[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles

Title: What does God command regarding the baby about to be aborted?
Source: ChristianPatriot.com
URL Source: [None]
Published: Feb 7, 2015
Author: Pastor Bob Celeste for ACP
Post Date: 2015-02-07 16:29:11 by BobCeleste
Keywords: None
Views: 51744
Comments: 95

What does God command regarding the baby about to be aborted?

Does God command us to stand around and do nothing or does He command us to rescue the baby by what ever means we need to use?

You decide: Deliver those who are drawn toward death, And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter. If you say, "Surely we did not know this," Does not He who weighs the hearts consider it? He who keeps your soul, does He not know it? And will He not render to each man according to his deeds? Proverbs 24:11&12.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 4.

#3. To: BobCeleste (#0)

The same thing regarding the innocent man about to be put to death: don't kill them, and if you do, their blood shall be upon your head.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-02-07   20:29:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Vicomte13 (#3)

The same thing regarding the innocent man about to be put to death: don't kill them, and if you do, their blood shall be upon your head.

He's asking about witnesses to an innocent's murder, not the executioner.

kenh  posted on  2015-02-07   23:18:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 4.

#5. To: kenh (#4) (Edited)

He's asking about witnesses to an innocent's murder, not the executioner.

Put in other terms, he's asking if the United States, today, should attack North Korea, China, Iran and Saudi Arabia as these nations murder innocents as a matter of course all the time.

Looking backward in history, he is asking if the United States should have gone to war with Germany immediately in 1939, the instant they attacked Poland, and should we have gone to war with Japan in 1934, when they attacked China.

Should the US Cavalry have ridden out onto the Plains and slaughtered American settlers, as they were provoking wars with and killing Indians by coming there.

By extension, then, should those who know that a man in state prison who is about to be executed is innocent storm the prison and shoot the executioners?

Or, more directly to the underlying intent of the question: do we have the right to violently attack abortion providers to prevent abortions, which are murders of the innocent?

I provide all of the parallels because they ARE parallel. North Korea kills lots of innocent people and we know it. So does China. Should we, then - MAY we - spontaneously attack them.

The resurgent wave of jihadism in Islam thinks so. Islamic jihadis believe that they, each being instruments of God, have the right, and even the duty, to violently attack whatever is wrong, as they define wrong. Violent attack to stop something inevitably involves killing, and so Muslims kill in order to attack something they believe is ungodly. The question, then, is whether Christians have the same right.

The answer to that question is difficult, because different people assign different final authority to different places. Jews, for example, would answer "No", because any infliction of death by the Jewish faithful would require a full formal trial that respects all of the procedures. This is the Jewish rabbinical interpretation of the Torah. So, while Jews would be justified, by their religion, to intervene to stop a street crime, they would not be justified in attacking people doing something legal even if they thought it was immoral. The great Jewish prophets such as Jeremiah and Jonah and Amos railed against evil practices, offensive to God, and they did so inspired by the Holy Spirit. But they did so using WORDS, or symbolic acts. What they did NOT do was violently physically attack the people doing the wrong.

King Ahab passed his children through the fires of Molech. Elijah and Elisha excoriated him, but they didn't directly seek to kill him, or call for a revolt.

Of course, Jews are not Christians, and Jews don't have Jesus or Paul or the other Apostles to guide them. So just because the Jews' interpretation of their law would NOT justify attacking abortion clinics doesn't mean that that is the right answer for Christians.

With Christians, the answer may depend on where Christians believe the final authority to answer such questions reposes. Obviously all Christians believe that it ultimately reposes on God, so the question really is "To whom does God reveal the answer to questions like this."

In a formal sense, most Christians think that God has invested the Church with those answers and with the authority to pronounce them. So, that settles it for the 80% of the Christian world who are Catholics, the 10% who are Orthodox and the 5% who are Anglican/Episcopalan. All of those traditionalists, which is 95% of the world's Christians by numbers, think that God vested the Church with the authority to answer such questions, and the Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican Communion Churches all definitively answer NO. No, a man does not have the right, on his own, to go attack abortion clinics or prisons, or states. Men are bound to respect the laws. If the laws are evil, then men must not obey those particular laws. This does not, however, justify a proactively aggressive attack on the state or on people doing something, however odious, that is legal under the laws of the state.

Looking at the other 5% of Christians (who form a majority in the United States), several others such as the Presbyterians, Methodists and Mormons think likewise when it comes to the Church having the authority to decide these things. Their concepts of what the Church IS differ from Catholic/Protestant/Anglican traditionalists, but their conclusion about what the Church DOES is not.

