Outside The Media. Beyond the News. Live from Greensboro, NC.

Liv wrote:

ecofox wrote:One question to all.

Why would you condemn innocent children, to a fate you are not willing to share?

Death? Death is coming for all of us. In the vast time-line of all the things that are and will be, there is very little difference between anything we can conceive of time.

There's a vast difference between natural death and (murder) dismemberment or trip through the vacuum from the inside of your mothers womb.

Are you willing to die today?

Do you think a child shouldn't even be given the chance to make that choice?

Or there is no Pro-Choice when the child's involved.

So, Ecofool, if you are married, then do you and your spouse agree to have sex ONLY when you want a baby? Or are pregnant? If so, then your sex drive must be very low. You are an idiot if you expect the majority of people to abstain from sex only at the times they actively want to make a baby. That is not how the great apes species of primates (of which we are one) were designed to live. Therefore, you are (inadvertently I suspect) suggesting we go against God's will by trying to live in a way He did not design us to live. Our species (as well as Bonobos and Chimpanzees--our closest relatives) use sex not only for procreation, but also for building strong emotional ties, and it is these bonds which help human couples remain together long enough to rear children.

It is so interesting how you claim to be a Christian and claim the bible as the basis of all information, but totally ignore the bible when it suits your political purpose. The Jewish people have always defined human life as beginning when the first breath is taken immediately after birth. Jesus did NOT change that. He did correct a variety of errors in the old testament but He did not change that definition of when ensoulment takes place and a human life is begun. Jesus changed the instruction on how we are to deal with our enemies: He told us to abandon the eye for an eye rule and instead to turn the other cheek. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, He told us that all people were our brothers and we should no longer view those who were not Jewish as "not our responsibility". That was a very BIG change in His times. He even told us that capital punishment was not according to God's will when He stopped the crowd from stoning the prostitute. He said, "Let he who is without sin throw the first stone." And of course everybody left. Everybody is a sinner. That was an enormous change for that society, as was his allowing Mary Magdalene into His circle of Apostles. His insistance that women were people to be loved and respected just as were other men was totally foreign to the Jews of 2,000 years ago.

So, why did He not change the definition of the beginning of human life? Your and BHL's definition of when a person becomes ensouled is NOT biblical. It is antibiblical and entirely modern. It is, in fact less than 200 years old. You are not credible as a Christian and you sure are not credible as a scientist. So just shut up.

ecofox wrote:Are you willing to die today?

Yep. It's not looking like I'm expatriating myself anytime soon, so death by dismemberment seems rather tame compared to living under the American way of life.

Questioner wrote:So, Ecofool, if you are married, then do you and your spouse agree to have sex ONLY when you want a baby? Or are pregnant? If so, then your sex drive must be very low. You are an idiot if you expect the majority of people to abstain from sex only at the times they actively want to make a baby.

Really? I am a fool for thinking humans are higher than monkeys?

If that is the definition of a fool then I am glad to be one.

How many years in jail should you get for killing a monkey?

That is not how the great apes species of primates (of which we are one) were designed to live. Therefore, you are (inadvertently I suspect) suggesting we go against God's will by trying to live in a way He did not design us to live. Our species (as well as Bonobos and Chimpanzees--our closest relatives) use sex not only for procreation, but also for building strong emotional ties, and it is these bonds which help human couples remain together long enough to rear children.

We did not come from monkeys. It is not goo to you transformation.

It is so interesting how you claim to be a Christian and claim the bible as the basis of all information, but totally ignore the bible when it suits your political purpose. The Jewish people have always defined human life as beginning when the first breath is taken immediately after birth.

Jeremiah 1:5
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Jesus did NOT change that. He did correct a variety of errors in the old testament but He did not change that definition of when ensoulment takes place and a human life is begun.

The old testament did not have errors. Written by God right? Divine inspiration.

The errors then were the same as the errors now. Flawed and sinful Humans who misinterpret the scriptures.

