Support NeoGAF

[Shanadeus]

That's certainly true, but it's not fair to have such a basic reduction of "If it doesn't say it, then it must be OK, or since God kills things, that means we can kill things"

This is where you and I will always disagree because abortion is not birth control like a condom or a pill. The Bible is full of examples of people who had no kids even if married, it has no examples of ones who had an opportunity to have kids wind up aborting them.

Well, this is a bit different as it's telling you the punishment for making someone miscarry. And surprisingly, it's not treated as murder and seem completely focused on the harm that comes to the woman rather than the fetus.

If a woman herself chose to remove the fetus then there is no aggressor and it should thus be okay.

That's at least how I interpreted that verse.

I know that abortion isn't like birth control, it is afterall the intentional destruction after a life has created rather than the prevention of a life being created, but they're essentially the same in that they're a method/choice you make in order not have a child for X reason.

If a fetus is less valuable than a older human and if there is no punishment for the act of destroying one then abortion, the practice, is acceptable. When you combine that with the idea that you're allowed not to have a child, then using an abortion for that purpose shouldn't be against the principles of the Bible even thought it doesn't outright state "GO ON, HAVE AN ABORTION".

The assumption throughout the Bible is that the unborn were living- which is accurate considering that science and the law doesn't dispute this.

Right, but that's not the point. I too consider a fetus to be alive and a human being, it just lacks the same value as a child or an adult.

And it looks like the Bible agrees with me.

Yeah, I figured, but it's just an argument using verses the wrong way to justify an assumtion that doesn't hold up. On top of using an odd Bible translation, he also justifies it by changing the meaning of a Hebrew word. That's pretty bold.

I am no expert on hebrew but his explanation makes sense, that it's a case of bad grammar.

 

[JackEtc]

*snip* money money

Hm, interesting point.

Jack, with respect, I'd start reading before getting beliefs piecemeal from the Internet. Many people are smart here, but you kind of have to get a systemized belief system all in 1 go.

I'm just seeing what other members have to say, and maybe have explanations of some things in Layman's terms. But yes, I do do my research before deciding on something as big as something like this.

I think you can read the New Testament without a literal interpretation, and without any divine magic. I don't believe it is too late, you have your whole life ahead of you, and those 4 years at university are going to open your eyes and probably change your world view - I know it can be hard right now, but trust me it gets easier.

Some reading: http://serene-musings.blogspot.com/2007/04/origin-of-virgin-birth-stories.html

Yeah, we'll see what ends up happening later on in life, who knows. Even if I change my mind later in life, I feel like I should switch over to nondenominational Christianity if anything, as soon as I can drive/find a church. Or at least give it a try.

 

[JGS]

Well, this is a bit different as it's telling you the punishment for making someone miscarry. And surprisingly, it's not treated as murder and seem completely focused on the harm that comes to the woman rather than the fetus.

Again, you can only link abortion to this if you do two things:
1. Accept this verse as accurate which it is apparently not bases on 2 things
a. More common translations (Not more politically correct, but more widely known) have it as giving birth to a preemie
b. The Hebrew word is correctly translated as giving birth
2. Accept that voluntary abortion is on par with involuntary miscarriage

So although you can make a case that God's law provided monetary restitution for a miscarriage, it did not carry over to an abortion- meaning that God still would hold value to the life of an unborn child voluntarily killed by it's mother.

I know that abortion isn't like birth control, it is afterall the intentional destruction after a life has created rather than the prevention of a life being created, but they're essentially the same in that they're a method/choice you make in order not have a child for X reason.

I agree. An abortion is taking care of a problem that someone doesn't want. The difference is birth control is responsibility, birth prevention usually shows a lack of that. As I've said before, since the issue is on viability, there is little to no difference between abortions and infanticide since both are highly dependent on others to survive- especially if they have defects.

So if God values life at all, does not sanction his worshippers to kill their kids, & offers no reasons whatsoever that a fetus should be killed, there's really no way to assume that God is fine with them.

However, abortion is not a religious issue, it's just that religious people tend to see it that way because of their views on the whole "Life is precious" thing. I'm not tha jaded, but i also know no matter how much life is de-valued now by abortions, it doesn't change the fact that you're killing something that if not human now will inevitably be so. I find that to be disgusting- God or no God. As I've said before, I am not for a death penalty, but I would rather a hundred murderers be killed over one unborn kid. The good news is that I have no say in the matter.

If a fetus is less valuable than a older human and if there is no punishment for the act of destroying one then abortion, the practice, is acceptable. When you combine that with the idea that you're allowed not to have a child, then using an abortion for that purpose shouldn't be against the principles of the Bible even thought it doesn't outright state "GO ON, HAVE AN ABORTION".

That a big if. There's no reason to think that the fetus is less valuable. Secondly, birth control is how you don't have kids.

Religious people echo the opinion polls on abortion, so they already concur with this. Since abortion isn't outright stated, then people run with this and do what they want. Abortion is easily winning this "battle" so there's no reason to encourage religious people to change their opinion on it.

 

[yacobod]

Following this up as far as i know only Catholics have saints.

and eastern orthodox, anglicans, ....

you're not very well informed

 

[JGS]

Long reply so sorry.

It's a strong theme that God wants sex for marriage and for you to have one partner only, I get that.

Basically my beef is that you have to have extensive knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages and Jewish history to even have a fundamental understanding of some of the most common issues to man including sex.

I'm thinking that it's so simple that people add to it.
Fornication is definitely a no-no. It's probably the one thing that got much stricter with Christianity since the Jews could have more than one wife. However, the things you do with your wife and the frequency at which you do them is up for interpretation. Ditto with masturbation although there is a leaning in both scenarios that moderation & self-control is in order. I always see it as the difference between a principle and a rule. One is a highly recommended view while the other is unyielding.

Of course, there is also the matter of how repentant and foregiveness plays a role in it.

Here's other confusing points/issues of contention:

-The verse in Matthew 5 is talking about adultery, not broad sexuality. I don't think it's proper interpretation to apply it as so. Here lust means in a desirous way, that is thinking "I want to have sex with her" instead of your wife.

This is true and if one looks for explicit detail, then you could argue that porn is OK for a single man, maybe even strip clubs. I think the point is what the intent of viewing it is. There's a scripture in Proverbs that basically warns men to be careful at lingering at the prostitute on the street corner & of course David's problems started with him watching Bathsheba bathing. So there is a correlation to what was previously taught about the "Just looking" scenario.

-The gouge out your eye/cut off scriptures are deeply troubling in the context of sexuality. There's unnatural sexual activity that you seek out and cultivate by the images/things that you surround yourself with, but...

Well, I think the verses acknowledge the fact that we are prone to do what we desire so there is an extraordinary effort that's needed to avoided something, that with no effort at all, would be quite natural even if not in the proper context of marriage.

- People get naturally aroused after a period of inactivity. It's going to happen and as a result you will think of someone in a sexual manor.

Agreed. It's inevitable which is why Jesus counseled against it and paul stated if you remain in a horny state, get married for that reason (I paraphrasing of course). This is why I have a fairly liberal view of masturbation. I think a shame factor should be a part of it still so as not to become dependent on it for gratification (Since there are more than that and sex to reduce arousal.)

- If I think about robbing a bank because I'm having financial problems, it doesn't mean I'm going to do it. Thinking about a woman's body while you masturbate doesn't mean you're going to try to have sex with her.

True, but the point is the arousal shouldn't be encouraged to begin with- especially if you're married. So you should turn away when a hot girl is walking by. Further the fantasy in all liklihood does not start with a guy thinking about dating and marrying the girl frst, it's about committing fornication. Thinking about it on a normal basis does not lead to sex with those fantasy girls, but it does lead to an acceptance of fornication.

