New Kids Book: "The Preborn Christ: A Story of God in the Womb"

To: Risky Schemer

Why don't you abort yourself?

61 posted on 04/09/2002 9:52:09 PM PDT by Robert-J

To: Risky Schemer

One thing the "theocratphobes"(my word)always leave out of their A to Z stories is, Why are the children of religious Zelots fornicating to need abortions in the first place? If one raises a child in the Word, she won't need an abortion because she didn't fornicate. Usually the abortion is just the latest sin performed. Why did the parents let her go places she could fornicate? If we lived in a perfect world, we wouldn't need laws to protect people because everyone would love the Lord more than their flesh and sin would be no more. The Truth is, we need laws that protect children because their parents would kill them just to solve an embarassing situation. One is a Christian BECAUSE HE KEEPS CHRIST'S COMMANDMENTS, not because he says he is.

I'm sure our forefathers never dreamed of the debates we are having daily today. Fornicating on the first date, killing the baby that results, fisting in class, homosexual marriage, taking the 10 commandments from public buildings, 50% taxes, etc. They could have answered all these questions in a nanosecond because they were moral men.

After proofreading the last paragraph I wrote, all I can say is "Come Lord". This is not my home. I'm just passing through the wilderness.

62 posted on 04/09/2002 10:55:24 PM PDT by chuckles

To: Risky Schemer

"You do illustrate the raging fanatical blindness of the "abortion is murder" crowd: You either agree that abortion is "murder" or you are labeled "pro-abortion."

Nonsense. If someone said something as criminally evil as "The shooting of abortion doctors is wrong, so it should only be done rarely and infrequently," that person would rightly be considered "pro-murder." Anyone who says "Abortion is wrong, so it should only be performed rarely and infrequently," is, pro-abortion, regardless of how they qualify it. Morally, condoning something while declaring against it is still condoning it.

63 posted on 04/10/2002 6:40:31 AM PDT by Harrison Bergeron

To: Risky Schemer; Artist

1. What is the difference between a real scholar and a "self-appointed" scholar — if earned degrees, fruit, and 25+ years at the workbench mean nothing to you?

2. Since facts and rationality clearly don't interest you on this issue, I ask again: what is your personal issue with abortion? What in your behavior and self-image would be affected if the Bible were right, and you wrong, on this issue?

Dan

64 posted on 04/10/2002 6:53:53 AM PDT by BibChr

To: Risky Schemer; homeschool mama; marylina; brad's gramma; ArGee; MeeknMing; AFVetGal

This will be long, so I apologize. I’m in the middle of a move and don’t have time for debate. I’ve been trying to avoid them, but no such luck this time.

I don’t know if you are a Christian or not, but Christians believe God is about love, grace, and mercy. He loves the “little guy” in life. He has commandments for us to take care and defend those who can not take care of themselves. The widows, orphans, those living in poverty who cannot feed themselves, and those being led to the slaughter. In my opinion, abortion doesn’t fit with who or what God is. Abortion is contradictory to him, and who he is as THE Supreme Being. Your use of scripture to support your pro-choice view, is not persuasive because we have the BIG picture of who and what God is, and what he likes and doesn't like.

Proverbs 24:11 says “Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter.”.

The ancient Assyrians, Sumerians, Babylonians and Persians all had extremely strict laws forbidding abortion. The Assyrians were a brutal bunch of people who chopped peoples fingers off for dinner time entertainment. How can such a blood thirsty people forbid abortion, when we, the United States of America, a supposedly civilized group of people, allow it? The Greeks and Romans allowed abortions, but there were strict laws forcing the woman to inform her husband of her abortion BEFORE it took place. The Hippocratic oath given in 400 B.C. stated, "I will not give to a woman an instrument to procure abortion." Pagan Greeks thought the “fetus” was fully human, equivalent to the newborn.

The Hebrew people placed high value on children and families. It was unthinkable that a Jewish woman would want an abortion. It is wrong to shed innocent blood. Innocent human life was valuable because of the sacred nature of being made in the likeness of God. Also, the Hebrew word for fetus and child was the same (I think). Have you not read the dozens of stories of God “helping” a woman get pregnant, to fulfill his will, so he could be glorified. God LOVES babies, and you can see it in all the barren stories of Elizabeth, Sarah, Hannah, and Rachel. Babies were ALWAYS a blessing whether she was barren or not. AND…..have you also not read how much God HATED child sacrifice and what he did to his people when they turned to this. Child sacrifice, idol worship, and homosexuality was the LAST STRAW for God. He would not tolerate people throwing their babies into the fire.