Jesus changed the instruction on how we are to deal with our enemies: He told us to abandon the eye for an eye rule and instead to turn the other cheek. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, He told us that all people were our brothers and we should no longer view those who were not Jewish as "not our responsibility". That was a very BIG change in His times. He even told us that capital punishment was not according to God's will when He stopped the crowd from stoning the prostitute. He said, "Let he who is without sin throw the first stone." And of course everybody left. Everybody is a sinner. That was an enormous change for that society, as was his allowing Mary Magdalene into His circle of Apostles. His insistance that women were people to be loved and respected just as were other men was totally foreign to the Jews of 2,000 years ago.

You are confused. God does not change. We do. God's standards then were the same one's he has now. One sin, and you die.

One sin and you fall short of the perfect standard.

Jesus came not to abolish the law but to fulfill.

Matthew 5:17-19
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus was a Jew. Jesus was the perfect Jew. Jesus was the perfect Human. Jesus was God.

He paid our dept. So we can abandon the slavery of sin and follow him.

The Jews spread the Gospel to the Gentiles. Now we need to give back.

Jesus is God, who showed the Rabbis and Gentiles how the Bible was supposed to be interpreted. He did not change a letter of the Old Testament.

The Jews were misinterpreting the Bible so Jesus (God) corrected them.

So, why did He not change the definition of the beginning of human life? Your and BHL's definition of when a person becomes ensouled is NOT biblical. It is antibiblical and entirely modern. It is, in fact less than 200 years old. You are not credible as a Christian and you sure are not credible as a scientist. So just shut up.

I don't know why you are getting so irritated. We are not trying to abort you or encourage others to abort children.

Why do you only care for the mothers choice and not the child's?

My life was saved by God.
My mom walked into an abortion clinic with me inside her womb. A lady stood outside and handed her a pro-life pamphlet with pictures of aborted children.

She sat inside the clinic miserable, coming from recent beating from my abusive, cheating, manipulative father.
She was coerced into considering aborting me.

After she read the pamphlet, she left. Someone cared enough to share with her the truth.

It would be Eternal Ingratitude on my part, if I never fought for the voiceless.

So when Liv spoke. She hit closer to home then she knew.

But God saved my life. That pamphlet was no accident. My mother didn't have a couple of electrons go haywire in her head. My biological father chose his own path.

Until you people abort yourselves, I will never consider your views to be valid. All your telling me is no ones life is worth more then your own.

And our lives aren't worth more than a monkeys.

Liv wrote:

abortion_versus_universal_health_care.jpg

Good one Liv. But of course, the fundies don't see the contradiction. It just amazes me how people can be so illogical.

I notice Ecofox didn't answer about his/her OWN sex life. Just making rules for everybody else.

If none of the old law was changed, then why don't Christians keep Kosher? That was a KEY component of the old law. (Of course, some say that Jesus was referring only to the 10 commandments when He said he did not come to change the "old law". But Ecofox and BHL continue to fail to explain how ALL the rules of the OT must be obeyed when THEY don't obey most of them.

Now how do Ecofox and BHL explain Jesus contradicting the OT when he changed the "eye for an eye" to "Turn the other cheek". And all the other rules of living that Jesus changed.

By the way, Jeremiah 1:5 has nothing to do with ensoulment. It is simply God saying He planned a great task for Jeremiah before Jeremiah was even conceived. Are you silly enough to now say that every egg and/or sperm is a person? Read the words again: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew [a] you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." So exactly how do you define ensoulment? Before the egg even meets the sperm? God was thinking about Jeremiah even before egg met sperm. So even according to YOUR quote, fertilization is NOT the time ensoulment happens. Evidently it happens even before fertilization if you think Jeremiah 1:5 has something to do with defining when ensoulment occurs--which it clearly does not. BUT, God DOES tell us when that happens in the Bible.

"Genesis 2:7, ‘And the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living soul." This is unambiguous, and certainly makes it clear when a human being acquires a living soul. When that person takes his/her first breath after being formed. The first breath a human baby takes is immediately after birth.

This rule is still embodied in American Jurisprudence. When a girl has a baby and it is found in a trashcan or similar dumping place, they cannot charge her with killing the baby unless upon autopsy it can be shown that the baby has air in its lungs, proving it took a breath after birth. If it did not take its first breath, then the birth is considered too have been a stillbirth: the baby was born dead and no crime (other than unlawful disposal of a body) has taken place.

