Abortion...I would call this a theological issue

[Charity]

I see the abortion issue is still a hot topic.  Lots of opinions.  And that's ok.  God gave us minds to think i suppose. So we should use it.   I haven't read all the posts.  But I would like to add my thoughts to the mix - again

 (1) who is the creator of all life and should He as creator have the final say in who lives and who dies?  (2) if every woman has the right to choose whether her unborn child lives, regardless of the situation, who is advocating for the right of the child to live or die (that is if we consider the unborn child a life with rights)

(3) let's consider the principle - abortion is not condoned / sanctioned under certain circumstances. But under other circumstances is accepted.   Now apply that same principle to genocide, for example. Under certain conditions genocide is not condoned/sanctioned.  But under others it is accepted.  Who determines the acceptable / unacceptable conditions?   If the woman in the case of abortion, what about society, God.  The unborn child.  How is it that for an abortion it's the woman's sole choice.  In the case of genocide.  Who decides?  Or. What factors are considered?  Is it the entity committing the act?  Or the world looking on ???  Would the entity commiting the genocide be justified If they felt it was for their own good or even the good of the nation being murdered??    After all.  It could be an act of mercy?  And if it's the world - why the world in this case and not in the abortion case . Hmmmm ...  If a woman should be the one to determine what's right for her body and commit murder - then it should be ok for one nation to decide what's best for it and anhilate another to preserve itself

Regardless of our opinions.  The one question that I believe will settle all issues is - outside of God, are humans equipped to make any decision - except for the decision to serve God - and even that We can't do outside of God because He is the one who "draws" us to Him before we can decide to serve Him. 

Somethine else I think is worth mentioning.  We only exist because God exists!!!!    If God didn't exist - we wouldn't. For in Him we live and move - exist (Acts 17:28).  The power of every thought, word, act, sensation - is God.   We've forgotten this - or just plain denied it. Hence we give the right to murder to humans if the conditions are right - or just simply to protect "me and my interests".  

If we would only but stop! Allow the Holy Spirit to fill our senses.  Allow the reality of God to overpower us!!!   Then we would rightly know - who is God.  And it's not humans or the devil.

God declares: I am the Alpha and the Omega, who is and was and who is to come, the -  Almighty!!

[Robert]

1 hour ago, Charity said:

Somethine else I think is worth mentioning.  We only exist because God exists!!!!    If God didn't exist - we wouldn't. For in Him we live and move - exist (Acts 17:28).  The power of every thought, word, act, sensation - is God.   We've forgotten this - or just plain denied it. Hence we give the right to murder to humans if the conditions are right - or just simply to protect "me and my interests".  

[Lauralea]

While I am strongly opposed to abortion, it differs from genocide in that it is not wrong 100% of the time. Occasionally there is a life threatening condition for the woman and in that case I believe it is necessary for her to have the option. Also the Bible valued the mother's life more highly because "If men strive and hurt a woman with child so that her seed depart from her..." They were fined by her husband if no mischief followed, but if mischief followed ( i. e. she died) then they were to give life for life. In other words, miscarriage was punished by a fine but if the mother died so did the perpetrator of violence.

[Robert]

21 minutes ago, Lauralea said:

...the Bible valued the mother's life more highly because "If men strive and hurt a woman with child so that her seed depart from her..." They were fined by her husband if no mischief followed, but if mischief followed ( i. e. she died) then they were to give life for life. In other words, miscarriage was punished by a fine but if the mother died so did the perpetrator of violence.

According to Paul "God does not show favoritism." Rom 2:11 So we must not conclude that one life is better than another.

 I don't think one should use Ex 21:22 as a gauge to what a life is worth.  Case in point,  Ex 21:2-11 deals with laws regulating slavery.  Shall we conclude, then, that slavery is okay?

 

 

[Lauralea]

Just now, Robert said:

According to Paul "God does not show favoritism." Rom 2:11 So we must not conclude that one life is better than the other.