The more you think about sex, the more you are likely to have it when the opportunity arises is the thinking. I actually agree with that. Of course, not knowing anything about sex could also lead to eat too.
I find people who say that masturbating is a gateway to serious sins are pontificating. "Nothing beyond what is written" is what the bible says.

- Tradition doesn't constitute biblical doctrine nor does cultural values of a time.
- Lust has an inspecific definition about improper sexual conduct and also about a craving desire. Pornea refers to fornication outside of marriage, incest, etc. There isn't anything about looking at women's bodies being "lust" or masturbation being lust.

Lust is desire and there are many warnings regarding it. However, masturbation itself could lead to an unclean act although that may be open to interpretation. I guess I'm still looking at it from a self-countrol angle.

- I've heard the argument that all masturbation is a sin, even in the context of marriage which I find to be ludicrous.

It could be sinful just depending on how you view it. It's like a person who's rich may be a sinner on the basis of how he views his money or how important it is to him.

- If God created us to marry one person and have sex with one person, why is polygamy in the bible and accepted?

Well, culturally it was accepted, but it also tied into nation building for population growth. Christianity, in contrast, went back to the original purpose - one wife. It did this because it had no interest in forming a nation to compete with other countries or gain a land advantage which was the case with Israel all the way to their enslavement in Babylon. I can't remeber how prominent the practice was by Jesus' day and very few of God's prophets or writers practiced it with the obvious exception of David & Solomon.

- If sex within marriage is the only acceptable sexual outlet why does Paul discourage people from marrying to focus on the Lord?

Because some are fine without sex. Love & marriage is a distraction if you want to devote your life completely to God. Sex is not a neccesity for life like food and water is, so some could refrain from it. It's not a requirement though and Paul was simply stated if you can do it, then it's the best way to go.

- Why does the Bible place a large emphasis on sexual immorality disqualifying you from salvation (1 Corin 6:9)? What about being overweight which significantly impairs all of your mental and bodily functions?

Gluttony is condemned too, but being overweight in this day and age can be caused simply by what's offered. If you are eating what is placed in front of you, it is tough not to gain weight without exercise and actually dieting to beneath what you enjoy. So that has to be taken into consideration.

I personally don't think that the Bible places a lot of emphasis on sex. It lays it out there, it's pretty self-explanatory, but the buklk of the NT involves explaining how significant Jesus' sacrifice is and how we can apply that to our lives in any number of ways including sex. I just think it looks like it's a big theme since sex is a big theme to society and, quite frankly, people want to have sex wthout being married. So religions either have to focus their sermons on it or justify why it's OK (Hmmm I wonder why?) since tons of churches have no problem with fornication.

- To me, it raises questions of the divinity of the bible.

To me, it helps verify divinity because no man in his right mind would tell people they can't do what they naturally feel compelled to do. There's not an upside to it from a human perspective. It creates more division and strife rather than unity until everyne comes on board. From a human perspective orgies are the way to go which is why so many religion practice that and polygamy at the time.

 

[Prologue]

How do you guys "reason" out of tragedies when it comes to faith? Not sure if thats even the right word. You turn on the news and you see what is going on in the world. Family members are dieing, random killings in the street, earthquakes on one part of the world while others starve on the other side. I can't help but think sometimes that my life is going to be as difficult, I mean why wouldn't it? I know I'm not going to be the exception. How do you go about having a positive outlook on life knowing all this stuff is going on and sooner or later the shit is going to hit the fan in your life as well? Why would I get happiness when other people lack it? I'm not special.

 

[Shanadeus]

How do you guys "reason" out of tragedies when it comes to faith? Not sure if thats even the right word. You turn on the news and you see what is going on in the world. Family members are dieing, random killings in the street, earthquakes on one part of the world while others starve on the other side. I can't help but think sometimes that my life is going to be as difficult, I mean why wouldn't it? I know I'm not going to be the exception. How do you go about having a positive outlook on life knowing all this stuff is going on and sooner or later the shit is going to hit the fan in your life as well? Why would I get happiness when other people lack it? I'm not special.

Carpe diem.

 

[JGS]

How do you guys "reason" out of tragedies when it comes to faith? Not sure if thats even the right word. You turn on the news and you see what is going on in the world. Family members are dieing, random killings in the street, earthquakes on one part of the world while others starve on the other side. I can't help but think sometimes that my life is going to be as difficult, I mean why wouldn't it? I know I'm not going to be the exception. How do you go about having a positive outlook on life knowing all this stuff is going on and sooner or later the shit is going to hit the fan in your life as well? Why would I get happiness when other people lack it? I'm not special.

I look at it in terms of the end result. Christianity is not necessarily about us being physically protected now but rather not being forgotten about after we die. So tragedies befall everyone, good or bad, and especially if we do things or are born into things that hasten that demise.

I'm not going to get into the end results since that is easily the most confusing thing about Christianity to me- what happenes when we die or when Judgement Day is here. Quite frankly, I don't really worry about it too much because I'm supposed to be working on myself regardless of the reward. But we do know that no matter what, we are rewarded for faith and the primary way that reward comes about is by the ressurection.

So no matter how bad the tragedy, God can "fix" it in the future.

EDIT: I guess it helps to be a realist in this regard. Not being superstitious or thinking God works in mysterious ways or not thinking I'm being particularly bless or cursed is pretty relieving.

 

[Chaplain]

How do you guys "reason" out of tragedies when it comes to faith? Not sure if thats even the right word. You turn on the news and you see what is going on in the world. Family members are dieing, random killings in the street, earthquakes on one part of the world while others starve on the other side. I can't help but think sometimes that my life is going to be as difficult, I mean why wouldn't it? I know I'm not going to be the exception. How do you go about having a positive outlook on life knowing all this stuff is going on and sooner or later the shit is going to hit the fan in your life as well? Why would I get happiness when other people lack it? I'm not special.

My dad killed himself when I was about 2 years old. I struggled with this for many years until God saved me. I was then shown that I was allowed to experience this tragedy to comfort others. God then brought people into my life where I was able to encourage and comfort during their painful time of losing a loved one to suicide.

My wife is currently in the hospital with a incurable disease (basically dying). She has suffered for about 6 years now and her faith is stronger then ever. I have been given peace through this trial and I am seeing God use this trial to change me. Do we have bad days? Of Course! But God always gives us what we need when we come to the end of ourselves. This has definitely been one of the hardest things we have ever face being alive.

Suffering is one of the methods God uses to remind us that life is short, to help us grow and to develop a closer relationship with God and others. The flip side can be that we can become bitter, turn away from God and look for methods of escaping the pain (like drugs for example).

I am grateful that I am being allowed to experience these things so that others may come to know Christ and so I can help others in their own time of need.

 

[Bungalow Bob]

(in a nutshell) I think the Bible is not pro-abortion

It seems you are interpreting the Bible based on what you want it to say rather than what it actually says. What do you think the result of a birth that is premature by let's say... 6 months is? It's obviously guaranteed death even though you seem to be arguing otherwise.

Here's Exodus 21:22 from the Bible in Basic English: If men, while fighting, do damage to a woman with child, causing the loss of the child, but no other evil comes to her, the man will have to make payment up to the amount fixed by her husband, in agreement with the decision of the judges.

This places the value of a fetus in God's eyes on roughly the same level as a cow. So-called Christians who are anti-abortion simply do not believe in the Bible.

edit: There's no talk about controversy in the wikipedia entry for the Bible in Basic English.

 

[Orayn]

How do you guys "reason" out of tragedies when it comes to faith?

I always found this question interesting. These are the three most prominent explanations I've heard.

• God is marginalized to some degree. He is said not control things like natural disasters or murderers.
• God is a pretty violent guy, and does direct natural disasters to kill those he doesn't like.
• God not intervening is handwaved as being part of some incomprehensibly complex plan. He is still considered all-loving and merciful.

 

[Dude Abides]

Are you unaware that there is an afterlife (at least according to Christians)?

