How "pro-life" is it to deny the sacrament?

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
So what is the fate of the pregnancy when a pregnant adulteress is commanded to be stoned to death (Leviticus 20:10)?

And what is the fate of the pregnancy when a pregnant adulteress is commanded to drink a "bitter water" abortifacient instead and say "so be it, so be it" (Numbers 5:20-28)?

Numbers 5:20-28 NIV
20 But if you have gone astray(A) while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse(B)—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[a] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water(C) that brings a curse(D) enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”
“‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.(E)”
23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll(F) and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord(G) and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[b] offering(H) and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse.(I) 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
That's the problem with garbage pseudo-translations like the NIV. They are garbage.
 

J regia

Well-known member
That's the problem with garbage pseudo-translations like the NIV. They are garbage.
Doesn't change the fact that the commandment in Numbers 5:20-28 to terminate the pregnancies of adulteresses is about the property rights of men to ensure legitimate lines of descent and inheritance.

Numbers 5:20-28 ERV
But if you have sinned against your husband—if you had sexual relations with a man who is not your husband—then you are not pure. 21 If that is true, you will have much trouble when you drink this special water. You will not be able to have any children. And if you are pregnant now, your baby will die.[a] And the Lord will cause your people to speak evil of you and curse you.’
“Then the priest must tell the woman to make an oath. She must agree for the Lord to cause these things to happen to her if she lies. 22 The priest must say, ‘You must drink this water that causes trouble. If you have sinned, you will not be able to have children. Any baby you have will die before it is born.’ And the woman should say, ‘I agree to do as you say.’
23 “The priest should write these warnings on a scroll. Then he should wash the words off into the water. 24 Then the woman must drink the water that brings trouble. This water will enter her and, if she is guilty, it will cause her much suffering.
25 “Then the priest will take the grain offering from her (the offering for jealousy) and raise it before the Lord. Then he will carry it to the altar. 26 The priest will fill his hands with some of the grain and put it on the altar and let it burn there. After that he will tell the woman to drink the water. 27 If the woman has sinned against her husband, the water will bring her trouble. The water will go into her body and cause her much suffering. Any baby that is in her will die before it is born, and she will never be able to have children. All the people will turn against her.[b] 28 But if the woman has not sinned against her husband and she is pure, the priest will say that she is not guilty.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Well-known member
Doesn't change the fact that the commandment in Numbers 5:20-28 to terminate the pregnancies of adulteresses is about the property rights of men to ensure legitimate lines of descent and inheritence.

Numbers 5:20-28 ERV
20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:
21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The Lord make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the Lord doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;
22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.
23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:
24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.
25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the Lord, and offer it upon the altar:
26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.
27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.
28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
[KJV]

No mention of a baby or abortion in a real translation. You have to go digging for it in some out there translation to find what you are looking for. That doesn't make you right. It just makes you desperate to prove a lost point.

But I made the mistake of not looking at who I was responding to when I first responded to you in this thread. I'm done feeding this troll.
 

J regia

Well-known member
20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:
21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The Lord make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the Lord doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;
22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.
23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:
24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.
25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the Lord, and offer it upon the altar:
26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.
27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.
28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.
[KJV]

No mention of a baby or abortion in a real translation. You have to go digging for it in some out there translation to find what you are looking for. That doesn't make you right. It just makes you desperate to prove a lost point.

But I made the mistake of not looking at who I was responding to when I first responded to you in this thread. I'm done feeding this troll.
IOW the commandments in Leviticus 20:10 and Numbers 5:20-28 obviously command the termination of pregnancies of pregnant adulteresses.

If you believe otherwise, then what evidence do you have that adulteresses never become pregnant?

But if you mistakenly believe that Numbers 5:20-28 is just about aching thighs and upset stomachs then why weren't male adulterers also commanded to drink a "bitter water" abortifacient and say "so be it, so be it" too?

