Christian Hypocrisy; Biblical God is NOT pro-life

Okl so just pick one. Here's a good one:

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 “If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.”

This passage is one of the many that Islamic 'fundamentalists' today actually use to justify stoning.

Nope, just that he clearly endorses it and has ordered not only abortion but infanticide in the past, according to the Bible.

LOL Yeah what with the crusades, inquisitions, wars of religion, religious imperialism, etc etc (all justified with the passages of the OT), yeah we should just leave it Christians.

I dont think we're talking about the same planet.

 

AGain the Old Testament and what God chose to do and the New Testament and Jesus….two completely different times and different plans by God. As I said…no Holy Spirit no understanding. You do not have or ever will understand this without Him. Your reading of the Bible is like someone trying to read a book in a language they don't speak and understand. You just do not get what the Law was all about and the difference.

 

Assuming this is in context....what does this public execution have to do with aborting innocent life?

 

Right.

So people have to believe it a certain way to read it? Laughable.

Please address his points.

 

Of course not. I'm just saying....that some people interpret off the deep end. And some people interpret logically. You can reach your conclusions on which you are....I don't care.

But I have to say that Atheists are seemingly the most religious people around--when you take note of their constant obssession.

 

So what was the first plan? Explain why abortion and infanticide were ok then, but not ok now. Go on.

Your description of the holy spirit is the same as weed. You read the bible without, you see it makes no sense, but once you have some weed, oh boy it all becomes so clear all of a sudden!
Your "holy spirit" bs isnt fooling anyone. Neither God, nor Jesus, nor anyone, said you ever had to read the Bible or Torah "with the holy spirit" in order to understand it. Even the prophet Muhammad spoke of the Abrahamic creeds as having the truth self-evidently - that people would follow the Bible, Torah and Quran because they are truthful and show the truth regardless of who you are or what abilities you possess. I have no doubt Jesus would have agreed, along with all the other prophets - they certainly didnt say anything contrary to it. Your "holy spirit" nonsense is just an excuse to avoid the clear Biblical endorsement of abortion and infanticide which you cannot deny let alone address.

 

It clearly says - you can kill a kid if it doesnt obey. Not only that - you can stone them to death. That is WAY worse than abortion or post-birth abortion (early infanticide) - its the killing of an entirely sentient person. You find nothing wrong with that?

Alright, lets find another one that expressly endorses abortion and/ot infanticide because you correctly point out that although God doesnt mind parents throwing stones at their children until they die because they disobey is alright, that isnt exactly the same as killing an "innocent" fetus or newly born infant. So if we could find a story with, at least infanticide, because if you can kill a new born babe, you surely wont have a problem with killing an unborn fetus, then this would resolve the doubt.

Oh, hang, I know! I've got one. Jesus, why didnt I think of it before?! The tenth plague! The plagues God sent down upon the Egyptians! The last one was the mass killing of first new-born infants by the angel of death belonging to all Egyptians. Now the Egyptians might have been "guilty" of being (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s, but their kids sure weren't - a lot wouldnt even have been able to speak or walk let alone know what was going on. But that didnt stop God. I mean, if you think its ok for God to endorse the execution by stoning of 7 year olds for being disrespect, I hardly see how you'll object to killing infants. God clearly has no problem condemning children for the crimes of others, like their parents. He clearly endorses infanticide, and consequently, abortion also.

So here we have an express endorsement by God of the mass execution as it were of "innocent" infants. (Exodus 12)

Spin a lifer argument out of that (*)(*)(*)(*), mate.

 

Explain how there is another way to interpret these passages of God's commands to abort babies both born and unborn as, at base, anything less than an endorsement of abortion and infanticide by God?

 

Right.

I am not an atheist these days, so your comments do not apply to me. I do however like things to make sense and for arguments to be handled in an intellectually honest manner. He raised an argument and you are using the old and tired "well, you are just misreading them".... Yes, context is important. However you have not given us the context of which they should be read. Instead you are habitually ignoring the point.

Address his points.

 

He who creates life has a right to destroy it. A human who takes another's life is trying to play God.

 

Nope.

There are plenty of secular Biblical scholars who can read and understand the Bible.

I do not believe anyone needs to be under the influence to understand a book that makes little sense.

 

Nonsense.

Nonsense.

He who has an interest in being alive, ought to have that interest equally weighed by another being with the same interest and vice versa.

 

Nope.

A lowly human being will in no way ever compete with a being of infinite knowledge and power.

 

And yet, it seems the other way around if we believe the religious idea that there is a God. I've always found it remarkable religious folk dont question the intrinsic contradiction of a being who has power over everything loves us and yet permits every evil imaginable to be conducted by some to others, who didnt deserve it. But that's for another thread.

 

Free will is a higher virtue that "being good" by coersion - allowing evil in the world allows people to choose their own destiny.

 

What's ironic is that the whole leftist argument for legalized abortion is that it's the woman's right since she gave it life.

If leftists don't have, then why would they have a problem with God (the creator of life) choosing to take the life He created?

 

The Problem of Evil.

The premise set out by the Christian model of God is contradicted by the Problem of Evil. The only real way around it is a non-interventionist God. More deistic than theistic in nature.

 

Because the premise set fourth by your beliefs create a perfect God, yet imperfect things occur in the world that are not the result of man's actions.

That is why.

 

Name something evil in the world that's not the result of man's actions.

 

Allowing indescribable evils in the world is a world that is indistinguishable from a world without a god.

This may make sense if those evils only occurred to "bad" people.

 

Which would ultimately mean he is not a God we really need worry about here - since he has left as, immorally, without the ability to intervene. He (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up - not us.
Either way, the result is God is meaningless for everyday like, hence my apatheism

 

Are you kidding?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_disaster

 

The belief isn't necessary, and more so, God does not require a fan club.

If people are to find God they will find it within, and not externally by referring to an ancient factually inaccurate book.

 

Haha, so true.

 

I did address his point. He says an execution is the same thing as an abortion. And I address it by saying that his interpetation is warped.

He said that God wants us to kill babies because God has control over who is born and who isn't. Who dies and who doesn't. And I address that point by saying----its a warped interpetation. And dangerous. But if someone sees the world that way its not something another human being can change.