Your opinion about life being harder for Christians is puzzling. It's like saying that a person who decides to make a $1 investment today for a $1,000,000,000 return tomorrow is making a hard decision, and must be very generous and self-sacrificing. The main point of the Bible is that Christianity is a huge advantage in every day life; and it makes this point very convincingly. This is why many non-believers call Christianity a crutch (i.e. something that helps to make things easier).

I hope that everyone else in this thread realizes that Christians are just making the obvious, rational decision when they worship God, just like the guy making the investment in the above paragraph.

I think a larger problem with GhaleonQ's statement is that "honesty, humility, self-sacrifice, austerity, abstinence, and zealousness about truth" (putting aside that "truth" in this context actually means "religious belief") are not required of non-Catholic Christians. They are more like suggestions, if anything.

 

[JGS]

It seems you are interpreting the Bible based on what you want it to say rather than what it actually says. What do you think the result of a birth that is premature by let's say... 6 months is? It's obviously guaranteed death even though you seem to be arguing otherwise.

This is not true. You are mixing up the arguments.

In fact, I specifically say abortion isn't a religious issue (Although one could deduce just as easily that God values the life of a prekid as much as he does the life of a person). Shanadeus already acknowledges that abortion is killing an unborn child but does not acknowledge it's value as a life form. This is where the eternal disagreement lies and nothing you say is going to sway me unless you have something new.

Here's Exodus 21:22 from the Bible in Basic English: If men, while fighting, do damage to a woman with child, causing the loss of the child, but no other evil comes to her, the man will have to make payment up to the amount fixed by her husband, in agreement with the decision of the judges.

Exodus 21:22 does not say this in plain English or Hebrew except in the unknown translation mentioned bby Shanadeus. Further the Hebrew word cannot be translated into miscarriage except under the loosest of definitions.

So God could very well be pro-abortion, but you would not know that by the verses mentioned except by the loosest of interpretations. On top of that, the situation doesn't translate to abortion.

I am more than willing to be corrected on the matter...it just hasn't happpened yet. The funniest part of that post is accusing Bible translations, that are normally accused of anything but as being politically correct, as being so just because they use the original meaning of words at the expense of the scholars view. In other words, he's guilty of what you're accusing me of.

 

[JGS]

What do you think the result of a birth that is premature by let's say... 6 months is? It's obviously guaranteed death even though you seem to be arguing otherwise.

I missed this one spot to correct your view of my post.

To answer the question, there is no guarentee of that at all. Further, as technology improves, who is to say a fetus couldn't flat out survive outside the womb throughout an entire mechanical pregnancy? Would abortion be banned then once technology defeats the womb?

However, all that is irrelevant as no one is condmning the mother for having a miscarriage.

An abortion is a voluntary action where the mother decides that iot's better to kill/end future life/stop developement of a child she does not want (In well over 90% of the cases so no need to get into the whole rape/incest thing). It's perfectly legal for them to do so but it still makes them a bit of a horrible person imo. But, outside of my immediate family, they aren't living to please me and my concern for what they do amounts to me discussing it in internet forums.

I will admit that twisting a pro-abortion stance to make it equate to a God love abortion stance is silly as there is no reason to encourage people to have an abortion anyway. If they want it they can have it without th need for divine endorsement since they aren't going to get it from Scripture (I wonder how Exodus 21 would fit in a Cosmopolitan ad for abortion?).

 

[JCRedeems]

Here is a post I hope will build faith for readers.

Matthew 24:14 (NKJV) "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come."

Wow, for some Jew guy who was born in a small village from a nation the size of Ohio 2000 years ago it sure was miraculous how his prediction is coming or has come to fulfillment. Wow, what extreme luck or coincidence. Who really knew that Gospel message-that he died for those who believe in him and was raised from the dead- would persist for 2000 years and spread across the globe to people of all nations and tongues? It's like he's divine or something. [wink wink]

The nations worship Jesus!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97-mwKm7SwY Africa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlgwwLyKIHM China
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWsvTIXmky0 Indonesia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74K8RKbsegQ Brazil
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2mDDz177wQ India
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6gvgHAR9pE&feature=related Columbia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20OoguQVet4&feature=related Pakistan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HYEmNOaFwk&feature=related South Korea
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXkWu8MjFLA Philippines

Rev. 22:13 "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."

Amen Lord, amen.

 

[Bungalow Bob]

It's perfectly legal for them to do so but it still makes them a bit of a horrible person imo. But, outside of my immediate family, they aren't living to please me and my concern for what they do amounts to me discussing it in internet forums.

I feel sorry for your children.

It's good that you're not anti-abortion politically, but I'm curious as to why you think killing a fetus is worse than, say, killing an adult pig. Obviously the pig is far more intelligent and suffers far more.

edit: The Bible passage in my previous post that basically equates the value of a fetus with that of an animal is from a well-known, non-controvertial translation. I saw another translation that also used the word "miscarriage." See the edit to my previous post.

 

[Sutton Dagger]

So I posted this in the Official Religion Thread but it seems like the conversation has shifted to this one. I hope to provide some interesting (you may not think so) questions I have about the notion of God presented in Christianity

"I have been lurking this thread for ages, and I really enjoy JGS's responses. Just so there is no miscommunication, I'm an Atheist. I have a few questions that I would like for someone to respond to (JGS, you usually respond in an intelligent manner so hopefully you will give it a go), and possibly some follow up questions.

1: What evidence (if any) persuaded you that there was an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent creator?

2: What evidence (if any) could be presented that would change your mind about this creators existence?

3: Where do you stand on the concept of original sin? Is it 'just' to hold humanity responsible for the 'sins' of our ancestors? If so, why?

4: Is evolution a product of God or purely a natural process? Does evolutionary theory ring true for you as a theist, and if so, where does God fit in with this theory?

5: What is your concept of hell? Is it the traditional 'fire and brimstone' realm of torment, or the eternal absence from God's grace? In either case, what circumstances would cause someone to end up in this place?

I assume these may have been covered before (and I apologise if it is becoming monotonous) but I'm interested on a Christian perspective. Cheers."

 

[Bungalow Bob]

(talking about the fact that natural sexual activity is, according to the Bible, a sin so great that it can result in eternal damnation) To me, it helps verify divinity because no man in his right mind would tell people they can't do what they naturally feel compelled to do. There's not an upside to it from a human perspective.

You couldn't possibly be more wrong about this. The most basic human desires include: eating, sleeping and fornicating. For some reason, a high percentage of humans consider it impressive to the point that it might be divinely inspired when they see someone abstain from one of these basic desires. Now obviously sex is the only one of these that can be abstained from that doesn't result in death.

If I decided to start a new religion/business I would be sure to do what is necessary to convince the members that all my priests not only abstain from sex, but also from sugars, cereals, legumes, alcohol, coffee and other unhealthy foods to give me a leg up on the competition.

Just look at the Roman Catholic Church (the wealthiest religious organization in the world); it's obvious that their decision to only ordain priests that are celibate results in the vast majority of the priests: having severe sexual problems; and being incompetent councilors due to their lack of experience in one of the most important aspects of humanity. But due to the irrational human idea that abstinence is divinely impressive, this decision also allows them to keep and convert more people than they otherwise would, so it's a net positive for them.

 

[hellclerk]

Well, I just watched this whole thing. It's a great discussion of faith and science, thought people would like to watch it. I own Brother Consolmagno's book, and I think I might read it again. He's just elevated himself to the list of people I'd love to have a nice lunch with and talk.

Find it here

 

[FunkyMunkey]

Well, I just watched this whole thing. It's a great discussion of faith and science, thought people would like to watch it. I own Brother Consolmagno's book, and I think I might read it again. He's just elevated himself to the list of people I'd love to have a nice lunch with and talk.

Find it here

This was a GREAT video to watch, from a religious, scientific, and philosophical view. Intelligent and well-spoken people.