Numbers 5:20-28 ESV
20 But if you have gone astray, though you are under your husband's authority, and if you have defiled yourself, and some man other than your husband has lain with you, 21 then’ (let the priest make the woman take the oath of the curse, and say to the woman) (A)‘the Lord make you a curse and an oath among your people, when the Lord makes your thigh fall away and your body swell. 22 May this water that brings the curse (B)pass into your bowels and make your womb swell and your thigh fall away.’ And the woman shall say, (C)‘Amen, Amen.’
23 “Then the priest shall write these curses in a book and wash them off into the water of bitterness. 24 And he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings the curse, and the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain. 25 And the priest shall take the grain offering of jealousy out of the woman's hand (D)and shall wave the grain offering before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 And the priest (E)shall take a handful of the grain offering, as its memorial portion, and burn it on the altar, and afterward shall make the woman drink the water. 27 And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman (F)shall become a curse among her people. 28 But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be free and shall conceive children.
 

HillsboroMom

Active member
I'll try to make it clear as possible. Home invasion occurs and the family is slaughtered, this would be murder. On the opposite end of the spectrum with same example home invasion occurs yet the intruder is killed while attempting to harm the family. The intruder was killed not murdered. Does that help, or would like another example?

That helps.

In your opinion, the difference between "murder" and "kill" is intent? If someone kills in self-defense, it isn't murder, but if they kill with the intention of doing harm, then it is murder.

Do I have that correct?
 

HillsboroMom

Active member
But if you mistakenly believe that Numbers 5:20-28 is just about aching thighs and upset stomachs then why weren't male adulterers also commanded to drink a "bitter water" abortifacient and say "so be it, so be it" too?
It helps, too, if you know some Hebrew slang.

Like, "thigh" is "womb."

And don't get me started on "feet."
 

Nic

Well-known member
That helps.

In your opinion, the difference between "murder" and "kill" is intent? If someone kills in self-defense, it isn't murder, but if they kill with the intention of doing harm, then it is murder.

Do I have that correct?
I thinks that's a fair understanding. I don't own that understanding, it's a historic perspective.
It flows from loving your neighbor as yourself; second table of the law. First table commands us to love God.🙂
 

J regia

Well-known member
And remember, men and women have different rules, according to the Old Testament. This shouldn't surprise anyone.
And why wouldn't they have different rules, since the men wrote the laws and commandments and owned the women, along with their sheep and goats.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Often they do.

It is legal in most states to shoot someone if they break into your home.

Yet you think that should not be legal. You think the government should make all your decisions for you, including whether it's okay to kill someone to protect your own health or property.

You and I clearly disagree about the amount of power the government should have. I don't believe we should be sheep with regard to the secular government. I am a sheep for my Shepherd only. Not for any human.

Yet, I support your right to worship the government, if you so choose.

Would you support my right not to worship human power?
So which do you placr first, what Christ teaches or what the law of your country says?
Secondly if someone burgles your home do you take them to have communion?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nic

BMS

Well-known member
I'm not interested in "convincing" anyone.

I know I'm not going to convince you. You don't even agree with the Bible, so there's no point arguing with you.
So you dont believe that Romans 13 refers to what it says?? Hello.?
So lets get this right. You dont believe what the Bible says and you dont think people who quote it do either. Wow
 

HillsboroMom

Active member
I thinks that's a fair understanding. I don't own that understanding, it's a historic perspective.
It flows from loving your neighbor as yourself; second table of the law. First table commands us to love God.🙂

Out of curiosity, please answer some more questions for me.

Are you aware that in the US, you are protected to kill someone not just for "self-defense," or to protect the life of someone else, but also to protect your property?

The law states that if I kill someone who is robbing me, even if it's clear that person is not a threat to my life or the life of anyone else, if they are stealing from me, I am justified in killing them, exonerated from wrong-doing, and often heralded as a hero? (That last part isn't "law," obviously, just culture, but the first two clauses are part of the law.)

