Leaving ELCA

[seajoy]

No I'm sorry you are offended by my signature. I don't view abortion is "murdering" a "baby". That's sensationalist. But that has nothing to do with the OP's topic at hand so I will not discuss it here with you.

Just dusting off my sandals - I won't be discussing this with you either.

 

[Protoevangel]

Just dusting off my sandals - I won't be discussing this with you either.

Good for you Seajoy! The signature is demonic.

 

[lux et lex]

Demonic? Wow....

But back to leaving the ELCA...I'm still disappointed people are doing it even though I understand. For now, I'll squarely stand with the ELCA, even though what used to be my home church will not.

 

[Edial]

...
But back to leaving the ELCA...I'm still disappointed people are doing it even though I understand. For now, I'll squarely stand with the ELCA, even though what used to be my home church will not.

Well, people choose that what is close to their liking.
It is hard to go against own likes and dislikes.

Everyone is owned by own likes and dislikes to one degree or another.
It is how we handle those once there is a conflict with the Bible.

When I was a new believer I had a number of conflicts with the Bible. But since I believed the Bible more than I believed myself, my mind began changing towards following the Scriptures.
And I started following it ... but not blindly, but in faith.

I was also fortunate to come from an atheist background ... so my mind was not cluttered with teachings of theologians, opinions about the Bible, denominations and so forth.

I just believed the Book is true in what it teaches.
And now, after years of practice, I know the Book is true.

I found that in the long run it is MUCH easier following that same-old-Book than my own understanding of what is right and what is wrong.

Am I judging you?
Heck no.

Just sharing what works.

Welcome to TCL.

In Christ,
Ed

 

[TheCosmicGospel]

It would have been easier to want to get to know you as a person instead of an issue. But the issue is offensive to most conservative Christians. So who you are I guess is not that important for you to drop the tag. We will never know. Our loss, I know.

Have a nice day in the ELCA.

 

[LutheranMafia]

I view this to be about as morally compelling as vegetarianism. It's like eco-terrorism, it just doesn't hold water. The soul doesn't enter the body of a fetus that has no brain and is indistinguishable from a chicken at the same age. If it is a sin then killing chickens must be a sin too. You couldn't tell the difference if you saw them side by side.

As to hate and compassion, the proof is in the putting, public child-care services for living children are almost non-existent in the red states where abortion would be illegal if they could make it so, but in the blue states which keep abortion legal, child care services are abounding. I think it says just as much about how you deal with the living, and what the conservative red states have to say is that children don't really matter.

Conservatives just don't think about the consequences to young people. I know first hand, my birth destroyed both my parents lives. They were WAY to young to have a child and I ended up being raised by my grandparents. But of the three of us, it was by far the hardest on me. I feel that if I had been abort I simply would have incarnated somewhere else, no big deal, God can't be thwarted. This whole notion that God can be thwarted and a child fail to enter this world at God's command seems lacking in faith to me. God cannot be thwarted, if He deems someone is getting in that child will get in no matter what. With abortion, the odds increase that that child will be born to a loving home that really wants a child. The alternative is an ugly reality that people around here aren't interested in hearing about.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I view this to be about as morally compelling as vegetarianism. It's like eco-terrorism, it just doesn't hold water. The soul doesn't enter the body of a fetus that has no brain and is indistinguishable from a chicken at the same age. If it is a sin then killing chickens must be a sin too. You couldn't tell the difference if you saw them side by side.

As to hate and compassion, the proof is in the putting, public child-care services for living children are almost non-existent in the red states where abortion would be illegal if they could make it so, but in the blue states which keep abortion legal, child care services are abounding. I think it says just as much about how you deal with the living, and what the conservative red states have to say is that children don't really matter.

Conservatives just don't think about the consequences to young people. I know first hand, my birth destroyed both my parents lives. They were WAY to young to have a child and I ended up being raised by my grandparents. But of the three of us, it was by far the hardest on me. I feel that if I had been abort I simply would have incarnated somewhere else, no big deal, God can't be thwarted. This whole notion that God can be thwarted and a child fail to enter this world at God's command seems lacking in faith to me. God cannot be thwarted, if He deems someone is getting in that child will get in no matter what. With abortion, the odds increase that that child will be born to a loving home that really wants a child. The alternative is an ugly reality that people around here aren't interested in hearing about.

Abortion simply guarantees that the child won't be born at all. In your case, the responsible thing your parents should've done is give you up for adoption.

You really need to speak with your pastor if you think that unborn (aborted) fetuses go on to be live infants elsewhere.

 

[DaRev]

The soul doesn't enter the body of a fetus that has no brain and is indistinguishable from a chicken at the same age.

And you know this because...

