Somebody has got to do something!

[Nadiine]

If they are an allegory, then YOU are an allegory.

Adam was the first man, created by God. Eve was created by God from Adam.

Christ died as a KINSMAN REDEEMER to ADAM!

I'm trying not to be disrespectful here but

yes and he might want to explain how he got that sin nature too....
since it comes by bloodline -
and it's life-blood that has to be shed to atone for sin. (life for life).

We inherited Adam's sin that he had to commit in order for us
to recieve it.
Sin isn't allegorical anymore than Adam & Eve were.
(and don't we all think that God HAD to start life with
REAL people)?

And who was God talking with in the Garden and why would
something allegorical use fig leaves to cover up body parts?
And who was tending the garden & the animals?


/s i g h

 

[Nadiine]

Obama won. Get over it. Calling him the anti-Christ isn't going to change anything, and it makes you look silly the longer he goes on NOT having actual horns and a forked tail. Feel free to say "I told you so" when he starts making everyone get 666 tattoos and leads an army of all the world to Megidoo, but until then, give it up.

If someone looks silly it might be you - becuz you just claimed I
called Obama the antichrist.

I said the world is being prepped to recieve the antichrist - [who comes
out of the global world union, not the USA.]
I don't give Obama the credit to be the antichrist, he's not
competent to pull it off as far as I'm concerned.

the point I was making was the PEOPLE are so blind and
obsessed that they won't see the coming leader's real identity
as it would fit from scripture. Look at Obama, worshipping a man
who had ZERO experience, ZERO credentials or anything significant
to be worthy of such homage.

They won't recognize what the antichrist is doing (agenda)

Obama the Antichrist? hardly

 

[LightHorseman]

If they are an allegory, then YOU are an allegory.

Adam was the first man, created by God. Eve was created by God from Adam. Adam MULTIPLIED via SEX between male and female Adam-kind.

Christ died as a KINSMAN REDEEMER to ADAM!

I'm trying not to be disrespectful here but

Unfortunately, all the available objective evidence suggests otherwise.

Species don't decend from only two individuals. Populations simply don't work that way.

Don't disagree with me, just tell me if Adam and or Eve where white, black, Asian, Polynesian, American Indian, or rainbow?

 

[LightHorseman]

If someone looks silly it might be you - becuz you just claimed I
called Obama the antichrist.

I said the world is being prepped to recieve the antichrist - [who comes
out of the global world union, not the USA.]
I don't give Obama the credit to be the antichrist, he's not
competent to pull it off as far as I'm concerned.

the point I was making was the PEOPLE are so blind and
obsessed that they won't see the coming leader's real identity
as it would fit from scripture. Look at Obama, worshipping a man
who had ZERO experience, ZERO credentials or anything significant
to be worthy of such homage.

They won't recognize what the antichrist is doing (agenda)

Obama the Antichrist? hardly

Well if the anti-Christ isn't in power yet, it seems a long bow to draw to claim that the end times are upon us, doesn't it?

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Unfortunately, all the available objective evidence suggests otherwise.

Species don't decend from only two individuals. Populations simply don't work that way.

Don't disagree with me, just tell me if Adam and or Eve where white, black, Asian, Polynesian, American Indian, or rainbow?

Obviously, within Adam is the DNA for all colors of people and bone structure. And YES, SPECIES do descend from two individuals which is why the ark was loaded in pairs.

 

[Nadiine]

Well if the anti-Christ isn't in power yet, it seems a long bow to draw to claim that the end times are upon us, doesn't it?

no it doesn't and I don't see how you come to this conclusion?

Those who believe the rapture doctrine/theory would claim that
a rapture occurs 7 years prior to a tribulation period (starting
in Rev. 4-5 when John is taken up into the heavens).
If we're gone 7 yrs prior to the start of the trib (let's say the trib starts in 8 years), it gives the antichrist several years before he comes forward...