Do you agree with that law?

Or do you think a person who kills another person to protect not their life, or the life of another person, but only property, should be considered a "murderer"?

Just curious to hear your reaction to that.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Out of curiosity, please answer some more questions for me.

Are you aware that in the US, you are protected to kill someone not just for "self-defense," or to protect the life of someone else, but also to protect your property?

The law states that if I kill someone who is robbing me, even if it's clear that person is not a threat to my life or the life of anyone else, if they are stealing from me, I am justified in killing them, exonerated from wrong-doing, and often heralded as a hero? (That last part isn't "law," obviously, just culture, but the first two clauses are part of the law.)

Do you agree with that law?

Or do you think a person who kills another person to protect not their life, or the life of another person, but only property, should be considered a "murderer"?

Just curious to hear your reaction to that.
150 years ago it was legal in the UK to hang children for stealing a handkerchief. We have moved on since then and now the law definitely values life over property. There have been several householders convicted of murder for killing intruders. The most notorious of which shot a sixteen year old burglar while he was on his knees crying for his mother. The thought that this would not be considered wrong in the US is sickening, but sadly not surprising.

Do you in the US have the concept of "reasonable force" whereby any force used in excess of that needed to contain a situation is regarded as unlawful? It is similar to the rules of engagement, which detail when a soldier can and cannot open fire. It is notable that there have been far more "accidental" blue on blue killings of British servicemen by Americans than vice versa. I suspect that there is a fundamental cultural attitude to life that differs.

Which makes the attitude to abortion more puzzling, since the British by and large don't consider it to be an issue of much importance. Perhaps there is a recognition here that the life of the unborn has a different status and quality to the life of a born person.
 

BMS

Well-known member
You've already proved you don't.

Wow is right.
So the quotes and Biblical references i posted werent from the Bible that I took them from? Wow

How do you know anything about your god. We have the Biblical testimony of our God which I have quoted from, what about your god?
 

BMS

Well-known member
What Christ teaches.


Absolutely. Just as Christ teaches.
So Christ doesnt teach people to steal and break in homes, and He doesnt teach to offer anyone communion. The bread and wine were for His disciples to remmember that His body and blood was broken and poured out for the forgiveness of sin, and Jesus commanded His disciples to make disciples who obey all He taught. (John 14-17)

Your religion seems to be everyone is saved so they can take communion, burgle houses and kill unborn offspring.. and celebrate it.

And next time doent just mouth the crap show the evidence of where your Jesus says what you claim
 

HillsboroMom

Active member
Do you in the US have the concept of "reasonable force" whereby any force used in excess of that needed to contain a situation is regarded as unlawful?
It varies by state. As far as I know, most states don't have anything specific written into law. States that have "reasonable force" laws have them written in such a way to protect (pardon my bluntness here, but) white men. For example, if a white man shoots a black man when the black man wasn't doing anything, he'll say, "I thought he was a burglar" and get away with it. Because those in power say, "Well, gosh, that's reasonable. I mean, he LOOKS like a burglar." But if a black man shoots a white man, even to protect his life, he gets killed on sight.

I'm not saying that's the way it should be. On the contrary, it's very, very wrong. But I've seen it happen with my own eyes, and anyone who claims this doesn't happen isn't paying attention.


It is notable that there have been far more "accidental" blue on blue killings of British servicemen by Americans than vice versa.
I suspect there are probably more than what gets reported.


Which makes the attitude to abortion more puzzling, since the British by and large don't consider it to be an issue of much importance. Perhaps there is a recognition here that the life of the unborn has a different status and quality to the life of a born person.
And here it is.

It brings us back to the point from 500 posts ago: women are called "murderers" when they think they should have the right to protect themselves (their bodies, their livelihoods, or even perceived risks), while men are heralded as heroes when they shoot someone who was no risk to themselves.
 
Top