• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Episcopalians Vote to Allow Gay Marriage in Churches

Really? Breathing means you are 'innocent?' Pretty sure that doesnt apply to alot of people, in prison and out.

You need to read what I said again. GOD breathed life into that child at conception.
 
Being is there would be no SSM without homosexuality ...then NO.

Nothing about homosexuality in the 10 Commandments. Do you need me to post them here?
 
You need to read what I said again. GOD breathed life into that child at conception.

So? Then according to you, He also breathed life into every murderer, rapist, pedophile, adulterer, etc. Are they also innocent? Let's try and maintain a little consistency here, eh?
 
The term "yatsa" doesn't mean "to lose her offspring" it means "to go out, to go forth". It certainly doesn't mean a dead child, it is simply meant to refer to the process going out, to include the process of childbirth - it is used, for example, to describe the live births of Esau and Jacob (Genesis 25:25-26). It is used 1,061 times in the Hebrew texts and is never used to mean miscarriage, except apparently this one time, where you are insisting that it's meaning has somehow magically and temporarily changed.

You're making my point for me.

In the context of an unborn child, "to go out, to go forth" can refer to both premature birth *and* miscarriage. That's why they did not use the term for miscarriage (because they wanted to include premature birth too) and why they did not use the term for premature birth (because they wanted to include miscarriages)

If they wanted the fine to apply only to premature births, they would have used the verb form of yeled
 
God gave us dominion over the flowers and trees etc.. He has dominion over humans....born or not. He breathed life into that human at conception.

Enough of your pro-abortion excuses.

We aren't the only creatures on earth that breathe. Nor were we even close to the first.
 
Says who?

From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. "Go up baldhead," they shouted, "go up baldhead!" The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces. (2 Kings 2:23-24 NAB)

The glory of Israel will fly away like a bird, for your children will die at birth or perish in the womb or never even be conceived. Even if your children do survive to grow up, I will take them from you. It will be a terrible day when I turn away and leave you alone. I have watched Israel become as beautiful and pleasant as Tyre. But now Israel will bring out her children to be slaughtered." O LORD, what should I request for your people? I will ask for wombs that don't give birth and breasts that give no milk. The LORD says, "All their wickedness began at Gilgal; there I began to hate them. I will drive them from my land because of their evil actions. I will love them no more because all their leaders are rebels. The people of Israel are stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit. And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children." (Hosea 9:11-16 NLT)

If even then you remain hostile toward me and refuse to obey, I will inflict you with seven more disasters for your sins. I will release wild animals that will kill your children and destroy your cattle, so your numbers will dwindle and your roads will be deserted. (Leviticus 26:21-22 NLT)

Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)

This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)





Just to name a few
 
You're making my point for me.

In the context of an unborn child, "to go out, to go forth" can refer to both premature birth *and* miscarriage.

No. The words used indicate live child. The word for miscarriage or dead child is explicitly and deliberately excluded. In order for the terms to include cases of miscarriage they would have to mean something in this verse that they meant nowhere else in the New Testament.

If they wanted the fine to apply only to premature births, they would have used the verb form of yeled

They did use Yeled - specifically the noun form, used to annotate live births in the OT (Gen 21:8, Exodus 2:3, Ruth 4:16, Isaiah 9:6).


There is no inclusion of miscarriage or dead children until you or someone else puts it there - it is eisegetical.
 
Doesn't condemn the killing of children though.............

Well, only to the extent that it demands the life of the killer in return.
 
No. The words used indicate live child. The word for miscarriage or dead child is explicitly and deliberately excluded. In order for the terms to include cases of miscarriage they would have to mean something in this verse that they meant nowhere else in the New Testament.

This is wrong, for the reasons i posted


They did use Yeled - specifically the noun form, used to annotate live births in the OT (Gen 21:8, Exodus 2:3, Ruth 4:16, Isaiah 9:6).

And again you make my case. If they wanted to indicate that only premature (ie live) births were fined, they would have used "yeled"

Well, only to the extent that it demands the life of the killer in return.

Actually, the Bible contains many examples where the life that was taken was not the criminals' or the sinners', but an innocent member of their family instead
 
Last edited:
This is wrong, for the reasons i posted

That is incorrect - the author had the option to include miscarriages, and chose not to.


And again you make my case. If they wanted to indicate that only premature (ie live) births were fined, they would have used "yeled"

:lol: they did.

Actually, the Bible contains many examples where the life that was taken was not the criminals' or the sinners', but an innocent member of their family instead

No doubt. The Bible records all manner of abuses and sins - it is not a tale of perfect people, but of God's plan for a broken humanity.
 
That is incorrect - the author had the option to include miscarriages, and chose not to.




:lol: they did.

You're repeating yourself.

Boring


No doubt. The Bible records all manner of abuses and sins - it is not a tale of perfect people, but of God's plan for a broken humanity.
Umm, I was talking about God killing innocent people (including children) for the crimes of others
 
You're repeating yourself.

Boring

:shrug: I have demonstrated where the text shows you to be incorrect. You insisted on putting a word in there that isn't in the text. It's as if I were to add "and also 21st century American leftism" to a list of sinners somewhere to "prove" that we need to elect Mike Huckabee or something to the Presidency - the fact that I'm having to add it to the text means it's not in the text.
 
Well, only to the extent that it demands the life of the killer in return.