You said this; And so, since in your opinion "abortion is murder of the innocent," that gives you the moral right, and I would say IMPETUS and OBLIGATION and DUTY to do whatever you can to stop the "murder," and extend CONTROL into every aspect of a woman's life, even to her own womb.

I would say the government has the moral DUTY to protect citizens, even those unborn. There are laws to protect your life and my life. Does an unborn child not matter? Why is a “fetus” a human if the woman has a miscarriage, but if she has an abortion, the “fetus” is a nothing. Determining the pre-born child’s “life” status of “human” or “not human” all depends on the emotions of the mother. Laws protected the unborn and had “control” over a woman’s womb for centuries. Big deal. No one complained about it 100 years ago. It was “accepted” that a baby was a life. Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton were pro-life. Then Margaret Sanger came along, and the rest is history.

I don’t understand your obsession with theocracy. Were we a theocracy before 1973? There are plenty of non religious pro life people, because they believe in the sanctity of human life and civil rights for all humans, even the unborn.

There doesn’t need to be an 11th commandment saying, “Thou shall not kill your unborn child”, for Christians to understand that abortion is evil. Abortion is the brutal action of a deep lack of faith in God to work everything out for her. There are plenty of scriptures to support God’s attitude about protecting the unborn. Protect the innocent, you were made in my image, your body is not your own…it is the temple of the Holy Spirit, thou shall not commit premeditated murder, fornication is a sin, always have faith in me because I will take care of you and everything will work out. etc, etc, etc.

My body and my womb does not belong to me. It belongs to God. I Corinthians 6:19 "Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit {who is} in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?"

If you go read the Planned Parenthood testimonial board, MOST of the women who get abortions are college aged girls who “weren’t ready for a baby or their boyfriend left them”. Abortion to save the life of the mother is rare and usually not necessary, since a late term abortion takes three days, when a C-section takes 30 minutes. Soooooooo…..abortion, what we have right now, is birth control. THAT IS EVIL.

Back alley abortions is an emotional, dramatic myth. I’m sure it happened occasionally, but it was rare. I don’t buy that argument.

You also said, ”But "abortion is murder" is not the way to go about it. It hasn't won the debate yet, and it won't,. Well, maybe not with you (yet) but it sure worked on people like Norma McCorvey.

One more point and then I need to get up. I take issue with the dramatic use of “we are going to go get women who get abortions with guns”. That’s a little over the top and not true. Your stereotyping is not fair or just. I can’t speak for every pro-lifer here at FR, but I seriously doubt any of us would walk up to a woman getting an abortion or one who had one, and scream in her face, “YOU’RE A MURDERER”. We are in this to save the woman just as much as the children. Even Norma McCorvey will tell you about all the times she spat in the face of a pro-lifer, only to have them wipe it off with a smile and say, “Jesus loves you”. Yes we feel abortion is murder, and because we are here debating this serious, emotional subject, we say emotional things. But when it comes down to the real thing, we would take her in our arms and give her a big hug and try to talk to her. We would try to share with her the loving mercy and forgiveness of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ that is available to her, free of charge.

Yikes! Sorry for the "essay". I had a lot to say and wanted to get it all over at once. I'm busy. Have a good day.

65 posted on 04/10/2002 9:39:19 AM PDT by SpookBrat

To: Notwithstanding

68 posted on 04/10/2002 11:06:37 AM PDT by Saundra Duffy

To: AdamWeisshaupt

I suppose divorcing your wife and marrying another is not adultery, either.

Casting bait are you?

What opinion are you interested in? The church's, the government's, society's, or what the Bible says?

69 posted on 04/10/2002 11:07:53 AM PDT by Risky Schemer

Nicely done, Spook.

Shalom.

70 posted on 04/10/2002 11:15:44 AM PDT by ArGee

To: AdamWeisshaupt

As far as I am concerned, he was alive when he was leaping, just as the fetus is alive when it sucks its thumb and kicks.

Whether the fetus is a living organism is not in question. It's whether or not it is a living soul. And, as I have been trying to point out, there are Bible grounds for believing it is not.

And as you point out, there are Bible grounds for respecting the fetus, whether it is a living soul yet or not.

But I am arguing that the "life of the unborn" and "killing innocent babies" and "abortion is murder" arguments (and justifications for seizing political power and controlling others) are based on "life begins at conception" -- the ensoulment of the fetus -- ideas, which the Bible does not support.