Questioner wrote:I notice Ecofox didn't answer about his/her OWN sex life. Just making rules for everybody else.

What are you talking about? The standards I ask others to hold are the same ones I will hold me self accountable to.

If I fall I shall not punish others for my failure. I will not kill little children and label them mistakes.

Questioner wrote:If none of the old law was changed, then why don't Christians keep Kosher? That was a KEY component of the old law. (Of course, some say that Jesus was referring only to the 10 commandments when He said he did not come to change the "old law". But Ecofox and BHL continue to fail to explain how ALL the rules of the OT must be obeyed when THEY don't obey most of them.

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/lawrole.html

Questioner wrote:Now how do Ecofox and BHL explain Jesus contradicting the OT when he changed the "eye for an eye" to "Turn the other cheek". And all the other rules of living that Jesus changed.

In this he was not contradicting the commandment rather he was revealing it's deeper meaning.

It's important to be just. It is God-like to be merciful.

Questioner wrote:By the way, Jeremiah 1:5 has nothing to do with ensoulment. It is simply God saying He planned a great task for Jeremiah before Jeremiah was even conceived. Are you silly enough to now say that every egg and/or sperm is a person? Read the words again: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew [a] you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

Ensoulment? What's that mean? Creation of the soul? Or the soul and the body being melded together?

A human embryo is a person. A sperm and a egg is not.

God said that all people are equal.
Acts 17:26
26And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

He knew us all before we where formed. He has great plans for all of us. So we must listen and follow closely.

JEREMIAH 29
29:11 For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.
29:12 Then shall ye call upon me, and ye shall go and pray unto me, and I will hearken unto you.
29:13 And ye shall seek me, and find [me], when ye shall search for me with all your heart.

Questioner wrote:So exactly how do you define ensoulment? Before the egg even meets the sperm? God was thinking about Jeremiah even before egg met sperm. So even according to YOUR quote, fertilization is NOT the time ensoulment happens. Evidently it happens even before fertilization if you think Jeremiah 1:5 has something to do with defining when ensoulment occurs--which it clearly does not. BUT, God DOES tell us when that happens in the Bible.

"Did not He who made me in the womb make him, And the same one fashion us in the womb? (Job 31:15)

Yet Thou art He who didst bring me forth from the womb; Thou didst make me trust when upon my mother's breasts. Upon Thee I was cast from birth; Thou hast been my God from my mother's womb. (Psalm 22:9-10)

For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother's womb. I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Thy works, And my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from Thee, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth. Thine eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Thy book they were all written, The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them. (Psalm 139:13-16)

Thus says the LORD who made you And formed you from the womb, who will help you, `Do not fear, O Jacob My servant; And you Jeshurun whom I have chosen. (Isaiah 44:2)

Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, "I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself, And spreading out the earth all alone, (Isaiah 44:24)

http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/p ... XZsFavvPkU

Questioner wrote:"Genesis 2:7, ‘And the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living soul." This is unambiguous, and certainly makes it clear when a human being acquires a living soul. When that person takes his/her first breath after being formed. The first breath a human baby takes is immediately after birth.

Your first breath does not make you human.

Questioner wrote:This rule is still embodied in American Jurisprudence. When a girl has a baby and it is found in a trashcan or similar dumping place, they cannot charge her with killing the baby unless upon autopsy it can be shown that the baby has air in its lungs, proving it took a breath after birth. If it did not take its first breath, then the birth is considered too have been a stillbirth: the baby was born dead and no crime (other than unlawful disposal of a body) has taken place.

So your not a human. Until you take a breath. What if you are using a machine to breath should they abort you because your not really breathing?

Abort the young Abort the elderly. Eugenics is what it equates to.

How can you not care for the choice of the child? How can the blood and guts of children in trashcans not horrify you? How can you be so numb?

How can you define a single cell as a person? How can you be so dumb?

The living woman means nothing to you. Evidently to you, the only thing that matters is the potential human within her.

And there you go again, quoting unrelated scripture when the relevant scripture is presented to you. Your misinterpretation of the bible would be laughable if you were not so serious about it and if you and your ilk did not mislead so many people who are actually seeking the truth. Jesus also spoke about people like you who mislead others away from the True God.