 

[OttomanScribe]

To Christian debate threads on the front page. Impressive.

 

[Vincent Alexander]

To Christian debate threads on the front page. Impressive.

Two?

 

[FunkyMunkey]

To Christian debate threads on the front page. Impressive.

This isn't a debate thread.

 

[MorisUkunRasik]

Well, I just watched this whole thing. It's a great discussion of faith and science, thought people would like to watch it. I own Brother Consolmagno's book, and I think I might read it again. He's just elevated himself to the list of people I'd love to have a nice lunch with and talk.

Find it here

They talk a lot and don't say very much.

 

[JGS]

This isn't a debate thread.

Sadly, neither is the other one, at least the last time I saw it.

 

[Dead Man]

This isn't a debate thread.

Sure it is. People are debating the meanings of passages in the bible, the age of doctrines, and the meaning of it all.

 

[JGS]

I feel sorry for your children.

Thanks for worrying about nothing. My kids are fine and they will continue to be so even though they are being taught to think that *gasp*, an abortion is killing a prekid. The Missus doesn't need teaching since she believed that way before we met. So we're good, but if you continue to be concerned, I completely understand if you need to call social services on that.

It's good that you're not anti-abortion politically, but I'm curious as to why you think killing a fetus is worse than, say, killing an adult pig. Obviously the pig is far more intelligent and suffers far more.

What a strange analogy. You have experience being a fetus to the point of knowing that their butchering is better than a pig's? You have experience of getting shot in the head or butchered. What a life you've lived!

So you think killing should be based on intelligence? This goes back to thinking it should be ok to simply kill a kid outright since their intelligence ain't that great either. Why let birth get in the way? The primary difference (not the only one), is I identify with human life much more than a pig's. However, if prekids taste like bacon then all bets are off!(j/k)

Seriously, I am against the killing of a pig for the heck of it too. I think it's tragic and a waste of life. Fortunately most farmers are either not that cruel or that wasteful and if they don't want pigs, they don't have to raise them to begin with.

However, an animal is never the equal of humans in terms of human life. A pig may on occasion, I guess, kill their young but they are certainly intelligent enough to raise what they conceived. In that case, a pig is smarter than most people who champion abortion.

edit: The Bible passage in my previous post that basically equates the value of a fetus with that of an animal is from a well-known, non-controvertial translation. I saw another translation that also used the word "miscarriage." See the edit to my previous post.

This edit is worthless because it is simply doing what the article is- finding the verse to fit the argument. Whether there are verses out there that fit to your needs to ridicule my stand are irrelevant. I could probably find a Bible that refers to Jesus and the apostles as JC & the Homeboys, that wouldn't mean it's an accurate translation.

 

[JGS]

You couldn't possibly be more wrong about this. The most basic human desires include: eating, sleeping and fornicating. For some reason, a high percentage of humans consider it impressive to the point that it might be divinely inspired when they see someone abstain from one of these basic desires. Now obviously sex is the only one of these that can be abstained from that doesn't result in death.

No one is impressed by a lack of sex. No one. Most in society today find it odd if you don't have sex before marriage. The Bible is pro-sex but with the stipulation of being married to enjoy it.

If I decided to start a new religion/business I would be sure to do what is necessary to convince the members that all my priests not only abstain from sex, but also from sugars, cereals, legumes, alcohol, coffee and other unhealthy foods to give me a leg up on the competition.

Just look at the Roman Catholic Church (the wealthiest religious organization in the world); it's obvious that their decision to only ordain priests that are celibate results in the vast majority of the priests: having severe sexual problems; and being incompetent councilors due to their lack of experience in one of the most important aspects of humanity. But due to the irrational human idea that abstinence is divinely impressive, this decision also allows them to keep and convert more people than they otherwise would, so it's a net positive for them.

I now understand the previous paragraph better. I think I already answered, but to clarify, Christianity does not promote abstinence as a normal human behavior. Sex is natural just not required for life. I'm not going to discuss what other religions do, but your example proves the point that under normal circumstances, humans would encourage sex to prevent the problems faced some religions.

Being basically a eunuch is not irrational. It makes perfect sense that people who can abstain do so as it can help in other aspects of life. So I'm not dogging people who choose to abstain. However, it was by choice and not by a widespread encouragement from Scripture which is why the majority of Paul's writings on the matter focus on marriage and also the need to not fornicate.

Sutton Dagger: I will respond but I'm late for work now! Lost track of time.

 

[OttomanScribe]

This isn't a debate thread.

? fooled me

I am not talking about its intent, but rather its current form.

 

[Bungalow Bob]

Sadly, neither is the other one, at least the last time I saw it.

The other Christianity thread is now a lot better than it was during the first 5 pages.

 

[JGS]

The other Christianity thread is now a lot better than it was during the first 5 pages.

I'll check it out again.

The thing is that when a non-Christian makes a Christianity thread, I tend to match tone which I'm trying to avoid. Everytime that happens I am accused of being a troll, derailing the thread, or whatever. So those threads tend to wind up not actually wanting Christians in it except for the purpose of ridicule. It doesn't help that I actually am not that interested in people trying to figure out what I think is as obvious, just as abiogenesis is obvious to most atheists although they can't "back it up" either. Why on Earth do I need to show proof just because a non-Christian can't see it?

In many cases, I think arguing (not in the debating sense which I always welcome the challenge of) is a fun experience as I like see how the replies by the non-religious mirror the ones that they condemn as bigots, delusional, ignorant, and whatnot. At this point, I'm not in the mood though.

 

[JGS]

So I posted this in the Official Religion Thread but it seems like the conversation has shifted to this one. I hope to provide some interesting (you may not think so) questions I have about the notion of God presented in Christianity

"I have been lurking this thread for ages, and I really enjoy JGS's responses. Just so there is no miscommunication, I'm an Atheist. I have a few questions that I would like for someone to respond to (JGS, you usually respond in an intelligent manner so hopefully you will give it a go), and possibly some follow up questions.

1: What evidence (if any) persuaded you that there was an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent creator?

I still check the religion thread but if it's not in the first few pages I assume it's died out until another time.

I personally feel there is more than enough evidence to suggest there is a God but it really just boils down to odds. I do not think it is possible and never will be possible for life to come about without creation being some part of it. This doesn't have much to do with evolution and entirely to do with life starting or evolving between kinds which there is no proof beyond pictures and essays.

Although any analogy to tie this together gets shot down, it really is as simple as it's more likely for complex things to start out created and then go from there.

2: What evidence (if any) could be presented that would change your mind about this creators existence?

Proof is all it would take. I'm very open minded and my faith is strong until it is disproven and then I'm up for change. The proof can come in two ways.
1. Proof of a large conspiracy on the part of writing the Bible. Accusations fly but they tend to be on the basis of dismissing chunks of it and not on actually disproving it. A conspiracy in the Bible would need to cover centuries of deception, proof od non-existence, and verification that there were indeed different writers. This would involve complicity across at least 2 different religions and potentially millions of people even before leaving the 1st century.

2. Time travel since that's really the only way to know that life started with a bang or with the mysterious super cell that defied cell theory to start everything.

Otherwise, I don't think I will ever get out of a natural disposition to believe in something bigger than me. It doesn't necessarily have to be God I guess, but even if it were Zeus or Buddha or anything else, it still lends to the idea that creation was the key. I personally feel that the pieces of the puzzle fit better in Christian Doctrine.

I suppose if scientists discovered the start of life with no time travel involved that would be a start too. Lab work does not count. It's impressive, but far from proof.

3: Where do you stand on the concept of original sin? Is it 'just' to hold humanity responsible for the 'sins' of our ancestors? If so, why?

No, I don't think this. Sin is pretty much genetic. The standard for eternal life requires perfection, otherwise there's nothing special about perfection itself. Humanity is trapped by sin right now, but Jesus is the reason we aren't held captive to it forever.