And so we are left with those few percentage of Christians who do NOT believe that the Church is vested with the authority to answer such things for individuals, or those who DO, but whose Churches are small and are filled with people who are ready to attack.

In the latter case, people who believe Church decides, and Church has told them to attack, they certainly feel justified in attacking. However, no such Church claims the authority to institutionally speak for God that that Catholic/Orthodox/Anglican Churches do, so even in those cases the individual Christian would have to satisfy himself that what God himself said (or is believed to have inspired) in the Bible (or elsewhere, if they believe in direct ongoing revelation) authorized the attack.

And there, there is a problem, because different people who read the Bible well and thoroughly focus on different things they find there.

Here is what I believe is the BEST read. In Genesis, whatever laws God may have formally given to Adam and Eve, the only ones that are formally written down are to reproduce, to eat the fruit of the garden (then, after the fall, to eat the herb of the field and bread gained by the sweat of the brow), and to not eat of a particular tree. They ate of it so they were expelled. God didn't discuss murder with them and hadn't given a law against it, at least not that's in the text, when Cain slew Abel. God did not put Cain to death for this. Rather, he marked him, and doomed him to wander.

Although God did not prohibit killing in the text, it's clear that it disturbed him greatly, for in the text leading up to the Flood, we are told that the world was filled with violence, and that God repents of having made men and resolves to destroy it, by Flood. So, the Flood happened because of violence.

Note that it wasn't until AFTER the Flood that God gave men animal flesh to eat. But immediately after that he warns them not to eat flesh with life's blood in it. This has been interpreted ritualistically as "pour out the blood", and indeed God does say just that to the Jews, but the text here in the Hebrew seems to speak of flesh that is still alive: don't tear parts off of living animals to eat them, don't eat flesh that is still alive. Kill it first.

Immediately after that God gives the general law against killing man. He says that whoever (man or beast) sheds man's blood, by man his blood must be shed. So, God puts an onus upon man to repay bloodshed with bloodshed.

And that's where the law for mankind in general ends until Jesus.

The rest of the Old Testament speaks of God's specific contracts with one specific man and his family, and then with the nation he set up. For that nation, Israel, he made all sorts of laws. But those laws were for that people in that land, a land that God was ruling DIRECTLY as King. God didn't give the laws of Israel to all of mankind. The laws for all of mankind were given to Noah, and there are not many of them. The law about killing is simply: don't. Don't, but if somebody does, shed his blood in return.

The Jews were given many laws. Picking and choosing among them to decide which of them applies too everybody is a sterile exercise: NONE of them do. It was a contract: DO ALL THIS, and you get a stable farm in Israel. That's it. And it was only for the circumcised descendants of Abraham,. Isaac and Jacob and their adoptees. Nothing more.

Trying to pick through the New Testament ends up being shunted back to references in the Old Testament a lot, which would seem to bring those provisions forward, but Jesus generally made the law as he intended it pretty clear. To know what WE are bound to, all we need to do is read Jesus.

It's particularly important to read the last page of the Bible for there, in Revelation, Jesus twice gives lists of deeds that will cause a man to fail final judgment and be thrown into the Lake of Fire, and murder appears on both lists.

"Murder" doesn't mean what it means in our Anglo-Saxon law. This is important. To us, murder is an UNLAWFUL killing. But to the Scripture, a murder is an INTENTIONAL killing. Note well that in the Torah, when executions for committing crimes against God are revealed, God says that the criminal is to be judged and then taken outside of the camp and MURDERED by the people - with stones, or hanging, or whatever.

In the Scriptures, the word God uses to describe a LAWFUL execution after a trial is MURDER. We don't execute somebody in the electric chair for having committed murder. We MURDER the murderer in the electric chair. That is the lexicon that God uses.

Now, most people upon hearing that don't like it very much. They do not like to think that soldiers in the field doing their "duty", or the state executioners, are committing MURDER. But they are.

This is a distressing discovery, when one reads on the last page of the Bible, twice, that murderers do not enter into the city of God but are thrown into the lake of fire. It calls into question the ability to execute people for crimes ("Let he among you who is without sin, cast the first stone" is Jesus' standard for executions). It calls into question the ability to make war at all.

At this point, most people prefer to recede into the traditions of their Churches, because the Churches have fabricated Just War doctrines, to allow organized mass murder for reasons of state (war).

Those without organizations who read the Bible directly have frequently come to the conclusion that even that is not allowed. Quakers and Shakers and Brethren and others are pacifists BECAUSE the easiest straight read of the Bible is that that's what God asks us to be.