 I don't think one should use Ex 21:22 as a gauge to what a life is worth.  Case in point,  Ex 21:2-11 deals with laws regulating slavery.  Shall we conclude, then, that slavery is okay?

 

 

Um not showing favoritism just citing what is to me the most relevant Bible passage. Even Sequeira in the OP acknowledged there are a small minority of cases in which there is a medical justification for the procedure or at least that is how I understand the passage you quoted from him. 

[Robert]

5 minutes ago, Lauralea said:

Um not showing favoritism just citing what is to me the most relevant Bible passage.

I'm not accusing you of presenting favoritism.  I'm just thinking that we must be careful how we interpret these OT passages.  After all, collecting firewood on the Sabbath could get one stoned to death....

[Green Cochoa]

9 minutes ago, Lauralea said:

While I am strongly opposed to abortion, it differs from genocide in that it is not wrong 100% of the time. Occasionally there is a life threatening condition for the woman and in that case I believe it is necessary for her to have the option. Also the Bible valued the mother's life more highly because "If men strive and hurt a woman with child so that her seed depart from her..." They were fined by her husband if no mischief followed, but if mischief followed ( i. e. she died) then they were to give life for life. In other words, miscarriage was punished by a fine but if the mother died so did the perpetrator of violence.

I agree with your position, Lauralea, but I must differ with where you differ.  Genocide is not always wrong either.  Consider the Bible's own teaching on the matter.  After having filled up their cup of wickedness, a number of groups were commanded to be destroyed.  

Quote

    Before returning to his people, Balaam uttered a most beautiful and sublime prophecy of the world's Redeemer and the final destruction of the enemies of God: "I shall see Him, but not now: I shall behold Him, but not nigh: 
 There shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Scepter shall rise out of 
    Israel, 
 And shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of 
    Sheth."  {PP 451.1}  
     And he closed by predicting the complete destruction of Moab and Edom, of Amalek and the Kenites, thus leaving to the Moabitish king no ray of hope.  {PP 451.2}  

It would appear from the above that Jesus takes responsibility for the destruction of these groups; albeit, He gave command to King Saul and others to accomplish it.

The important thing to remember is that life has more value to God when it has 1) freedom to choose (e.g. humans are more valuable than animals as free moral agents); and 2) respect for and obedience to God's law of love.

[Green Cochoa]

12 minutes ago, Robert said:

According to Paul "God does not show favoritism." Rom 2:11 So we must not conclude that one life is better than the other.

 I don't think one should use Ex 21:22 as a gauge to what a life is worth.  Case in point,  Ex 21:2-11 deals with laws regulating slavery.  Shall we conclude, then, that slavery is okay?

No favoritism...

Keep in mind the context for that.  Anyone can come to Christ.  Anyone who sins will perish.  That is the context.  In other words, the context includes the idea that God will not make special exceptions for anyone either.

As far as God's laws, they show that some were estimated as of a different value than others.  Consider a few verses from the last chapter of Leviticus:

Quote

Chapter 27 

 27:1    And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,  
 27:2    Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons [shall be] for the LORD by thy estimation.  
 27:3    And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary.  
 27:4    And if it [be] a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels.  
 27:5    And if [it be] from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels.  
 27:6    And if [it be] from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation [shall be] three shekels of silver.  
 27:7    And if [it be] from sixty years old and above; if [it be] a male, then thy estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female ten shekels.  

Both gender and age influenced the monetary valuation.  The lowest-ranked person, age-wise, was that of a month old.  (As I understand, this would essentially begin at birth, because in the Jewish system, they always rounded things upward, so a partial month would be counted as a month.)

[Lauralea]

5 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

I agree with your position, Lauralea, but I must differ with where you differ.  Genocide is not always wrong either.  Consider the Bible's own teaching on the matter.  After having filled up their cup of wickedness, a number of groups were commanded to be destroyed.  

It would appear from the above that Jesus takes responsibility for the destruction of these groups; albeit, He gave command to King Saul and others to accomplish it.