71 posted on 04/10/2002 11:17:39 AM PDT by Risky Schemer

To: AdamWeisshaupt

So there was no soul in John to make him leap? First you said it was breath, now you speak of the soul? Do you really consider those to be the same thing? Now whether it is the breath, or the quickening, sucking one's thumb, etc, the absense of these things does not mean that there is no soul.

See #50.

73 posted on 04/10/2002 12:24:37 PM PDT by Risky Schemer

To: Risky Schemer

Dear Risky Schemer,

I've been thinking about your post number #50 today. I understand and see the point you are trying to make. I did some study this afternoon to understand better, the verses you put forth. Assuming you are sincere in your convictions, I want to ask you to reconsider your belief that life begins at birth, because it doesn’t. It begins at conception.

The word "breath" in Genesis 2:7, Job 27: 3-4, Job 33:4 are all the same Hebrew word. The word means spirit, and I believe it means a soul, provided by God. It's not necessarily oxygen.

This same Hebrew word for breath is used in Job 32:8, "But it is a spirit in man, And the breath of the Almighty gives them understanding." How is this word "breath" significant in your position of life beginning at birth, when this same Hebrew word is used to show that the Almighty gives us "understanding" through the Spirit. This word breath is not referring to oxygen.

If oxygen is your hang up, don't pre-born babies receive oxygen from their mother through the cord?

The word "breath" in Ezekiel 37:5, Ezekiel 37: 8-10 is a Hebrew word that means spirit also, but it is a different word. It means "personality" or the personality of the spirit or soul.

I don't understand the point you are trying to make by using John 3:27. "Born of water and the Spirit". The Greek word for born here means "conversion". The word Spirit is the Holy Spirit.

You can’t take these verses to prove your point and leave out the rest of the entire Bible which gives many examples of a baby being alive in the womb. There are dozens of examples of how God feels about people who murder their own children. Every Hebrew law, given by God, was to protect the innocent. The Lord loves the innocent. You have to take all the verses together, roll them up in a ball and see the BIG picture. There is a big beautiful forest out there, not just a few trees.

Sincerely,
Spookbrat

74 posted on 04/10/2002 3:37:11 PM PDT by SpookBrat

To: Risky Schemer

There is a Biblically-based side of the argument that abortion -- though wrong -- is not murder. The argument does not condone abortion, it simply argues that the Bible does not support the charge that it is murder.

I agree: Abortion is not murder.

It's an abortion and that is a more grevious act than murder.

75 posted on 04/10/2002 6:53:37 PM PDT by Procyon

The word "breath" in Genesis 2:7, Job 27: 3-4, Job 33:4 are all the same Hebrew word. The word means spirit

I'm not sure where you get that. Strong's lexicon gives the first definition as breath, and the word is translated in the Authorized Version, in the 24 places it appears, as "breath" 17 times, "blast" 3 times (as in a blast of breath -- 2 Samuel 22:16, Psalm 18:15), "spirit" only 2 times, "inspiration" 1 time, and "souls" 1 time.

Notice the same words, "BREATH OF LIFE" as used in Genesis 2:17 applied to animals in Genesis 7:21-22. It's BREATH. Air in the nostrils and lungs. The same word used in Deuteronomy 20:16, Joshua 10:40, Joshua 11:11, Joshua 11:14, 2 Samuel 22:16, 1 Kings 15:29, 1 Kings 17:17, Job 27:3, Job 33:4, Job 34:14, Psalm 150:6, Isaiah 2:22, Isaiah 42:5, Daniel 10:17. It's BREATH in all those places. In the majority of the places the word appears it is air in the nostrils and lungs. In only a very few places is that word used to signify anything other than air -- breath -- in the body. And "inspiration" is the opposite of "expiration," and "inspire" means to breathe, cause to breathe, inhale, while "expire" means to breathe out, exhale, emit one's last breath, die.

That the word would be used interchangeably with "souls" or "spirit" in those few other places is no surprise. A breathing man is a living soul (Genesis 2:17). And since man is a trinity (spirit, soul and body) a breathing man who is a living soul has a spirit. (Whether it is a dead spirit inherited from Adam, or a living one brought up by the quickening Spirit, depends on whether or not a man has been born again.)

And that brings us to John 3:5. The "water" birth is the physical birth -- the point when breath enters the body and a man becomes a living soul. It is one of the two requirements for a man to enter the kingdom of God. (Ever hear an expectant mother say "my water broke"? That's the water.) ("Water" also happens to be a scriptural type of the word of God.)