4: Is evolution a product of God or purely a natural process? Does evolutionary theory ring true for you as a theist, and if so, where does God fit in with this theory?

I don't know since the Bible doesn't concern itself with it. I personally believe it's both. Evolution can occur simply by changes in environment so, assuming the earth's been arond for billions of years, science has verified time and again that massive changes can occur in very brief periods of time. However, I also think that God can control the course of things or find ways to improve/change the design which would lead to variety. It's hard for us to imagine a million different species, I don't think it's that tough for a person identified as The Creator who is all-knowing.

5: What is your concept of hell? Is it the traditional 'fire and brimstone' realm of torment, or the eternal absence from God's grace? In either case, what circumstances would cause someone to end up in this place?

This & the Trinity is where I diverge from most Christians. I do not believe in the slightest in Hell as a place of fiery torment for all eternity. Don't buy it. Further, there's no way I could really worship a God that endorsed that as a fitting punishment. I would try to fake it though!

Although the Bible discusses Hell, it doesn't discussing the way it is classically known. The few verses that discussed eternal torment were purely in parable/sign form and were pretty obviously explaining something else as symbolic language typically does. The Bible consistently discusses the wages sin pays = death and i believe that.

Hell is generally tied to death and the grave which is why faithful men like Job & Jesus are mentioned in relation to it. Job was preferring to be burned forever in torment to his plight? I doubt it. Why would Jesus have to go there even for a short time?

 

[Hi-tekk]

Hey guys sorry to somewhat derail what you all where talking about here but I wasn't sure where to put this at because of the centerpiece of Christians and faith being involved here. If any of you could offer up some genuine, thoughtout and honest posts from those who are Christians I would greatly appreciate it. So here goes (i promise I'm going to do my best to not make this a wall of text):

- I'm involved with knowing a guy who has been married for 5 years. He recently expressed that he feels he wants to leave his wife because he realizes that he never really loved his wife.

- Now the bible talks about not divorcing (see here) and the only way a marriage should end would be on grounds of adultery. But honestly the guy doesn’t want to do that. He just wants to end things as amicably as possible (even though the wife doesn’t want the divorce because she feels like he is her soulmate).

- The church that we are both apart of believes that divorce isn’t an option unless adultery has occurred in the relationship by either party and believes the couple should just work it out. They feel that with God it can work out and it should be given a chance.

- But the guy feels like he’s tried to give it a chance (since day one of the marriage) and still doesn’t have an emotional connection with his wife. He fought to not commit adultery and even decided to push through his feelings to have a child with his wife (the baby girl is 1 year old).

- The guy realizes that yea it’s not right to divorce but since the issue doesn’t keep him from going to heaven and because of God’s grace. He believes that he needs to do it and God will forgive him.

- Any thoughts/input/advice on this from a Christian perspective? Is the guy from a Christian perspective miss using the bible and/or God’s grace? I would definitely like to him help through this. Obviously this whole situation boils down to the faith of the guy versus the faith of his church. Who’s right? If this is truly about faith, then does it matter what the church thinks but rather what God thinks? Thanks for your responses.

 

[Chaplain]

Hey guys sorry to somewhat derail what you all where talking about here but I wasn't sure where to put this at because of the centerpiece of Christians and faith being involved here. If any of you could offer up some genuine, thoughtout and honest posts from those who are Christians I would greatly appreciate it. So here goes (i promise I'm going to do my best to not make this a wall of text):

- I'm involved with knowing a guy who has been married for 5 years. He recently expressed that he feels he wants to leave his wife because he realizes that he never really loved his wife.

- Now the bible talks about not divorcing (see here) and the only way a marriage should end would be on grounds of adultery. But honestly the guy doesn’t want to do that. He just wants to end things as amicably as possible (even though the wife doesn’t want the divorce because she feels like he is her soulmate).

- The church that we are both apart of believes that divorce isn’t an option unless adultery has occurred in the relationship by either party and believes the couple should just work it out. They feel that with God it can work out and it should be given a chance.

- But the guys feels like he’s tried to give it a chance (since day one of the marriage) and still doesn’t have an emotional connection with his wife. He fought to not commit adultery and even decided to push through his feelings to have a child with his wife (the baby girl is 1 year old).

- The guy realizes that yea it’s not right to divorce but since the issue doesn’t keep him from going to heaven and because of God’s grace. He believes that he needs to do it and God will forgive him.

- Any thoughts/input/advice on this from a Christian perspective? Is the guy from a Christian perspective miss using the bible and/or God’s grace? I would definitely like to him help through this. Obviously this whole situation boils down to the faith of the guy versus the faith of his church. Who’s right? If this is truly about faith, then does it matter what the church thinks but rather what God thinks? Thanks for your responses.

God hates divorce because of the damage it causes to all parties involved. What I do know is that the husband made a promise to God, his wife and all the parties at the wedding that he would love her in the good times and in the bad.

He has to make the choice. Is he going to live for himself or is he going to die to himself and stop sinning against God by going the opposite way he promised to go?

“You have heard the law that says, ‘A man can divorce his wife by merely giving her a written notice of divorce.’ But I say that a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit adultery. And anyone who marries a divorced woman also commits adultery."

Some Pharisees came and tried to trap him with this question: “Should a man be allowed to divorce his wife for just any reason?”

“Haven’t you read the Scriptures?” Jesus replied. “They record that from the beginning ‘God made them male and female.’ And he said, ‘This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.’ Since they are no longer two but one, let no one split apart what God has joined together.”

“Then why did Moses say in the law that a man could give his wife a written notice of divorce and send her away?” they asked.

Jesus replied, “Moses permitted divorce only as a concession to your hard hearts, but it was not what God had originally intended. And I tell you this, whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery—unless his wife has been unfaithful.”

God will change this mans heart and fill him with His love if he decides to do the write thing. God will not condone sin just because a person wants to do their own thing.

 

[GhaleonQ]

- Any thoughts/input/advice on this from a Christian perspective? Is the guy from a Christian perspective miss using the bible and/or God’s grace? I would definitely like to him help through this. Obviously this whole situation boils down to the faith of the guy versus the faith of his church. Who’s right? If this is truly about faith, then does it matter what the church thinks but rather what God thinks? Thanks for your responses.

Basically, even though he raises important issues, he has no theological (and, I'd argue, social) argument.

When you commit, you're agreeing to spend all of your emotional energy for this person. If there's a problem, you fix it within the confines of your accord. If you aren't happy, you need to solve what's wrong with you. And so on. This might take 1 hour. It might take 30 years. This is how you live a fulfilling life, not by abandoning whatever starts to bore you.

This all assumes, of course, that he can raise serious concerns about the health of their relationship, his efforts to fix things, and his genuine commitment to Christianity and to the objective societal (non-Christian) concept of marriage. 5 years, some of which was probably "happy" in the shallow sense? If this were decided by some kind of court, he'd be laughed out. Obviously, a pastor (and a friend, if you're a Christian) should show more sympathy to his problems. I'm just talking about the objective and subjective interpretations of the Bible/whatever his church is.

Oh, and he agrees to never marry again, anyway. Marriage is not a debate about "upgrades," in the Christian conception.

 

[Shanadeus]

Again, you can only link abortion to this if you do two things:
1. Accept this verse as accurate which it is apparently not bases on 2 things
a. More common translations (Not more politically correct, but more widely known) have it as giving birth to a preemie
b. The Hebrew word is correctly translated as giving birth
2. Accept that voluntary abortion is on par with involuntary miscarriage

So although you can make a case that God's law provided monetary restitution for a miscarriage, it did not carry over to an abortion- meaning that God still would hold value to the life of an unborn child voluntarily killed by it's mother.

But that's the thing, in several of the verses along with the Exodus one God doesn't seem to put that high of a value on a fetus and in some cases doesn't even consider it to be alive and/or ensouled.