Ruth the Moabites had faith. Rachab too from Jericho. So as a group they may have passed divine forbearance but individuals were saved. The majority of those in those nations were beyond redemption and would have led instigated great evil in God's people This is why they perished and why a few did not in my understanding. 

 

 

[Lauralea]

Sorry that all ran together. Smart phones have limitations.

[Lauralea]

16 minutes ago, Robert said:

I'm not accusing you of presenting favoritism.  I'm just thinking that we must be careful how we interpret these OT passages.  After all, collecting firewood on the Sabbath could get one stoned to death....

We do need to be careful but I believe it is relevant .

[Robert]

4 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

No favoritism...

Keep in mind the context for that.  Anyone can come to Christ. 

 

Okay...I'll give you a better one: 

James 2:8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right. 9 But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it...

Keep in mind that "God is agape" and "agape is the fulfillment of the law".  Therefore God cannot show favoritism. 

[Green Cochoa]

4 minutes ago, Robert said:

 

Okay...I'll give you a better one: 

James 2:8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right. 9 But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it...

Keep in mind that "God is agape" and "agape is the fulfillment of the law".  Therefore God cannot show favoritism. 

Again, what is the context for the "respect to persons" in that verse (I prefer the KJV)?  The context is directly that of rich versus poor.  In other words, status.  We are not to have special respect for people of higher social class, caste, or status.  

[Robert]

10 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

Again, what is the context for the "respect of persons" in that verse (I prefer the KJV)?  The context is directly that of rich versus poor.  In other words, status.  We are not to have special respect for people of higher social class, caste, or status.  

You are placing limits on God's law here....The law demands us to love our neighbors (which is everyone) as we naturally love self.  

To look at an infant as a soulless entity and therefore justify its demise is not agape - rather it is self-love (Satan's u-turn agape).

[Robert]

5 minutes ago, Robert said:

You are placing limits on God's law here.

"The law of Jehovah is exceedingly broad. Jesus ... plainly declared to His disciples that this holy law of God may be violated in even the thoughts and feelings and desires, as well as in the word and deed." Ellen White

[Green Cochoa]

3 minutes ago, Robert said:

You are placing limits on God's law here....The law demands us to love our neighbors (which is everyone) as we naturally love self.  

That is correct.  However, that is not the context of the passage you quoted to try to show such.  In fact, if that were the meaning of it, then what is wrong with giving the rich man a nice place to sit?  Wouldn't that show love toward him?

5 minutes ago, Robert said:

To look at an infant as a soulless entity and therefore justify its demise is not agape - rather it is self-love (Satan's system of love).

An infant has a soul.  A pre-born fetus doesn't.  Let's keep the definitions straight.   Knowing the definitions and making them clear to others is not the same as advocating for abortion, mind you.  Please keep that straight as well.

7 minutes ago, Robert said:

"The law of Jehovah is exceedingly broad. Jesus ... plainly declared to His disciples that this holy law of God may be violated in even the thoughts and feelings and desires, as well as in the word and deed." Ellen White

Very true.  And one thing you might like to be mindful of to accompany that thought is the following:

"The truth and the glory of God are inseparable; it is impossible for us, with the Bible within our reach, to honor God by erroneous opinions. Many claim that it matters not what one believes, if his life is only right. But the life is molded by the faith. If light and truth is within our reach, and we neglect to improve the privilege of hearing and seeing it, we virtually reject it; we are choosing darkness rather than light."  {GC 597.2}  

[Robert]

5 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

That is correct.  However, that is not the context of the passage you quoted to try to show such.  In fact, if that were the meaning of it, then what is wrong with giving the rich man a nice place to sit?  Wouldn't that show love toward him?

Quote

 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right. 9 But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it...

Favoritism is just one sin out of many....Anything outside agape is sin.  For example, "self-seeking" is sin, yet everyone of us does it.....That's why we had to be delivered from under law.  

[Robert]

16 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

An infant has a soul.  A pre-born fetus doesn't.  Let's keep the definitions straight.  