With all of the encouragement of god to kill children and entire towns and rape women, etc.......... I don't recall there being a demand after he told them to do so to go ahead and kill off those following his commands.
 
That is incorrect. The Old Testament does not have a word for Abortion, but it does have a word for Miscarry. There is no instance of someone willfully miscarrying their own child, in the OT, and so nothing is listed for or against it. The closest we have is that the OT states that if a man harms a pregnant woman so as to cause a premature birth, and lasting harm (the death of the child or the death of the woman) comes from it, he would pay for that with his life.

Throughout the Old Testament the text continually affirms that our life begins in the womb, that we have souls in the womb, and the New Testament states that we can even be touched by the Holy Spirit in the womb.

So you could say that that form of partial-birth abortion is considered a sin (a capital one) in the Old Testament, and you can say that there may be room for ambiguity about willful miscarriage in the OT, but you definitely cannot say that "The Old Testament clearly does not see abortion as murder".

Actually it says he should pay with money if the fetus dies. He will pay with his life if the woman dies.
 
Actually it says he should pay with money if the fetus dies. He will pay with his life if the woman dies.

On the contrary - he pays with money for a premature birth of a baby (live), and then pays with his life if there is any permanent harm to the woman or the child.
 
On the contrary - he pays with money for a premature birth of a baby (live), and then pays with his life if there is any permanent harm to the woman or the child.

And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no [further] injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him

:shrug:
 

Yeah - NRSV screwed that one up. The term "yatsa" doesn't mean "to lose her offspring" it means "to go out, to go forth". It certainly doesn't mean a dead child, it is simply meant to refer to the process going out, to include the process of childbirth - it is used, for example, to describe the live births of Esau and Jacob (Genesis 25:25-26). It is used 1,061 times in the Hebrew texts and is never used to mean miscarriage. The idea that it suddenly becomes "miscarriage" in this one verse and no where else is unlikely.

The word for "stillborn child" is "nephel" (Job 3:16, Eccl. 6:3-4, Psalms 58:8). The word for abortion or to cause miscarriage, is "shachol" (Genesis 31:38, Job 21:10, etc.) and is used by the author to mean miscarriage when he discusses miscarriage two chapters later (Exodus 23:26). The Hebrew word used here is a noun form of a verb (yeled) that means "child" or "child brought forth" or "little child" and is used to refer to live births in the Old Testament (ex: Gen 21:8, Exodus 2:3, Ruth 4:16, Isaiah 9:6), including earlier in the exact same chapter (Exodus 21:4).


The early Church Fathers were similarly clear.
 
Last edited:
Yeah - NRSV screwed that one up. The term "yatsa" doesn't mean "to lose her offspring" it means "to go out, to go forth". It certainly doesn't mean a dead child, it is simply meant to refer to the process going out, to include the process of childbirth - it is used, for example, to describe the live births of Esau and Jacob (Genesis 25:25-26). It is used 1,061 times in the Hebrew texts and is never used to mean miscarriage, except, apparently, only in this one verse. :roll:

The word for "stillborn child" is "nephel" (Job 3:16, Eccl. 6:3-4, Psalms 58:8). The word for abortion or to cause miscarriage, is "shachol" (Genesis 31:38, Job 21:10, etc.) and is used by the author to mean miscarriage when he discusses miscarriage two chapters later (Exodus 23:26). The Hebrew word used here is a noun form of a verb (yeled) that means "child" or "child brought forth" or "little child" and is used to refer to live births in the Old Testament (ex: Gen 21:8, Exodus 2:3, Ruth 4:16, Isaiah 9:6), including in the exact same chapter (Exodus 21:4).


The early Church Fathers were similarly clear.

That website reminds me of geocities, LMAO
 
They did. During the Inquisition they (Catholics I believe) had no problem killing to serve their own purposes.

Today, many Christians support the death penalty....as well as certain sects.

We arent talking about killing as a judicial punishment but murder for the sake of murder because s9meone thinks its not against the Bible
 
and perhaps you put that first whereas other christian sects put love thy neighbor first. you aint god of christianity, so some sects can be all anti-gay and others will br pro-love and within the christian architecture all can exist.

What exactly is "pro-love"

You act as if there are only two positions hating gays and solemnizing gay marrige. You can still recognize that gays have the right to be together while acknowledging that the Bible defines marriage between a man and a woman.

That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh. -Genesis 2:24
 
I don't follow the Bible of your religion.

Yet I am still an American citizen.

I should not be subject only to what your God's laws are.

We are talking about marriage solely within the context of Christianity here so Im not sure what point you are getting at.
 
No. I'm pointing out the inconsistencies. You have still failed to point out where there is any agreement on what is or is not a violation of "thou shalt not kill/murder". Heck, the various Bible translations can't even get into agreement on what it should say, kill or murder.

No you are trying to make the Christian definition of murder ambiguous by using disparities on how secular govts define murder.
 
What exactly is "pro-love"

You act as if there are only two positions hating gays and solemnizing gay marrige. You can still recognize that gays have the right to be together while acknowledging that the Bible defines marriage between a man and a woman.

That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh. -Genesis 2:24

Oh what ever. I find your Avatar really insulting. And I'm speaking as a 5th generation Texan. Also did you know one of largest gay Christian Churches in the world is located right here in Texas. So while you are welcome to your view you are not welcome to enforce it on anybody.
 
Back
Top Bottom