Yes, it's killed volontarily by it's own mother in an abortion but if it's done for a biblically good reason (such as the reason you are allowed to use birth control according to some interpretations of scripture) then the death of a fetus isn't murder.

In Exodus something has been done to the woman against her/the husband's will, a damage that one presume isn't what she wanted as it is unintentional and not requested, which is why it's fined rather than being fined because a fetus has died.

That's at least how I interpret that verse as it seems pretty uncaring for the fate of the fetus which the article author pointed out.

I agree. An abortion is taking care of a problem that someone doesn't want. The difference is birth control is responsibility, birth prevention usually shows a lack of that. As I've said before, since the issue is on viability, there is little to no difference between abortions and infanticide since both are highly dependent on others to survive- especially if they have defects.

So if God values life at all, does not sanction his worshippers to kill their kids, & offers no reasons whatsoever that a fetus should be killed, there's really no way to assume that God is fine with them.

However, abortion is not a religious issue, it's just that religious people tend to see it that way because of their views on the whole "Life is precious" thing. I'm not tha jaded, but i also know no matter how much life is de-valued now by abortions, it doesn't change the fact that you're killing something that if not human now will inevitably be so. I find that to be disgusting- God or no God. As I've said before, I am not for a death penalty, but I would rather a hundred murderers be killed over one unborn kid. The good news is that I have no say in the matter.

And if one can find that the scripture isn't against abortion then I see it as an opportunity to reduce the anti-abortion sentiment found in mainstream culture which is a good thing in my eyes as it'd result in less shaming of women who chose to have abortions and help them realize that they don't have to feel bad about it (which I believe holds true especially for a religious person who for some reason have an abortion)

That a big if. There's no reason to think that the fetus is less valuable. Secondly, birth control is how you don't have kids.

Religious people echo the opinion polls on abortion, so they already concur with this. Since abortion isn't outright stated, then people run with this and do what they want. Abortion is easily winning this "battle" so there's no reason to encourage religious people to change their opinion on it.

And when birth control fails, an abortion is how you don't have kid.
The verses make a pretty big argument for the fetus being less valuable.

It's also worth pointing out that the commandment of not killing is really just a general and simplified rule as there are plenty of cases where killing is just fine and the killing of a fetus that isn't said to have any worth in the Bible is one of those cases in my opinion even of the Bible doesn't outright go out and say it's fine to kill a fetus.

 

[Hi-tekk]

God hates divorce because of the damage it causes to all parties involved. What I do know is that the husband made a promise to God, his wife and all the parties at the wedding that he would love her in the good times and in the bad.

He has to make the choice. Is he going to live for himself or is he going to die to himself and stop sinning against God by going the opposite way he promised to go?

God will change this mans heart and fill him with His love if he decides to do the write thing. God will not condone sin just because a person wants to do their own thing.

Game,

thanks for the response and he definitely sees and understands the bible and what it says about divorce. But his arguement is this: God gives us free will and with that he believes that he was too immature in the first place to get married to this woman. He felt that he didn't even realize who he was as a person and spiritually. So many times he's focused on himself and and tried to work through his selfishness and immaturity with God. But he keeps coming back to square one of how he feels he wasn't ready to have made that decision of marriage in the first place.

This all assumes, of course, that he can raise serious concerns about the health of their relationship, his efforts to fix things, and his genuine commitment to Christianity and to the objective societal (non-Christian) concept of marriage. 5 years, some of which was probably "happy" in the shallow sense? If this were decided by some kind of court, he'd be laughed out. Obviously, a pastor (and a friend, if you're a Christian) should show more sympathy to his problems. I'm just talking about the objective and subjective interpretations of the Bible/whatever his church is.

Oh, and he agrees to never marry again, anyway. Marriage is not a debate about "upgrades," in the Christian conception.

Ghaleon see my above post to Game. You make some good points I agree with them but at the end of the day God allows us to make mistakes. So when we make mistakes God can and does forgive us as long as in our hearts we repent of our sins and don't make it a lifestyle. It's not like the guy has a girl on the side and wants to leave his wife for another woman, he just wants to leave because he doesn't have the love (and never did) that God calls him to have towards his wife. And lastly, legally couldn't they get divorces base off of irreconcilable differences?

 

[JGS]

Hey guys sorry to somewhat derail what you all where talking about here but I wasn't sure where to put this at because of the centerpiece of Christians and faith being involved here. If any of you could offer up some genuine, thoughtout and honest posts from those who are Christians I would greatly appreciate it. So here goes (i promise I'm going to do my best to not make this a wall of text):

- I'm involved with knowing a guy who has been married for 5 years. He recently expressed that he feels he wants to leave his wife because he realizes that he never really loved his wife.

- Now the bible talks about not divorcing (see here) and the only way a marriage should end would be on grounds of adultery. But honestly the guy doesn’t want to do that. He just wants to end things as amicably as possible (even though the wife doesn’t want the divorce because she feels like he is her soulmate).

- The church that we are both apart of believes that divorce isn’t an option unless adultery has occurred in the relationship by either party and believes the couple should just work it out. They feel that with God it can work out and it should be given a chance.

- But the guy feels like he’s tried to give it a chance (since day one of the marriage) and still doesn’t have an emotional connection with his wife. He fought to not commit adultery and even decided to push through his feelings to have a child with his wife (the baby girl is 1 year old).

- The guy realizes that yea it’s not right to divorce but since the issue doesn’t keep him from going to heaven and because of God’s grace. He believes that he needs to do it and God will forgive him.

- Any thoughts/input/advice on this from a Christian perspective? Is the guy from a Christian perspective miss using the bible and/or God’s grace? I would definitely like to him help through this. Obviously this whole situation boils down to the faith of the guy versus the faith of his church. Who’s right? If this is truly about faith, then does it matter what the church thinks but rather what God thinks? Thanks for your responses.

Well divorce is not scripturally allowed except for adultery. Separation however is permissible but usually under extreme circumstances such as abuse (I think that's in one of the Corinthian books too).

So even if the husband were to separate (A legal divorce could be a scriptural separation. They are different), he still wouldn't be able to remarry as that is adultery. Since he doesn't want to commit adultery, then he's still stuck. The only way to truly be out unless he wants to be alone his whole life is to either commit adultery or prove his wife did.

It gets more complicated though because divorce would have to be initiated by the wife who has not forgive him for the sin, plus he would be taking a chance that God would not view him as repentant considering it was a willful act. It's deep stuff.

If this guy's wife thinks he is his soulmate, then that may be difficult. Of course, churches all over the place have no problem with divorcing under less rigid circumstances, but just doesn't appear to be the case at yours.

 

[GhaleonQ]

Game,

thanks for the response and he definitely sees and understands the bible and what it says about divorce. But his arguement is this: God gives us free will and with that he believes that he was too immature in the first place to get married to this woman. He felt that he didn't even realize who he was as a person and spiritually. So many times he's focused on himself and and tried to work through his selfishness and immaturity (with God). But he keeps coming back to square one of how he feels he wasn't ready to have made that decision of marriage in the first place.

Ghaleon see my above post to Game. You make some good points I agree with them but at the end of the day God allows us to make mistakes. So when we make mistakes God can and does forgive us as long as in our hearts we repent of our sins and don't make it a lifestyle. It's not like the guy has a girl on the side and wants to leave his wife for another woman, he just wants to leave because he doesn't have the love (and never did) the God calls him to have towards his wife. And lastly, legally couldn't they get divorces base off of irreconcilable differences?

Right, he'd still be sinning to counteract a bad decision (if it is indeed bad), but he'd merely be committing a societal sin. That's serious, but it's only 1 form.

However, he would never be allowed to have another sexual relationship or marriage ever again (unless he remarried her) and he'd make his wife be stuck, too. He wouldn't have kids unless he adopted. Anything else is a sexual sin every time. It sounds like he thinks he gets a do-over.