 

[lux et lex]

As to hate and compassion, the proof is in the putting, public child-care services for living children are almost non-existent in the red states where abortion would be illegal if they could make it so, but in the blue states which keep abortion legal, child care services are abounding. I think it says just as much about how you deal with the living, and what the conservative red states have to say is that children don't really matter.

QFT.

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

I view this to be about as morally compelling as vegetarianism. It's like eco-terrorism, it just doesn't hold water. The soul doesn't enter the body of a fetus that has no brain and is indistinguishable from a chicken at the same age. If it is a sin then killing chickens must be a sin too. You couldn't tell the difference if you saw them side by side.

As to hate and compassion, the proof is in the putting, public child-care services for living children are almost non-existent in the red states where abortion would be illegal if they could make it so, but in the blue states which keep abortion legal, child care services are abounding. I think it says just as much about how you deal with the living, and what the conservative red states have to say is that children don't really matter.

Conservatives just don't think about the consequences to young people. I know first hand, my birth destroyed both my parents lives. They were WAY to young to have a child and I ended up being raised by my grandparents. But of the three of us, it was by far the hardest on me. I feel that if I had been abort I simply would have incarnated somewhere else, no big deal, God can't be thwarted. This whole notion that God can be thwarted and a child fail to enter this world at God's command seems lacking in faith to me. God cannot be thwarted, if He deems someone is getting in that child will get in no matter what. With abortion, the odds increase that that child will be born to a loving home that really wants a child. The alternative is an ugly reality that people around here aren't interested in hearing about.

I love when people turn everything into conservative vs liberal. I am ridiculously moderate and yet I still follow what both the confessions and the Bible say about the unborn. But when you are in a denomination that can just vote about what you want the scriptures to say....

 

[Flipper]

Prayers that you go wherever God leads you, Ed.

 

[LutheranMafia]

And you know this because...

Which part, about the soul entering the body or about a human embryo being indistinguishable from a chicken embryo at up to 2 months?

I think the problem is conflating the body with the soul and spirit. The body is not the soul or spirit. The body does not survive death, but the soul and spirit do. A soul bearing spirit can't enter the body of an undeveloped embryo anymore than it can enter the body of a fish. But if you conflate the body with the soul then you can make all sorts of suppositions that are not in any way supported by the Bible. It is just sloppy theology.

It is the same issue with evolution, there came a point when our ancestors acquired souls, but even just 3,000 years ago in the OT and in Homer's epic our ancestors were still acting like savage animals. But gradually more and more people started acting civilized rather than like human animals, i.e. they acquired souls. People with souls act civilized and people without do not. Just as there came a point when our ancestors clearly started acquiring more souls and being less animal-like and subhuman, there comes a time when a fetus acquires a soul.

So I think that irrational attitudes about both abortion and evolution are intimately linked. It is all based on sloppy theology, the body is not the soul, they are very different things. To conflate one with the other leads to all sorts of erroneous beliefs.

 

[AngelusSax]

But when you are in a denomination that can just vote about what you want the scriptures to say....

You mean like the church in Acts where 613 laws became only 4 that needed followed by Gentile converts to Christianity (not even the 10 Commandments, according to what Scripture actually says they decreed should be followed)?

Now, LM... what the... I can't even ask a proper question, so I'll just say that just because people don't act like we think they should act (civilized or "uncivilized"), doesn't mean they are soulless. And a human fetus has human chromosomes, a chicken fetus has chicken chromosomes (genes, etc.). Just because they look alike to the naked eye doesn't mean they actually are alike.

I fully believe life begins at conception. While some unborn children die naturally (miscarriages), that is not in and of itself a justification for abortion, to me (just to proactively tackle that argument). God gets to be God, and if in His Wisdom some should be allowed to die through miscarriage, then much as I don't personally like it, I must let God be God. But a doctor, a mother, or even a father pushing for abortion (or for life, for that matter), are not and should not be God.

Just my 2 cents, felt the need to share. (I may appear as a "flaming liberal heretic bound for hell" or some other combination of words using "flaming liberal heretic" to some, but on this issue I am about as "conservative" as can be--and I support child care services.)

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

I fully believe life begins at conception. While some unborn children die naturally (miscarriages), that is not in and of itself a justification for abortion, to me (just to proactively tackle that argument). God gets to be God, and if in His Wisdom some should be allowed to die through miscarriage, then much as I don't personally like it, I must let God be God. But a doctor, a mother, or even a father pushing for abortion (or for life, for that matter), are not and should not be God.

 

[DaRev]

Which part, about the soul entering the body

Yes. You know this beacuse...

or about a human embryo being indistinguishable from a chicken embryo at up to 2 months?

You don't know much about human development, do you? A human embryo has hands and feet at 6 to 8 weeks. I've never seen a chicken with hands or human feet.