Genesis makes clear that Adam was a fully formed human body, but not a person until God breathed the breath of life into that body. Jesus was a Jew. Jews believed that the fetus was not a person, and the baby expelled from the womb became a person once that first breath was taken. That breath showed that the baby was now alive, it was a person with a soul. We know what the Jews believed because it is in their writings, and what they still teach. We know Jesus was a Jew. We also know Jesus said nothing about abortion (which were done even then), we know he said nothing to change the Jewish definition of when ensoulment happens (and ensoulment was what made a human body a person). In all of the gospels, there is nothing whatsoever that indicates Jesus did not believe that too. He was a JEW! Those things from the Old Testament that He knew were wrong He corrected.

Since you refuse to accept His teachings, you are not a Christian. You are some form of Old Testamentist, but definitely you have abandoned the teachings of Jesus.

Questioner wrote:How can you define a single cell as a person? How can you be so dumb?

If you take a look at any abortion pictures you will see that the child is a far cry from a "single cell".

Abortion proponents claim that a fertilized egg is just a single cell - like any other cell of the human body and is only "potential life". However, this single cell is alive by any biological definition of life and defines the beginning of each new human being. This single cell is unique from both the father's and mother's cells, so it cannot be defined as just part of the woman's body.

http://www.godandscience.org/abortion/s ... IbxHJQKLdV

A persons a person no matter how small. Should I abort you because you have less cells then me? Of course not that makes no sense!

Questioner wrote:The living woman means nothing to you. Evidently to you, the only thing that matters is the potential human within her.

You have no idea what your talking about. The living woman wouldn't be alive if her mother decided to abort her!

You don't care for the woman, nor do you care for the child.

If you cared for the woman you would protect her from Abortion, if you cared for the child you wouldn't label it a mistake. (Tears, and guilt or cold numbness.)

Pregnancy's are evil, just abort everyone end the human race.
Is that right?

Questioner wrote:And there you go again, quoting unrelated scripture when the relevant scripture is presented to you. Your misinterpretation of the bible would be laughable if you were not so serious about it and if you and your ilk did not mislead so many people who are actually seeking the truth. Jesus also spoke about people like you who mislead others away from the True God.

The scripture is not unrelated.
Do you believe that God changes?

Questioner wrote:Genesis makes clear that Adam was a fully formed human body, but not a person until God breathed the breath of life into that body. Jesus was a Jew.

Your not alive without a soul. Baby's inside the womb definitely have souls.

Questioner wrote:Jews believed that the fetus was not a person, and the baby expelled from the womb became a person once that first breath was taken. That breath showed that the baby was now alive, it was a person with a soul.

I don't think they did. Cite your sources.

Questioner wrote:We know what the Jews believed because it is in their writings, and what they still teach. We know Jesus was a Jew. We also know Jesus said nothing about abortion (which were done even then), we know he said nothing to change the Jewish definition of when ensoulment happens (and ensoulment was what made a human body a person). In all of the gospels, there is nothing whatsoever that indicates Jesus did not believe that too. He was a JEW! Those things from the Old Testament that He knew were wrong He corrected.

Souls are eternal. But can be destroyed.

At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, where she entered Zechariah's home and greeted Elizabeth. When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. (Luke 1:39-44)

Can you leap for joy without a soul?

Questioner wrote:Since you refuse to accept His teachings, you are not a Christian. You are some form of Old Testamentist, but definitely you have abandoned the teachings of Jesus.

What is a Christian?
How are we saved?

And this is why religion is useless, even in matters of ethics where it demands sole jurisdiction.

We end up either arguing about 'ensoulment' when an invisible, weightless and otherwise undetectable thing, that cannot even be shown to exist, magically inserts itself into a collection of cells, or we end up trying to deduce what a nomadic tribe of bronze age sheep herders thought about it - as if it matters.

A Person wrote:And this is why religion is useless, even in matters of ethics where it demands sole jurisdiction.

We end up either arguing about 'ensoulment' when an invisible, weightless and otherwise undetectable thing, that cannot even be shown to exist, magically inserts itself into a collection of cells, or we end up trying to deduce what a nomadic tribe of bronze age sheep herders thought about it - as if it matters.