Others read the text differently, though generally with a mindset that God CAN'T have asked that, because that would mean that OTHER things we value, such as our states and political control, would not be attainable. Generally speaking such people then burrow into the Old Testament, where God directs the killing of many for reasons of state. They reason that Christians are not the Chosen People, so Christians can affirmatively do all of those things (though they say that Christians are not at the same time BOUND by all of the restrictions of the texts that say that they CAN'T do something - Christians see THOSE as having been "Just for the Jews", but executing witches, or tithing? Well, that's for everybody, that's for us.

It's a convenient, self-serving, and altogether dishonest way to read the text. And in that list of things that'll get you damned, lying is right alongside of murder as something that'll take you to the Lake of Fire.

Jesus at the Last Supper reminded his disciples that he'd sent them out before without money or weapons, and they had not been molested. But now that he was leaving, he told them they'd need to buy swords. Now, the Zealot among them, exulted at the authority to carry weapons again: HERE ARE TWO SWORDS! (YAY! We get to FIGHT!). But Jesus cut them off curtly: ENOUGH! He said.

In other words, NO, I am not authorizing you to take up the sword. I'm authorizing you to have a sword for you own defense.

And within an hour or two, when the band came to arrest Jesus in the Garden, Peter drew a sword and struck off a man's ear. Jesus told him to put away his sword, that he who takes up the sword perishes by it ("Live by the sword, die by the sword.")

Any Christian who seeks to find solace for a profession of arms in the text of the Bible will find it to be very unappetizing gruel indeed. He will have better luck in the traditions of the Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian,. Baptist, Mormon, and other Churches (not the Quakers or the Jehovah's Witnesses), who have highly refined theories of justification regarding force. Those theories are comforting for people who want to make a profession of arms. They don't follow the Bible really - they spend a lot of time dwelling in the Old Testament, but that seems to be good enough for people who want the answer to be that they can take up arms and sometimes kill other people and NOT be murderers destined for the fire.

On a straight read of Scripture, especially of Genesis, Jesus and Revelation, I think they have a lot more to worry about than they believe.

And that's where I come down on the matter of physically attacking abortionists. It ends up being the same "No" that the Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, Baptists, Mormons and others come down on: it's not authorized by God. But the reasoning is different. They think that's because the state is imbued with power to decide such things. I don't think God imbued states with the power to kill. The states cannot make abortion licit. It's murder. The problem is that you have to commit murder to prevent the murder, and God never authorized that. Jesus authorized apostles carrying swords to defend themselves as individuals from attacks, presumably from individuals. But against social evils such as war and abortion, Jesus left us with the swords of our mouths, and NOT the physical sword.

If we would kill an abortionist because he's a murderer, we had best remember the standard: Let he among you who is without sin, cast the first stone.

And we had best realize that the state is going to arrest us and cage us, and perhaps kill us for this crome of murder - that it IS murder under God's law (just as the abortion is). I don't see it justified Biblically. I do see that vengeance is reserved by God to himself alone. I think that men who murder others over abortion are arrogant. They have arrogated themselves the right to be judge, jury and executioner, because they have elevated an inchoate right of defense into an authorization for attacking others who are doing something bad.

Killing somebody is not the worst crime in the Bible. It's in the same league as serious sexual sin, lying and idolatry. Biblically, life goes on after death, so the dead baby has not been completely destroyed. God knows who did it, and God has said that murderers are thrown into the Lake of Fire. So no, WE are not authorized to kill abortionists. But yes, all abortionists, and all women who procure abortions, are going to fail judgment as murders and be thrown into the flames, unless God forgives them. THAT much is clear.

So, to answer the original question again: the baby about to be killed will go to God innocent and live happily ever after. The abortionist and the mother, and the nurse and the financier and the front office staff - everybody - they will descend into Gehenna where they will pay for their sins. They actual murderers: the abortion doctor and the mother, have committed a sin that cannot be paid, and that will get them cast into the lake of fire unless they stop, repent it, and cease to support such things. So, the baby lives, the doctor and the mother dies in the flames of hell.

And the bystander? God gave no clear directions. He can certainly intervene with words. If he intervenes with violence, the state will punish him. Whether God rewards or punishes him is up to God. The range of possible outcomes for him are from being rewarded as a faithful servant to being thrown into the lake of fire along with the woman and the abortionist, for "Vengeance is mine alone."

To get into the position to do anything about an abortion in progress, one must undertake several steps. Better be sure that one of them is being free of sin, for if you cast stones to murder while in your own sins, you're in trouble deep.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-02-08 10:05:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: kenh (#4)

He's asking about witnesses to an innocent's murder, not the executioner.

How would you separate the executioner from those who stand by and allow it to happen without interfering?

BobCeleste  posted on  2015-02-09 10:30:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 4.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com