I mean, obviously, he can divorce whenever (unless he's Catholic) go to whatever church or court will marry him, but theologically, there's no argument. I'm not just saying that, "this is what I believe so Im right SHUT UP." His case is basically what Christian religion is meant to prevent. It's open and shut. I'd be surprised if they didn't push counseling really hard on him.

By the way, you might find this interesting just as a bit of knowledge. http://www.getreligion.org/2011/01/getting-a-jewish-get/

 

[Shanadeus]

I got a similar question:

What happens with people who's partners have died and are thus eligible to re-marry ("until death seperate us")?
Their dead partners won't be able to reunite with their partners as they'll have found new loves of their own.

 

[bonesmccoy]

GetReligion is an excellent website: Just watch for people in the comboxes who forget that the point of the site is to discuss journalism itself, not the social/religious issue de jour.

Catholics of Irish heritage (like me), here's St Patrick's Breastplate:

I bind unto myself today
The strong Name of the Trinity,
By invocation of the same,
The Three in One and One in Three.

I bind this day to me for ever.
By power of faith, Christ's incarnation;
His baptism in the Jordan river;
His death on Cross for my salvation;
His bursting from the spicèd tomb;
His riding up the heavenly way;
His coming at the day of doom;*
I bind unto myself today.

I bind unto myself the power
Of the great love of the cherubim;
The sweet 'well done' in judgment hour,
The service of the seraphim,
Confessors' faith, Apostles' word,
The Patriarchs' prayers, the Prophets' scrolls,
All good deeds done unto the Lord,
And purity of virgin souls.

I bind unto myself today
The virtues of the starlit heaven,
The glorious sun's life-giving ray,
The whiteness of the moon at even,
The flashing of the lightning free,
The whirling wind's tempestuous shocks,
The stable earth, the deep salt sea,
Around the old eternal rocks.

I bind unto myself today
The power of God to hold and lead,
His eye to watch, His might to stay,
His ear to hearken to my need.
The wisdom of my God to teach,
His hand to guide, His shield to ward,
The word of God to give me speech,
His heavenly host to be my guard.

Against the demon snares of sin,
The vice that gives temptation force,
The natural lusts that war within,
The hostile men that mar my course;
Or few or many, far or nigh,
In every place and in all hours,
Against their fierce hostility,
I bind to me these holy powers.

Against all Satan's spells and wiles,
Against false words of heresy,
Against the knowledge that defiles,
Against the heart's idolatry,
Against the wizard's evil craft,
Against the death wound and the burning,
The choking wave and the poisoned shaft,
Protect me, Christ, till Thy returning.

Christ be with me, Christ within me,
Christ behind me, Christ before me,
Christ beside me, Christ to win me,
Christ to comfort and restore me.
Christ beneath me, Christ above me,
Christ in quiet, Christ in danger,
Christ in hearts of all that love me,
Christ in mouth of friend and stranger.

I bind unto myself the Name,
The strong Name of the Trinity;
By invocation of the same.
The Three in One, and One in Three,
Of Whom all nature hath creation,
Eternal Father, Spirit, Word:
Praise to the Lord of my salvation,
Salvation is of Christ the Lord.

This one of my favourite prayers.

 

[Hi-tekk]

Hey man you had me up until this quote:

It gets more complicated though because divorce would have to be initiated by the wife who has not forgive him for the sin, plus he would be taking a chance that God would not view him as repentant considering it was a willful act. It's deep stuff.

You mind explaining that a little more clearly?

GhaleonQ as far as this goes:

However, he would never be allowed to have another sexual relationship or marriage ever again (unless he remarried her) and he'd make his wife be stuck, too. He wouldn't have kids unless he adopted. Anything else is a sexual sin every time. It sounds like he thinks he gets a do-over.

I mean, obviously, he can divorce whenever (unless he's Catholic) go to whatever church or court will marry him, but theologically, there's no argument. I'm not just saying that, "this is what I believe so Im right SHUT UP." His case is basically what Christian religion is meant to prevent. It's open and shut. I'd be surprised if they didn't push counseling really hard on him.

I know this sounds crazy, but he has really thought about not wanting to marry anyone else. He feels that the one person who wanted to marry along time ago is already married and has moved on in her life. So he's already counted the cost and examined his options when it comes to this. And he's apart of a Christian nondenominational church. Oh and one more thing, thanks for the article. I'll check it out and forward it on.

 

[thehillissilent]

Hey guys sorry to somewhat derail what you all where talking about here but I wasn't sure where to put this at because of the centerpiece of Christians and faith being involved here. If any of you could offer up some genuine, thoughtout and honest posts from those who are Christians I would greatly appreciate it. So here goes (i promise I'm going to do my best to not make this a wall of text):

- I'm involved with knowing a guy who has been married for 5 years. He recently expressed that he feels he wants to leave his wife because he realizes that he never really loved his wife.

- Now the bible talks about not divorcing (see here) and the only way a marriage should end would be on grounds of adultery. But honestly the guy doesn’t want to do that. He just wants to end things as amicably as possible (even though the wife doesn’t want the divorce because she feels like he is her soulmate).

- The church that we are both apart of believes that divorce isn’t an option unless adultery has occurred in the relationship by either party and believes the couple should just work it out. They feel that with God it can work out and it should be given a chance.

- But the guy feels like he’s tried to give it a chance (since day one of the marriage) and still doesn’t have an emotional connection with his wife. He fought to not commit adultery and even decided to push through his feelings to have a child with his wife (the baby girl is 1 year old).

- The guy realizes that yea it’s not right to divorce but since the issue doesn’t keep him from going to heaven and because of God’s grace. He believes that he needs to do it and God will forgive him.

- Any thoughts/input/advice on this from a Christian perspective? Is the guy from a Christian perspective miss using the bible and/or God’s grace? I would definitely like to him help through this. Obviously this whole situation boils down to the faith of the guy versus the faith of his church. Who’s right? If this is truly about faith, then does it matter what the church thinks but rather what God thinks? Thanks for your responses.

I would recommend some Christian counseling for him and his wife (possibly from someone is is not affiliated with your church for an outside perspective). There are also a lot of good books out there that he can read and learn from as well such as Rescusing Your Love Life by Dr. Henry Cloud and Dr. John Townsend, The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work by John Gottman, and TThe Love Dare by Stephen Kendrick and Alex Kendrick . I have read/am currently reading these books. They have been of great help to my marriage. I don't know the whole situation, but he needs to do everythng possible as far as it depends on him to stay together and be a spiritual leader in his household. Also, he needs to think about the severe, negative impact that divorce wll have on his baby girl.

 

[Hi-tekk]

I got a similar question:

What happens with people who's partners have died and are thus eligible to re-marry ("until death seperate us")?
Their dead partners won't be able to reunite with their partners as they'll have found new loves of their own.

Shanedeus,

here's what the Bible (notably Jesus) has to say about that. That's talked about in Mark 12 in verses 18-26. You can check it out here

 

[JGS]

Yes, it's killed volontarily by it's own mother in an abortion but if it's done for a biblically good reason (such as the reason you are allowed to use birth control according to some interpretations of scripture) then the death of a fetus isn't murder.

In Exodus something has been done to the woman against her/the husband's will, a damage that one presume isn't what she wanted as it is unintentional and not requested, which is why it's fined rather than being fined because a fetus has died.

That's at least how I interpret that verse as it seems pretty uncaring for the fate of the fetus which the article author pointed out.

Again, abortion is not birth control.

The argument regarding Exodus can't get more circular because you keep saying it's an accidental miscarriage and I keep saying it doesn't say that at all. So I'm done arguing this verse as I've already made enough cases for it in either version- the right and the wrong ones.