What is free will?

Why are you changing the subject?

A Person wrote:Why are you changing the subject?

Because, as EcoFox has repeatedly shown in this thread, he has no ability to think logically or to carry on an intelligent conversation. So change the subject rather than recognize that your "arguments" have no basis.

ecofox wrote:What is a Christian?
How are we saved?

A Christian is a person who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, and no other. Jesus Christ did NOT write the books of the OT. Jewish writers were inspired to write down those stories, but being fallible human beings, they wrote imperfectly. Jesus did in fact come to change the way people were understanding and interpreting the law. So trying to follow the OT teachings is a dangerous and confusing journey. It is full of error and misinterpretation, and is best read as a history of the Jewish people. For guidance on how to live, a true Christian reads the 4 gospels for the instructions Jesus Himself gave. Even those 4 gospels, having been written quite a few years after the death of Jesus have some minor errors and differences. But there is also quite a bit of congruence among the gospels as to what they say Jesus Himself said and taught.

From the teachings of Jesus, it is clear that He was a reformer, and a humanitarian. All of his acts and teachings show us that the way to Him is through love of other people. He also was clear that civil values and laws did not necessarily have much to do with religious values and laws. In fact, He specifically said, "Render unto Ceasar the things that are Ceasar's and to God the things that are God's." So the true Christian does not try to use the legal system to force his or her religious beliefs on other people. Jesus NEVER tried to force His teachings onto other people. He went out to fields, mounts, and other non-religious places to teach, and those interested were welcome to come. He did a lot of teaching through example and parables. So the true Christian must read the gospels, think carefully about what Jesus said and what He did and try to understand what He wanted His people to do.

It Is pretty clear that He wanted us to chase after good works and not money, fortune or fame. To the extent we treasure His words and example and try our best to follow it, we are Christians.

We are saved literally (in our personal lives) and figuratively (in our spiritual lives) by accepting Jesus into our hearts and committing ourselves to following His will.

ECO... for frame of reference Q is a red letter Christian and discounts anything other than the 4 gospels (especially anything said by Paul) as not being inspired by God.

Questioner wrote:So the true Christian does not try to use the legal system to force his or her religious beliefs on other people

Would that this were true.

A Person wrote:

Questioner wrote:So the true Christian does not try to use the legal system to force his or her religious beliefs on other people

Would that this were true.

So I suppose you are suggesting that if your follow any religion then you should not vote. You're rediculous.

BecauseHeLives wrote:

A Person wrote:

Questioner wrote:So the true Christian does not try to use the legal system to force his or her religious beliefs on other people

Would that this were true.

So I suppose you are suggesting that if your follow any religion then you should not vote. You're rediculous.

You draw stupid and ridiculous conclusions from absolutely no data and no evidence. What I have said is you should not try to encode your religion into civil law. And you haven't learned to spell either.

BecauseHeLives wrote:

A Person wrote:

Questioner wrote:So the true Christian does not try to use the legal system to force his or her religious beliefs on other people

Would that this were true.

So I suppose you are suggesting that if your follow any religion then you should not vote. You're rediculous.

No don't be silly or even greendickulus. I am suggesting that if you meant what you said you would not try to encode your religion into the legal system and thereby force your religious beliefs on other people. Presumably if you do then you are not a true Christian.

Questioner wrote:You draw stupid and ridiculous conclusions from absolutely no data and no evidence. What I have said is you should not try to encode your religion into civil law. And you haven't learned to spell either.

I can spell "crazy and angry old obnoxious arrogant woman who is a closet atheist disguised as a catholic". How's that. Did i spel it awrite fer you?

So who is going to start a thread "Why does BHL hate everyone so much?"

A Person wrote:So who is going to start a thread "Why does BHL hate everyone so much?"

Anoxia from that hyperbolic (sic) chamber of his might be a contributing factor. Then again, so might his religious beliefs.

A Person wrote:Why are you changing the subject?

It's related to the subject. Or rather it's synonymous.

What is free will?

ecofox wrote:It's related to the subject. Or rather it's synonymous.

What is free will?

A philosphical question over the degree of control a sentient being can exercise over their actions.