Do you think if your first exposure to god was reading the old testament that you would love and praise god? [Spirituality & Religion]

Funny I would’ve thought that the petty cruel things were the result of men disobeying the laws God had given us. @Axelerator

@Axelerator

Well i don't think these undeniably horrifying acts of slaughter would keep me from [i]believing[/i] in the god of the bible if there was good reason to accept his existence.
But i can't see how i could ever love or admire a god like that.

Funny then how you support the modern Holocaust@Pikachu

@Speedyman That would be the equivalent of telling, say ants what to do, and then getting angry at them for not obeying. It would show a supreme lack of understanding for the species, and a petty sense of being wronged by something beneath you, and needing to punish it, to feel better. I see nothing even remotely godlike in that.
You could go out and drown a whole colony tomorrow, to feel powerful, like a god.
We could spend months arguing this, and it would make no difference to anyone, i is pointless.

Funny your comment makes no sense at all@Axelerator

@Speedyman Yeah, it’s hilarious

@Speedyman

Funny how whenever i challenge you to actually debate that topic you squirt out a smoke screen and run away...

@Pikachu This is a game played by many. No real debating is being done, it’s all about being right. Or insulting people enough to feel better about yourself. It’s sad really

@Axelerator

Unfortunately true of many users here and they're easy to spot.
But every now and then i get someone who's actually interested in debating and brings something to the table.

@Pikachu Those are the rare people worth discussing with.

@Axelerator

Yup.
Hell, i don't even care if your aim is to be right as long as you're willing to debate the subject because that's fun too.

Funny how often I challenge you to say that you don’t support the modern Holocaust and you evade the question. You are obviously running scared@Pikachu

@Speedyman

No speedy. I know i've explained this before but i will do it again for the benefit of any observers:

I do not concede the position which you hold that it is a holocaust, murder.
To murder you must be killing a person and for reasons i have made clear i do not consider a fetus to be a person.

You [i]do[/i] consider a fetus to be a person but for reasons that you have repeatedly [i]failed[/i] to make clear.
The best you've managed to date is " A fetus is a person"........

So let's see who's running scared. Let's see who evades the question.

Your assertion is that a fetus is a person. Can you make a logical argument why a fetus should be considered a person?

@Pikachu Judaism doesn't consider a fetus a person either. And we all know where Christianity came from:P Exodus 21:22-23 Talks about an accidental abortion and there is just a fine. Not an accusation of murder. Also in Numbers 5:19-22 it talks about a trial by ordeal which causes an abortion sanctioned by the priest in the case of infidelity. Jesus in Matthew 26:24 also tells Judas that it would have been better if he had not been born.

Id say in Judaism it has to do with the fact that until God breathes the breath of life into the newborn's lungs that they are not a person. To the ancient Jews something that doesn't breath would not be considered alive. And a fetus doesn't breathe until it is born. Thus not alive until then.

@canusernamebemyusername

Good point. I'm not very clear on where the "life begins at conception" argument comes from, from a biblical standpoint.

You are of course totally wrong. Typical misreading. The Exodus passage actually illustrates how seriously the Jews took causing a premature birth. There were consequences. In an ancient society there would not have been. The scripture means the opposite to what you think it means, that the Hebrews considered life precious. A fine had to be paid if the woman gave premature birth. If there was serious harm then it was life for life. We are never quite sure how these things were interpreted but it shows how seriously they took that which is the opposite to what your trivial interpretation made it out to me@canusernamebemyusername

You have course I once again totally wrong in the interpretation of numbers 5:19-22 Which is been taken by some atheists on their puerile websites to refer to abortion when it means nothing of the kind. It was a trial by ordeal meant to protect the woman from unjust accusations of a jealous husband in the days when women had no rights whatever. If you look at the actual Hebrew it does not refer to the womb at all as it says if she is guilty the thigh will rot and the abdomen swell. There is no hint here that the woman is pregnant or there will be a miscarriage. Your whole interpretation is based on a misunderstanding of the Hebrew and also a misinterpretation of a rather difficult passage of the Old Testament. It is another example of the problems caused by trying to use a 21st-century mind to solve ancient customs. Which ever website you’ve got that from was just showing ignorance@canusernamebemyusername

@Pikachu Waste of time, my friend. You know he won't do it.

‘That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit’. There are many examples in the Bible where in unborn child is considered to be living and considered to be a child. Killing such a child is murder@Pikachu

@Speedyman the thing is,these people don't really care, they just want discussion. The sanctity of life means nothing. You're worth nothing until you have the rights as an adult. Or at least that is the comparison pikachu gave me..embryo..adult. anything in between he is hypocritical.

@Speedyman

[b][i]Me: Your assertion is that a fetus is a person. Can you make a logical argument why a fetus should be considered a person?
[/i][/b]

Just to be clear here, are you submitting as your argument that the bible says so?
Ignoring for the moment that this was a very specific fetus, is that what you wish to bring to the table?

@Reverend

Actually you misremember.
In addition to not considering a fetus a person (a position for which you never offered a rebuttal) I also contended that even if a fetus were to be considered a person, they would have the same rights as any other person and you failed to offer a logical argument for why they should have [i]special[/i] rights.

Don't be snotty. We disagree on the issue but you needn't devalue my point of view as being sincerely held just because you don't like it.
Be better than that.

@Speedyman [quote]We are never quite sure how these things were interpreted[/quote] But your interpretation is right?

The passage illustrates that it was considered at most property damage. That is why it was not a life for a life but a fine. It was only life for a life if the woman died. Not the fetus. The verse above for instance: "Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property."

People are property and so is a fetus. Although there are other reasons in Judaism that says abortion is not okay such as it is a direct contradiction to go forth and multiply. It was still not seen as a soul until God breathed the breath of life into it. From the Hebrew nĕshamah - wind Root nasham - to pant in childbirth. So there is linguistic evidence as well that life begins during birth.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-fetus-in-jewish-law/

@Pikachu I agree to disagree. I don't devalue your opinion i just do not endorse it.

@Pikachu You misremember!! ha ha is that a word?😏