In your opinion - given your interpretation - a pre-born fetus doesn't have a soul.

But what if you are wrong? (and I'm pretty sure you are).  Sanctioning murder is serious because it is a life-style commitment to genocide. Those who practice and condone sin are of the devil. 

[Robert]

1 hour ago, Green Cochoa said:

Genocide is not always wrong either.  Consider the Bible's own teaching on the matter.  After having filled up their cup of wickedness, a number of groups were commanded to be destroyed.  

When Israel compromised by contracting multiple marriages, holding slaves and demanding a king, God did not reject them for it. He tried to install principles and requirements to make the best of a less than perfect situation, likely following the same procedure in regard to their choice to take up arms (Exodus 21:2-11; 1 Samuel 8).

 

[Robert]

"In religion, ensoulment is the moment at which a human being gains a soul. Some religions say that a soul is newly created within a developing child and others, especially in religions that believe in reincarnation, that the soul is pre-existing and added at a particular stage of development." Wikipedia

What is a soul?

Our soul is simply our self - who we are. Why make it more complicated?

[Nic Samojluk]

On 7/17/2016 at 5:21 AM, Robert said:

We look at the holocaust and say, “Boy, I don’t know how those Germans could do it.”  The reason they did it is because they turned their backs to God.  When Hitler turned his back to God, then you have unrighteousness.  And folks, when this country turns its back to God, we in America are capable of doing exactly what Hitler did.  And we are doing it to some extent, when we agree to have abortion.

...May I remind you that 55 million babies are aborted every year in the world of which 1.6 million are in this country.  Investigators have found that 90 percent of these abortions are not done because of necessity, but because of convenience.

Pastor Sequeira

Thanks, Robert, for introducing this topic of discussion. There is no other topic of more importance for the Adventist Church right now. We have devoted several General Conference sessions to the discussion of women's ordination--a topic that deprives no one of life--yet we remain silent on the violation of one of God's Commandments. This is incredible.

Our church is not neutral on rape, burglary, and the sexual abuse of children, but our Adventist leaders believe that being neutral on the murder of the unborn is a virtue. It is high time that we repent of this great evil. God is merciful and gracious, but without repentance there is no forgiveness!

 

 

 

[Robert]

41 minutes ago, Nic Samojluk said:

Our church is not neutral on rape, burglary, and the sexual abuse of children, but our Adventist leaders believe that being neutral on the murder of the unborn is a virtue. It is high time that we repent of this great evil. God is merciful and gracious, but without repentance there is no forgiveness!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_lGDBMml28

 

[8thdaypriest]

The recent problem of the Zika virus, and the microcephaly it causes, will bring the abortion debate to the forefront once again.  Should a woman who has the Zika, and whose fetus shows the microcephaly, be allowed to abort that fetus? 

The Zika virus can pass through the placental barrier and enter the fetus’s nervous system, resulting in slowed brain growth (and therefore slowed skull expansion).  Problems associated with microcephaly include developmental delays, mental retardation, seizures, difficulty moving arms or legs, problems with vision, hearing, or speech, and shortened life span.

[8thdaypriest]

Deuteronomy 20:16 "But of the cities of these peoples which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive"

The LORD commanded Israel to "kill every descendant of Amalek".   Just who those people are today - remains a mystery.

Numbers 31:17 "Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man intimately."

 Judges 21:11 "And this is the thing that you shall do: You shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman who has known a man intimately."

GOD actually commanded genocide, which included killing fetuses.  

And when Jesus returns in the clouds, He will remove the redeemed from this earth dimension (for 1000 earth years). 

Those who are left on earth WILL DIE - including millions of fetuses, still inside their "mothers". 

The problem here, is that what the LORD specifically commands concerning the killing of certain people groups, cannot be generalized to allow us to go on killing indiscriminately. 

[8thdaypriest]

Here's a question for you. 

Will women who died while pregnant, be resurrected with the fetus still inside them??