Then where is the free will?
Depends on what you mean by “the Church.” As an Episcopalian, I don’t recognize the Roman church as the one true religion. I recognize the more Christ-like Anglican Communion as the true discipleship of Jesus Christ. Our orthodoxy is universal love for humankind, recognition of suffering as a permanent human condition, and the relief of such suffering as our Christian mission on this earth. The Roman church, as nearly as I can tell, exists solely for the enrichment and expansion of the Roman church.
I think I can accurately predict that a true Christian would have offered a nine-year-old rape victim all the surcease, comfort, and medical attention she would want and need to transcend the horror of the crime committed against her. Mine is not to judge, but to minister, to love, to console and, yes, to pay for whatever she needed.
Why? Do you think that those verses necessarily preclude free will? 'Cuz frankly, I don’t see it.
I have to disagree. The first two are simply touching the womb, which pretty much is unavoidable; it’s not exactly a large space. Touching in that manner doesn’t imply recognition at all. The second two quite explicitly say they’re talking about after birth. I imagine speaking lies must be quite difficult if you’re in a liquid and before you’ve learnt to talk, as per your view. And even beyond that, these particular passages are about Isaac, Esau, Jacob, and David, hardly people with whom God had no particular especial interest in; they’re as un-generalisable from as is John (less so than Jesus, obviously, but still so). These really don’t work at all.
Anyone in the Bible you could say it someone ‘special’, but in truth mainly they are not, they are regular people. David was the youngest son of a Shepard, his father didn’t even consider him worthy of the possibility of being king, though all his other sons he called.
Right. Because the charitable benefits provided by Catholic charities is minuscule, a pittance. Especially when compared to those in the more Christ-like Anglican Communion.
But David became king, so presumably God thought he had something to him. Who’s opinion do you hold in higher value; David’s father, or God’s? 
And no, you couldn’t say it about anyone. There are plenty of nameless folks in the Bible. There’s plenty of named folk whose only claim to fame (as it were) is that they interact with Jesus or John or some other noteable. The people in the example you gave are none of them regular people. And that was solely my final rebuttal; even if they were average joes, your cites still wouldn’t work.
Are there any average Joe’s in God’s book?
Bold mine. Are you calling one of God’s son’s average? Part of my calling is not so much to non-believers, but to believers who don’t really understand that God is for them too, it’s just not for the few elect. God has given His Spirit to all who ask, and that comes with power that anyone who seeks can find. Many believers feel the need to go through another, such as a minister (some try to go through me) to reach God, when they are at the point that they can reach, listen and serve God directly.
IMO, even if we choose to believe in God it’s incorrect for people to claim to know God’s will on this issue. Regardless of varying interpretations of the Bible, if there is a soul we don’t know when that soul enters the body, and, I further doubt that we are able to frustrate God’s will by keeping any soul intended to be in the world, out.
We have medical procedures now that weren’t available years ago and we deal with life and death differently. A premature baby that had no chance of survival in Jesus day can now survive with modern medicine. Are we frustrating God’s will and plan by using our advanced knowledge to save lives. If not then it’s likely that we are supposed to choose and it’s all part of understanding our relationship with each other and and creation.
I am both pro life and pro choice. I think life, even potential life, should be honored but it’s not my place to choose for others. That’s between them and their conscience and them and God. The thing that angers and frustrates me the most is how those who are strongly against abortion don’t seem to honor the lives of children already born into society but they’ll fight to save a fetus while calling it a baby. If pro lifers want to do something positive for babies and children there are plenty of them in need in this country. Do something positive with your time and energy and get involved in helping the kids that are born so that our future generations will do better. How is it doing God’s will to insist abortion be illegal and more babies be born while allowing children to suffer daily?
Here’s a link with the author using Bible verses to justify abortion. Fairly irrelevant to me given my take on the Bible but I thought this was interesting
Keep in mind that a premature birth back then almost always meant death for the child. This seems to be saying that the loss of the fetus warrants a fine while any serious injury to the woman should be repaid with an eye for an eye.
I am SO friggin’ sick of this particular straw man. If this follows the usual progression, we will now be entertained by an impressive string of anecdotes and personal experience relating the hypocrisy of the pro-life movement. No need to support this after all, it’s a given. And you did say “seem,” after all, so it’s beyond dispute. :rolleyes:
kanicbird, I pitted you over this post.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10933302#post10933302
You know what?
There are some Catholics who share this outlook - about giving help and support. Just because someone with a fancy hat said something, does NOT mean we all see things that way. Any judgement and punishment (in my opinion) should be reserved for “daddy”.
Ah yes, it’s the old “you can’t judge Catholicism by what the Pope, all the cardinals and bishops, and official church doctrines say” argument.
God can and does use our disobedience to the good, but to do that pain must enter the equation.
We can make the same argument using the satanic power of voodoo. It’s not that God’s will is frustrated so much, but there is a cost somewhere in using powers that are not of God.
Part of my calling I believe is to be a voice of the unborn, as such He has given me revelations. The unwanted children, I believe is a direct result of the abortions, a direct result of we reap what we sow. The way to help those children the most is to go after the source, not the symptom.
It’s not that they should be punished, but the system must change, with the heart of the parents turned towards their children, realizing that God has made us to adore our children, and that putting them first is greater then any pursuit of happiness we can get by a career path. That the children are the very heart of the parents, and there joy is felt in the parents heart, the the upset of the children is also felt.
So you’re telling me that the laws in this perfect book, that I am supposed to devote my life to following, were written to save a lazy priest some work?
How do you know which laws are “real” laws, and which ones were written for this or other similar ridiculous reasons? Are we still expected to follow the laws that were written for such ridiculous reasons?
Could you guys do me a favor- all agree on someone you trust, perhaps the Pope, or Billy Graham, or George Bush, or whomever, and have him go through the bible with a red pen and mark out all the stuff that was written by a lazy priest, or that was just written for those specific people at that specific time and therefore doesn’t apply today, or any of the other silly rationalizations you can come up with, so I know which parts of the book I’m supposed to devote my life to? It would make it a heck of a lot easier for those who might be thinking of converting to have all that info up front.
I read about 1/3 of it, and skimmed another 1/3. IMHO is not inspired, takes things out of context while accuses others of doing it, and accusing the reader of not reading the scriptures.
God made us to rejoice in our children, could a loving God do it any other way? in a common sense view can you see in any way God saying to a woman to dispose of that ‘thing’ I placed in your womb like a piece of trash?
Yes, I would say so.
I think you may be misunderstanding the word “average”. Average (depending on whether you take the mean, median, or mode; I was personally going with mean) means the middling example in a range of many examples. If *all *people are God’s sons, then most certainly they are average. We’re all similar in level; in the range of people, we’re all pretty much about the same place, making pretty much most of us average. Average means normal, consistent with context. So yes, if we are all God’s sons, by that very definition one of God’s sons is average.
I’m afraid I don’t have any kind of calling to statistics, so I don’t have anyone to refer you to on statistics - but averaging is pretty easy to get!
Don’t forget The Bible.
OK I’ll give this one to you, though calling someone with unexceeded access to the King of the universe ‘average’ is really stretching the limits of a definition of statistical mathematics to make a point.
Not if everyone has unexceeded access to the King of the universe. Then it’s acting precisely within the limits of that definition, as I said. I’m not playing a semantic game.
That said, I wouldn’t consider everyone to have unexceeded access, which was sort of my point behind not being able to generalise from the esteemed figures noted in the Bible there. If we are all God’s children, Jesus is still pretty much above us on that particular pole.