I think the problem is conflating the body with the soul and spirit. The body is not the soul or spirit. The body does not survive death, but the soul and spirit do. A soul bearing spirit can't enter the body of an undeveloped embryo anymore than it can enter the body of a fish. But if you conflate the body with the soul then you can make all sorts of suppositions that are not in any way supported by the Bible. It is just sloppy theology.

It is the same issue with evolution, there came a point when our ancestors acquired souls, but even just 3,000 years ago in the OT and in Homer's epic our ancestors were still acting like savage animals. But gradually more and more people started acting civilized rather than like human animals, i.e. they acquired souls. People with souls act civilized and people without do not. Just as there came a point when our ancestors clearly started acquiring more souls and being less animal-like and subhuman, there comes a time when a fetus acquires a soul.

So I think that irrational attitudes about both abortion and evolution are intimately linked. It is all based on sloppy theology, the body is not the soul, they are very different things. To conflate one with the other leads to all sorts of erroneous beliefs.

Your whole argument is sloppy theology. It has no basis in Scripture or basic Christian teachings whatsoever.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

...Your whole argument is sloppy theology. It has no basis in Scripture or basic Christian teachings whatsoever.

QFT.

I'm not even sure we can say "sloppy theology". I don't think it's theology, PERIOD.

 

[LutheranMafia]

You don't know much about human development, do you? A human embryo has hands and feet at 6 to 8 weeks. I've never seen a chicken with hands or human feet.

At 6 weeks the arms and legs are still just "buds". Fetal development: The first trimester - MayoClinic.com

By 8 weeks the fingers are starting to form, but it is almost impossible to see on an ultrasound What your baby looks like -- 8 Weeks | BabyCenter. At 8 weeks the lower torso hasn't straighten yet and the head is still misshapen, so it still looks likes largely the same as a chicken embryo at the same stage.

Your whole argument is sloppy theology. It has no basis in Scripture or basic Christian teachings whatsoever.

What are the basic Christian teachings on this subject? I don't see much of anything in the Bible that clearly addresses this issue.

The majority of Protestants are pro-choice, as are 70% of Republicans. The majority of "main line" Protestant churches are pro-choice and the only countries I know of that have ever banned abortion are Catholic, not Protestant. So it hardly seems like a clear cut issue to me. Most Protestants disagree with you on this subject. This is not because the Bible has a clear message on the issue, it has a very ambiguous message.

The word nephesh is translated two thirds of the time as soul, one third of the time as spirit, and then there are 40 or 50 of the 750 occurances that are translated as everything from perfume to dead body. In Genesis even fish are said to have nephesh. Nephesh is not much like the clear cut distinction between soul and spirit that is put forward in the New Testament. Once the line between soul and spirit is blurred, I think it is easy to blurr the line between body and spirit, which I think is the crux of the problem here.

 

[Protoevangel]

QFT.

I'm not even sure we can say "sloppy theology". I don't think it's theology, PERIOD.

Indeed, 2 Timothy 3:13 comes to mind.

 

[LutheranMafia]

Now, LM... what the... I can't even ask a proper question, so I'll just say that just because people don't act like we think they should act (civilized or "uncivilized"), doesn't mean they are soulless.

In Homer's epic, either Hercules' son or Odysseus himself kills Hector's baby (there are two surviving versions of the ending of the Iliad). Even the heros of the epic are savage beasts that do things that modern civilized people could never even dream of doing.

It is an unthought out assumption inherent in belief in evolution that at some point in the past our ancestors evolved a physical form and social culture suitable for embodying souls, and that before that they were too primitive to have what it takes to embody a soul. If you go back far enough our ancestors were only fish, and clearly fish don't have souls like we do. If you think it through, you either have to believe this or doubt entirely the theory of evolution.

And a human fetus has human chromosomes, a chicken fetus has chicken chromosomes (genes, etc.). Just because they look alike to the naked eye doesn't mean they actually are alike.

Chromosomes do not dictate the presence of a soul bearing spirit. Only the development of the fetus into a being that has a brain and nervous system does, in my opinion.

I fully believe life begins at conception.

A fish's life begins at conception too. Life is not the issue, the presence of a soul is the issue here. People on both sides of the issue just gloss over this central issue, such that things are rarely said on either side that I find compelling.

 

[lux et lex]

What are the basic Christian teachings on this subject? I don't see much of anything in the Bible that clearly addresses this issue.

You're Bible is missing the 11th commandment too? Thou Shalt Not Abort? Or is the 12th...with the 11th being Thou Shalt Not Be Gay...I get those two confused. Anyway...

Really, the Bible never mentions abortion and does not deal with the question of when life begins. Genesis 2:7 (God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living being") refers to the specific, unique event of the creation of Adam out of the earth. It says nothing about the process of conception, pregnancy, and birth. The Book of Exodus clearly indicates that the fetus does not have the same legal status as a person (Chapter 21:22-23).