And if one can find that the scripture isn't against abortion then I see it as an opportunity to reduce the anti-abortion sentiment found in mainstream culture which is a good thing in my eyes as it'd result in less shaming of women who chose to have abortions and help them realize that they don't have to feel bad about it (which I believe holds true especially for a religious person who for some reason have an abortion)

The anti-abortion sentiment will die down over time as society goes through another moral shift in what's acceptable (I say it's aleready happened but por-abortionists swear up and down they're on the losing side), but there will always be a solid number of people like myself who, regardless of religious belief, viewing killing a fetus as wrong. There will always be people that don't see an upside to aborting a prekid. There will always be people that, although pro-choice, see no reason to champion it as the best solution for ridding oneself of the burden of an unborn child. There will always religious folk who believe that not killing an embryo is in harmony with the Bible views far more killing it.

And when birth control fails, an abortion is how you don't have kid.

So is strangling, cutting it's head off, or leaving it in a dumpster. That doesn't mean any of them are wise choices.

It's also worth pointing out that the commandment of not killing is really just a general and simplified rule as there are plenty of cases where killing is just fine and the killing of a fetus that isn't said to have any worth in the Bible is one of those cases in my opinion even of the Bible doesn't outright go out and say it's fine to kill a fetus.

Of course, I've said may times before that worshippers are indeed valued more than non-worshippers. The Laws in place are there in connection to national law, just like a US soldier now has permission to kill a terrorist, but not allowed to shoot a fellow soldier for the heck of it.

However, figuring out that those laws apply in abortion cases is still a pretty big leap.

 

[GhaleonQ]

GetReligion is an excellent website: Just watch for people in the comboxes who forget that the point of the site is to discuss journalism itself, not the social/religious issue de jour.

*high five* Agreed. There are liberal equivalents, other readers, but they aren't quite as good. Killing The Buddha shifted its focus a bit, but it's alright.

I know this sounds crazy, but he has really thought about not wanting to marry anyone else. He feels that the one person who wanted to marry along time ago is already married and has moved on in her life. So he's already counted the cost and examined his options when it comes to this. And he's apart of a Christian nondenominational church. Oh and one more thing, thanks for the article. I'll check it out and forward it on.

*laughs* I'm legitimately not putting him down, but if 5 years was enough for an about-face, well, a lifetime's longer. I'm basically just advising that he slow down and REALLY try. Like, to the point that he experiences emotional and spiritual anguish and so he knows exactly why their relationship could "never" work.

It sounds like a terrible thing (and I say this as me, not as "the Bible"), but I don't think you could divorce amicably in a Christian conception. I mean, I'm not saying that you have to be at the point where you want to murder someone to justify it to the church, but if 2 people are mature enough to judge that the "doesn't work" side of the ledger outclasses the "does work" side and to cut a deal based on that, they probably haven't tried hard enough to make it work.

Nevertheless, if he judges that he knows the consequences and has GENUINELY tried harder than anything to avoid it and knows his relationship more than anyone apart from his wife ever could, well, he can commit a great sin and pray for forgiveness. No one can judge, in that case.

 

[Shanadeus]

Shanedeus,

here's what the Bible (notably Jesus) has to say about that. That's talked about in Mark 12 in verses 18-26. You can check it out here

Jesus replied, “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God? 25 When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.

Ah, so the whole "I hope to be united with my loved ones when I die" would in reality be "I hope I'll be re-united with everyone, which includes my loved ones, when I die".

Can angels prefer the company of some angels over others?

If not then it seems kinda pointless to value the family unit when it completely dissolves in heaven.

 

[GhaleonQ]

Shanadeus, I really respect how smart you are.

If not then it seems kinda pointless to value the family unit when it completely dissolves in heaven.

I hope you can understand why Christians who make arguments about (NOT TO BRING IT INTO THIS TERRITORY) no-fault divorce, same-sex marriage, adoption, and the rest make them. If the family unit was only about love to Christians, the above would be totally right. There's an undeniable aspect of societal responsibility to it that compels right living.

Again, not to argue about it, I'm just trying to increase people's conception of the people who argue about those things. Some have real reasons for doing so. They may be wrong, but they are supposed to defend a certain conception that's particular, not necessarily universal.

 

[Blergmeister]

Hey guys sorry to somewhat derail what you all where talking about here but I wasn't sure where to put this at because of the centerpiece of Christians and faith being involved here. If any of you could offer up some genuine, thoughtout and honest posts from those who are Christians I would greatly appreciate it. So here goes (i promise I'm going to do my best to not make this a wall of text):

- I'm involved with knowing a guy who has been married for 5 years. He recently expressed that he feels he wants to leave his wife because he realizes that he never really loved his wife.

- Now the bible talks about not divorcing (see here) and the only way a marriage should end would be on grounds of adultery. But honestly the guy doesn’t want to do that. He just wants to end things as amicably as possible (even though the wife doesn’t want the divorce because she feels like he is her soulmate).

- The church that we are both apart of believes that divorce isn’t an option unless adultery has occurred in the relationship by either party and believes the couple should just work it out. They feel that with God it can work out and it should be given a chance.

- But the guy feels like he’s tried to give it a chance (since day one of the marriage) and still doesn’t have an emotional connection with his wife. He fought to not commit adultery and even decided to push through his feelings to have a child with his wife (the baby girl is 1 year old).

- The guy realizes that yea it’s not right to divorce but since the issue doesn’t keep him from going to heaven and because of God’s grace. He believes that he needs to do it and God will forgive him.

- Any thoughts/input/advice on this from a Christian perspective? Is the guy from a Christian perspective miss using the bible and/or God’s grace? I would definitely like to him help through this. Obviously this whole situation boils down to the faith of the guy versus the faith of his church. Who’s right? If this is truly about faith, then does it matter what the church thinks but rather what God thinks? Thanks for your responses.

I find this story incredibly sad.

I also find the fact that responses given so far don't take this man’s conclusions and happiness seriously also very sad and reminds me of why I don't often find myself at church anymore. It should be about compassion and not strict doctrine.

My advice would be some counseling with the wife and other serious attempts to work it out while acknowledging that there is a serious problem and divorce is a possibility. That is what I think but I'm not one who is close to church anymore.

 

[JGS]

Hey man you had me up until this quote:



You mind explaining that a little more clearly?

Adultery is about foregiveness more than contract breakage. Looking at it a different way, the grounds for divorce are based on whether the cheated on spouse chooses to forgive the wrong. They need this out because under normal conditions, Christians are required to forgive sins when repentance is shown. Without this out, the spouse would have the unrealistic requirement to forgive the spouse and stay married to them even though the trust may be irrepairably damaged.

So divorce is on the basis of the mate not being able to forgive for that vow breakage. Otherwise, there would be no justice at all for the wronged spouse since the cheater could then leave even if the spouse wants the cheater to stay- which is a whole lot of the time.

The adulterous spouse is still assumed to be repentant which means they would be the ones actually to want to work on the marriage unless they cheated to sabotage the marriage- in which case they are unrepentant and unworthy of forgiveness which doesn't sound like where your friend wants to be.

I find this story incredibly sad.

I also find the fact that responses given so far don't take this man’s conclusions and happiness seriously also very sad and reminds me of why I don't often find myself at church anymore. It should be about compassion and not strict doctrine.

My advice would be some counseling with the wife and other serious attempts to work it out while acknowledging that there is a serious problem and divorce is a possibility. That is what I think but I'm not one who is close to church anymore.

It is sad and Christianity seriously doesn't play when it comes to love and marriage. It's one of the few things that got stricter as it moved toward the original purpose. It's not a wrong view imo, but it takes a maturity level not often found in couples today or at least at the age most get married.

EDIT: Also, there is nothing wrong with counseling either although counseling could suggest a course that goes against their church's belief. The religious leaders of the church are limited because, in reality, they are not licensed marriage counselors. However, they are correct that just about anything can be solved within the scriptures regarding marriage. It's just a matter of actually believing that when you really want out. This is really the case with most beliefs though.