If there were no rapture, it could be several years as well.
With the speed of all the events happening, it wouldn't take much
to push the world into global union, and from what I see, if it
happens w/ Obama in leadership, he'd make a hasty decision and
sign us over the next morning - just like he signed in a billion dollar
spending bill without even reading the thing.

Anything can happen to push the events quickly

 

[LightHorseman]

Obviously, within Adam is the DNA for all colors of people and bone structure.

The human genome project disagrees with you

And YES, SPECIES do descend from two individuals which is why the ark was loaded in pairs.

Um... the story of The Ark is as alegorical as Adam and Eve, sorry

 

[LightHorseman]

no it doesn't and I don't see how you come to this conclusion?

Those who believe the rapture doctrine/theory would claim that
a rapture occurs 7 years prior to a tribulation period (starting
in Rev. 4-5 when John is taken up into the heavens).
If we're gone 7 yrs prior to the start of the trib (let's say the trib starts in 8 years), it gives the antichrist several years before he comes forward...

If there were no rapture, it could be several years as well.
With the speed of all the events happening, it wouldn't take much
to push the world into global union, and from what I see, if it
happens w/ Obama in leadership, he'd make a hasty decision and
sign us over the next morning - just like he signed in a billion dollar
spending bill without even reading the thing.

Anything can happen to push the events quickly

So... the rapture happens and THEN the anti-Christ comes to power?

Well, when/if the Rapture happens, I think that would be a pretty good example of an unambiguous sign from God. So maybe we should hold off on all the apocalyptic hysteria until the Rapture happens?

 

[Polycarp1]

FOCUS. None of those men threw the Constitution out the window and intends to destroy this nation like the one we have now.

Oh, the President who threw the Constitution out the window left office on January 20. The man we have now is a good Christian from Chicago, who was born in Hawaii.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Unfortunately, all the available objective evidence suggests otherwise.

Species don't decend from only two individuals. Populations simply don't work that way.

Don't disagree with me, just tell me if Adam and or Eve where white, black, Asian, Polynesian, American Indian, or rainbow?

Obviously, they had the DNA of all skin types and bone structures within them.

The SPECIES we are discussing is HUMAN. Asian, polynesian, Indian, black, white all refer to skin color and bone structure but they are ALL of the HUMAN species.

Did you ever stop to consider that there are only a handful of "races"...black, white, Indian, Asian...and these are basically tribal, in nature? Asian could even be considered a type of Indian...which leaves only three "races" of one SPECIES. What if the three sons of Noah were of these three races. That would explain the resemblance of peoples which forms races.

All tribes are traced back to Noah and his sons who repopulated the earth after the flood. Apparently, white went North, Indian went East/South and black went South/West.

 

[LightHorseman]

Obviously, they had the DNA of all skin types and bone structures within them.

The SPECIES we are discussing is HUMAN. Asian, polynesian, Indian, black, white all refer to skin color and bone structure but they are ALL of the HUMAN species.

Asians don't have white people DNA, Black people don't have Indian DNA, hence the differences. So what you are suggesting means that Adam was some species other than human.

Did you ever stop to consider that there are only a handful of "races"...black, white, Indian, Asian...and these are basically tribal, in nature? Asian could even be considered a type of Indian...which leaves only three "races" of one SPECIES. What if the three sons of Noah were of these three races. That would explain the resemblance of peoples which forms races.

Yes, they are all one species... but it is a species with too much diversity to have been generated from only 2 individuals 4000 years ago.

If Noah and his wife were Semetic, then no, they couldn't have had a black, white, and Asian son.

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Asians don't have white people DNA, Black people don't have Indian DNA, hence the differences. So what you are suggesting means that Adam was some species other than human.

LOL! WHAT? Are you suggesting that black people and Indian people are not HUMAN?
Every HUMAN is human regardless of what color their skin is.

