but it didn't come off as that. Ergo it seemed you were saying his parents were sinning when they conceived him. There is a cadre of people who believe that to be the case (that they were sinning when he was conceived).

The accounts of the creation of Adam & Eve and the Valley of Dry Bones have nothing to do with the conception of a baby, no matter how you might try to twist them. Ecc. 11: 5 has nothing to do with either of those occurrences. Dovetailing of scripture is necessary for rightly dividing. But to take disparate instances and try to make them dovetail is not rightly dividing. 

Where did you presume about pride? Oh, mayhap in your comments on humility. You know, in the excerpt from your book. Where it seems (now, this is presumption on my very-educated mind part) that you are saying if folks don't agree with you, there's no unity because there is pride. On their parts. If you didn't intend that, there was no need for you to add it to the discussion. Because it gives the appearance that you are saying if folks disagree with you they are prideful.

 

[SureWord]

2 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

You're not carefully listening to my biblical presentation.

1) I have given a biblical case that we don't know know when ensoulment occurs.

2) I have presented biblical evidence of a two stage process in human formation.

3) I've suggested this means we have a window in which to act.

Consequently, I don't believe Jesus would have us kill any human being in the womb.

"Ensoulment"? Never heard that before. Sounds New-Agey. 

If the "life of the FLESH is in the blood" and he who spills that blood is guilty of murder then that would be around 3-4 weeks when the so called "fetus" develops blood. The bible doesn't seem to care when the "ensoulment" happens just when life is in the flesh.

There are exceptions, IMO, that can be supported by the bible including accidental killing of the baby or to save the mother's life.

As far as things like incest, which is a very rare % of abortions, Abraham married his half sister making Isaac the product of incest.