Obviously a man has to be born before he can be born again. So you first have a man who is a living soul because he has breath in his body. But he has a dead spirit that needs something. And is needed is the Spirit of God in him to quicken his dead spirit. [And the word "Spirit" in John 3:5 (if you want to run to the Greek) is Pneuma, from which we get "pneumatic" -- which we use today to indicate something driven by air.] So a man becomes a living soul when physical breath enters his body, and he gets a living spirit when the living God, like "breath" -- in the person of the Holy Spirit -- enters and quickens him. At that point the man is "born again." (See John chapter 3.)

And how is this accomplished? Very simply. By asking. By believing on Jesus Christ and simply inviting Him into your heart to be your Saviour.

76 posted on 04/10/2002 6:55:12 PM PDT by Risky Schemer

To: Risky Schemer, SpookBrat

(Correction: the "Genesis 2:17" references should read "Genesis 2:7")

77 posted on 04/10/2002 7:03:01 PM PDT by Risky Schemer

To: Risky Schemer

So your point is: God doesn't mind babies being chopped up into tiny pieces because he hasn’t breathed life into it yet. He doesn't mind a sharp object being stabbed in the back of a baby’s head, because the 9 month old "fetus" just ain't alive. You are stubborn and are trying to justify this by using the scriptures, while in the same breath, bashing Jesus Freaks, one issue voters, and those who want a Theocracy. (Yeah right). THIS CHILD COULD VERY WELL BREATHE ON IT'S OWN, IF THEY WOULD LET GOD BREATHE "LIFE" INTO IT (according to you, it's not alive yet without this “breath”).

The child is alive!!! It has been alive all along, living off it's mother, tossing and turning, keeping her from getting any sleep, hiccuping, saying hello to her after a nap. I triple dog dare you to start a "mothers only" thread and say to their face, their baby was dead in their womb, up until the point of delivery, and at that point, it became alive because it could then BREATHE. Every single woman on this earth who carried a baby to term will tell you it was alive inside them. Are you saying it's "dead" in the womb until delivery? It's either dead or alive. A dead baby in a womb, left undelivered sure could make a mother sick, now couldn't it?

So by your logic, I could deliver my baby and hurry up and strangle it before God has a chance to breathe “life” into it, and I’m not guilty of murder, right? It wasn’t alive yet, right? It’s not a human yet, right? At what point do we become a human being according to your Bible? If you believe it takes oxygen to make a human, you are right…..the baby gets oxygen from the mother, therefore, it’s human and it’s alive in the womb. :)

God just doesn't give a darn does he? He could care LESS if the baby, HE put there, is chopped up. He turns his head and says, “It’s your body. Do what you want with it”. He says, “It really doesn’t bother me a bit, that you take your destiny into your own hands, instead of depending on me to make it alright”. He says, “I don’t care if you kill it. It isn’t alive. It’s just a sack of cells. Big deal”. When a baby is chopped up or stabbed in the brain, he says, “OUCH, that’s GOTTA hurt”!!!!

You are wrong. You are so very wrong. GOD DOES MIND. HELLO????? You are using God's word to justify infant slaughter. This is blaspheme. I got my information from Strongs, Vines and the BIBLE! Guess we are reading different Strongs, along with reading different Bibles.

I do agree with you that this should be a state’s rights issue. Chat with you later. Hope your back is better.

PS: I'm more stubborn than you.

78 posted on 04/10/2002 8:09:59 PM PDT by SpookBrat

To: Risky Schemer

One obvious problem with your story as a metaphor for America is that in real life it is A town which is trying to coerce Z town into adopting it's values. Pro Abortionists are not satisfied unless every state, every city and town and every country shares their values and has abortion clinics. They also want all the med schools to teach abortion.

In addition they are a bunch of cynical hypocrites because they say that their reason for being pro abortion is to ensure that a trained doctor performs the abortion, yet then they want abortion pills sold as over the counter drugs without a prescription or handed out by the school nurse. Both of these things are now legal in Britain.

79 posted on 04/10/2002 9:00:26 PM PDT by ganesha

To: Notwithstanding

How does the book explain the immaculate conception?

80 posted on 04/10/2002 9:17:33 PM PDT by ganesha

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794

NEW BOOK
The Preborn Christ

Home

News

Background

Prayer

Meditations

Solidarity by a Church

A Person in the Womb

Links

Outreach

Papal Blessing

Contact Us

Search

NEWS

Photos of a Person in the Womb
added to this website

www.prebornchrist.org

Given New Look !

NEWS

Photos of a Person in the Womb added to this website

Given New Look !

Photos of a Person in the Womb
added to this website