It's about dominant and recessive genes, LightHorseman. A man who is black and has sex with a black woman will have a very high chance of having a black child. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a recessive gene of another skin color in their DNA.

God could easily have controlled which gene was dominant in Noah's sons, thereby creating what we call races based on skin color and bone structure.

Yes, they are all one species... but it is a species with too much diversity to have been generated from only 2 individuals 4000 years ago.

If Noah and his wife were Semetic, then no, they couldn't have had a black, white, and Asian son.

I would dare suggest that each of us has a recessive gene of a different "race" in our DNA. For example, my great, great, great grandmother on my father's side was American Indian (Cherokee). My Dad has dark, black hair and tans easily but I'm so white I'm nearly transparent and burn easily. But there's a chance that my kids would have jet black hair if I inherited that recessive gene.

 

[LightHorseman]

LOL! WHAT? Are you suggesting that black people and Indian people are not HUMAN?
Every HUMAN is human regardless of what color their skin is.

Yes, every human is human regardless of skin colour... but if an organism had the genes for all the different skin colours in its genome, then that organism WOULDN'T be human, since humans simply don't have genes that work that way.

It's about dominant and recessive genes, LightHorseman. A man who is black and has sex with a black woman will have a very high chance of having a black child. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a recessive gene of another skin color in their DNA.

Um, except that racial traits are rarely if ever siomple dominant/recessive cases, they are all polygenic, as far as I know. However, even if we accepted for a moment that an apparently caucasion person could have all the necesary recessive genes to produce a homologous black child, that still fails to address the fact that there are more than 4 racial types identified, but your dominant recessive theory only allows for 4 possible race types, at least, thats if you insist on a generative pair as the only ancestors in recent history.

Human genetics doesn't work the way you are suggesting.

God could easily have controlled which gene was dominant in Noah's sons, thereby creating what we call races based on skin color and bone structure.

He could have, but didn't. Otherwise it would have been mentioned in the Bible, and there would be non-Biblical supporting evidence, right?

I would dare suggest that each of us has a recessive gene of a different "race" in our DNA. For example, my great, great, great grandmother on my father's side was American Indian (Cherokee). My Dad has dark, black hair and tans easily but I'm so white I'm nearly transparent and burn easily. But there's a chance that my kids would have jet black hair if I inherited that recessive gene.

Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. Please don't take my word for it, go an research genetics a little.

 

[Hentenza]

Knock yourself out...

• http://www.cbctrust.com/abortion.html

  Abortion in Law, History & Religionhttp://www.cbctrust.com/abortion.html

Website no longer available. Domain is for sale.

• http://ethics.acusd.edu/Applied/abortion/

  Abortion: Ethicshttp://ethics.acusd.edu/Applied/abortion/

Address not found. Attempted variations of the url name but no luck.

• http://www.garlikov.com/abortion.html

  The Abortion Debatehttp://www.garlikov.com/abortion.html

I did not purchased the booklet so I am not going to comment of its contents. Richard Garlikov is mostly known for his contributions to study methodologies and philosophy. He has written nothing regarding bible interpretation. His education according to his resume here does not include any reference to Theological studies. I can not consider him a biblical scholar.

• http://www.postfun.com/pfp/blasphemy.html

  Abortion Is Not a Sin from the site Adult
  [*]Christianityhttp://www.postfun.com/pfp/blasphemy.html
  [*]

This is an article written by Miss Poppy Dixon. Her biography is here. She has no formal Theological training and also can not be considered a scholar by any stretch of the imagination.

• http://liberalslikechrist.org/christianchoice/index.htm

  A Christian Choice from the site Liberals Like Christhttp://liberalslikechrist.org/christianchoice/index.htm

The article is written by a Rev. Raymond P. Dubuque for a website called Liberals for Christ. His biography is here (self biography). He has a resentment for the Catholic church evidenced by the website that he created called Catholic Arrogance and/or JesusWouldBeFurious. Hardly a unbiased "scholar".

Books:

• Birth Control in Jewish Law: Marital Relations, Contraception, and Abortion As Set Forth in the Classic Texts of Jewish Law
  • If you can't part with $40 for the above book, the section dealing with abortion is covered online at Perspectives in Judaism. http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/Cavalier/Forum/abortion/background/judaism1.html
  • That is part of a greater body of material on Religious Perspectives on Abortion

I did not purchase the book and I can't find any information on the author Davis Michael Feldman. The author of the book and the author of the article does not seem to be the same person since the authour of the article is a Rabbi by the name of Yitzchok (Lawrence) Feldman (link). The article that you linked by Rabbi Feldman does not address the interpretation of numbers 5.

• [URL="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/0252025504/realchangehomele"]A Brief, Liberal, Catholic Defense of Abortion

  : Catholic doctrine on ensoulment and abortion has not been the same down through history. [/URL]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/0252025504/realchangehomele

Both of these authors are Panentheists evidenced by their adherence to process theology and neoclassicism. Both are already starting from a pov outside of the logical arguments for the existence of God. I can not in good concience give any validity to the opinions of adherents to bipolar theology. It is simply not a logical stance. BTW- I have not read this book so I don't know if it discusses numbers 5.


Here are some of the more popular commentaries by well known scholars.

Matthew Henry

The water is called the bitter water, because it caused the curse. Thus sin is called an evil and a bitter thing. Let all that meddle with forbidden pleasures, know that they will be bitterness in the latter end. From the whole learn, 1. Secret sins are known to God, and sometimes are strangely brought to light in this life; and that there is a day coming when God will, by Christ, judge the secrets of men according to the gospel, romans 2:16. 2 In particular, Whoremongers and adulterers God will surely judge. Though we have not now the waters of jealousy, yet we have God's word, which ought to be as great a terror. Sensual lusts will end in bitterness.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on the Bible

John Gill

and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse; not that the water was bitter of itself, for it was the water out of the laver, and had nothing in it but the dust of the floor of the tabernacle; though some think some bitter thing was put into it, so Ben Gersom, as wormwood; but it is so called from the effects of it on those that were guilty; it produced sad effects in them, bitter and distressing, and made them appear to be accursed ones, for it was not bitter till it entered, Numbers 5:24; whereas it was not so to the innocent, nor attended with any such consequence to them; so that there was nothing in the water itself, but its efficacy was divine and supernatural.
John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

There are several other notable scholars that agree that bitter is symbolic with wicked and sin. Among these scholars is Dr. Norman Geisler in his volume 3 of Systematic Theology.

The verses do not refer to abortion but to the supernatural curse that the wicked sin of the woman would bring upon herself. The curse is one of becoming barren not to abort. This is evidenced by verse 28.

 

[LightHorseman]

The verses do not refer to abortion but to the supernatural curse that the wicked sin of the woman would bring upon herself. The curse is one of becoming barren not to abort. This is evidenced by verse 28.

Meh. You are welcome to which ever interpretation you prefer, of course. All I'd add is that purelky symbolic acts like making someone drink water that doesn't serve an actual purpose sounds awfully like idolatry to me, which the ancient Hebrews were kind of negative about.

But that said, would you like to explain how ripping out the children in the wombs of the women of Tipshah is "symbolic", rather than abortifactant?

 

[Hentenza]

Meh. You are welcome to which ever interpretation you prefer, of course. All I'd add is that purelky symbolic acts like making someone drink water that doesn't serve an actual purpose sounds awfully like idolatry to me, which the ancient Hebrews were kind of negative about.

Who said that the rite described in numbers 5 is symbolic? The verses uses symbolism but no where does it say that the actual cleansing of cheating women didn't happen. The Jews actually stopped performing that rite after the destruction of the temple in 70ad.

But that said, would you like to explain how ripping out the children in the wombs of the women of Tipshah is "symbolic", rather than abortifactant?

LOL!!!! That Manahem was one bad dude. Of course, if you just read a few more verses you would have known that the scriptures describe him as "doing evil" in the eyes of the Lord. This one doesn't help your cause one bit.

 

[LightHorseman]

Who said that the rite described in numbers 5 is symbolic? The verses uses symbolism but no where does it say that the actual cleansing of cheating women didn't happen. The Jews actually stopped performing that rite after the destruction of the temple in 70ad.

So which is it? Is it a symbolic cleansing, or an actual cleansing (i.e. an abortion)?

LOL!!!! That Manahem was one bad dude. Of course, if you just read a few more verses you would have known that the scriptures describe him as "doing evil" in the eyes of the Lord. This one doesn't help your cause one bit.

Would you like to address any of the several other examples where God or his representatives unambiguously order the slaying of pregnant women and thus their unborn children? Shall I list them for you?

 

[HisdaughterJen]

Yes, every human is human regardless of skin colour... but if an organism had the genes for all the different skin colours in its genome, then that organism WOULDN'T be human, since humans simply don't have genes that work that way.Um, except that racial traits are rarely if ever siomple dominant/recessive cases, they are all polygenic, as far as I know. However, even if we accepted for a moment that an apparently caucasion person could have all the necesary recessive genes to produce a homologous black child, that still fails to address the fact that there are more than 4 racial types identified, but your dominant recessive theory only allows for 4 possible race types, at least, thats if you insist on a generative pair as the only ancestors in recent history.

Human genetics doesn't work the way you are suggesting.He could have, but didn't. Otherwise it would have been mentioned in the Bible, and there would be non-Biblical supporting evidence, right?Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. Please don't take my word for it, go an research genetics a little.

Wait...what is your ultimate point?

Obviously, Adam and Eve had the genetic material to make people of all races or there wouldn't be people of all races!

OOOHHHH....wait a second...are you a follower of that Shepherd's Chapel guy who teaches that anyone who isn't white isn't human?...and that the animals on the ark were different races of people?

If so, this is your wake up call.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Well, I can certainly agree with that. Homosexuality is certainly an ancient sin but abortion is fairly recent, isn't it? Maybe I'm wrong.

Abortion has existed as long as pregnancy has.

 

[manchambo]

How many religions existed at the time of Adam & Eve when God
was with them directly in the garden?
How many religions & spiritist worldviews exist today?

That isn't escalation?


unless you're an infant in the womb....
or a Christian in other hostile countries (wanna check the stats on
Christian persecution around the world that is higher today
than all the past combined?) -

Safety doesn't negate increase of violence does it? MANY countries
are not "safe" for alot of people residing within them.
Ask the Chinese, ask the North Koreans, ask Iranians, Ask Afghanistani's
how "safe" things are. There are many more to add too - ask our military.


sorry, we are NOT the largest religion on earth.
The minute they introduce actual DOCTRINE into the mix of these
lame polls, they fall off the charts into nonChristianity.
But.... I doubt you'll agree with the traditional definition of Christianity
right?
MANY don't today, and I claim that's part of the deception prophecy.


What's to predict that already hasn't been predicted by Christian
teachers/leaders?
All you're going to see is more of the same at escalated rates.

The world is being prepped to recieve the antichrist - after seeing
the worship of Obama, a man who had ZERO political clout and
hadn't done ANYTHING to remotely be deserving of such homage,
we just saw how the antichrist will be welcomed by an adoring
world without having a clue.

People today lack discernment (this has come about from embracing
subjectivism/relativism - refusing absolutes.
Once the absolutes are discarded, they're open for the lie.
They seek temporary pleasure and will do anything and compromise anything to be satiated in their materialism.

You can't possibly believe the part about Christians being persecuted more now than in the past, can you? Leaving aside any other historical persecution, the Bible tells us an awful lot about real persecution--stuff about Rome, arenas, lions, etc. Where is anything like that happening now?