If I was aborted, would I have gone to heaven?

[Non sequitur]

Souls are not created (something from nothing); they are made (something from something).

All bodies come from one flesh. All souls come from one spirit.
That is a "split" in the sense that one individual person is x% of humanity.
God makes it clear that He considers all humanity to be present "in Adam".

So yes, I do like your term "split"; however, the process can equally be described as a growth.

And when a chimerical embryo is formed, did the souls merge?

 

[bricklayer]

And when a chimerical embryo is formed, did the souls merge?

"Merge", no. No spiritual "merging" apart from the body of Christ, the in-grafting to Israel, the Trinity fellowship.

 

[Non sequitur]

"Merge", no. No spiritual "merging" apart from the body of Christ, the in-grafting to Israel, the Trinity fellowship.

So what happened to the other soul?

 

[bricklayer]

So what happened to the other soul?

Apart from being regenerated, a soul remains dead.

 

[GrayAngel]

Come on, people. The Bible doesn't say that anything going on with embryos has anything to do with the formation of the soul. A body is a body, and a soul is a soul.

God creates the soul. We don't know exactly when it happens or how, but it's not a physical event. Some say that a fetus obtains a soul when it starts moving. Others say it's after birth, just after their first breath. Neither one of these positions are Biblically supported.

 

[Buy Bologna]

For those saying the murderer/aborter goes to Hell, Forget about me. For me to worry about me going to hell over taking a chance over my daughters eternal torment would be selfish.

However, wouldn't that be the ultimate sacrifice, for me to burn forever to assure that my daughter goes to heaven? (Assuming i can't realize my mistake after the fact and be saved)

 

[cXXo]

For those saying the murderer/aborter goes to Hell, Forget about me. For me to worry about me going to hell over taking a chance over my daughters eternal torment would be selfish.

However, wouldn't that be the ultimate sacrifice, for me to burn forever to assure that my daughter goes to heaven? (Assuming i can't realize my mistake after the fact and be saved)

No, it would be an act of ultimate stupidity. You don't know your daughter, why should you care for her? Like I said, you will miss out on having a daughter and burn in hell while a stranger goes to heaven. On the other hand, you could work hard to raise her well and enjoy having a daughter then go to heaven together.

 

[Buy Bologna]

No, it would be an act of ultimate stupidity. You don't know your daughter, why should you care for her? Like I said, you will miss out on having a daughter and burn in hell while a stranger goes to heaven. On the other hand, you could work hard to raise her well and enjoy having a daughter then go to heaven together.

Ultimate stupidity is stoning your child to death for disobedience. The same god you worship at one time condoned this.

The same book giving you your outline of heaven.

 

[GrayAngel]

Ultimate stupidity is stoning your child to death for disobedience. The same god you worship at one time condoned this.

The same book giving you your outline of heaven.

1. They were not children in your connotation of the word. They were old enough to make their own decisions, and it was accepted for specific reasons, and as a last resort.

2. All sin is punishable by death. You're just lucky God isn't quick to strike you dead every time you slander Him. He's very patient.

3. Such laws would rarely ever be enforced. Parents don't usually like the idea of having their children killed. Although, at one point, they did regularly perform child (infant) sacrifices to Baal--which, by the way, God was not too happy about.

4. Contrary to popular opinion, the "God of the Old Testament" was merciful, just like He was in the New Testament:

Hosea 6:6 - For I desire mercy, not sacrifice,
and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.

 

[ranunculus]

No, it would be an act of ultimate stupidity. You don't know your daughter, why should you care for her? Like I said, you will miss out on having a daughter and burn in hell while a stranger goes to heaven. On the other hand, you could work hard to raise her well and enjoy having a daughter then go to heaven together.

Love, bravery and stupidity aren't mutually exclusive. How would you characterize the actions of a soldier who jumps on a hand grenade to save his fellow soldiers?
Like i said earlier, you won't burn in hell if you're a christian and repent and thus get saved. On the other hand, a simple thought crime like "I don't believe god exists" is enough to send anyone to hell.

 

[ranunculus]

1. They were not children in your connotation of the word.

They were still human beings.

They were old enough to make their own decisions, and it was accepted for specific reasons, and as a last resort.

Yes the specific reason was, if they were unruly, you'd be justified in killing them. It doesn't matter if nobody actually did it. The fact that hardly anyone did it doesn't suddenly make the rule moral.

2. All sin is punishable by death. You're just lucky God isn't quick to strike you dead every time you slander Him. He's very patient.

Yes lucky to have such a caring ethereal father, who loves me so much that he's not electrocuting me with lightning bolts everytime I use my reasoning mind to figure out a universe in which god has obscured himself from our reasoning minds.

3. Such laws would rarely ever be enforced.

How does that make the rule moral? That fact that you're here struggling to make it seem like nobody ever followed it shows that you also think it's an immoral law.

Parents don't usually like the idea of having their children killed.

No but if they did kill their children, adult or not, for being unruly god wouldn't have a problem with it.

Although, at one point, they did regularly perform child (infant) sacrifices to Baal--which, by the way, God was not too happy about.

A little sibling rivalry perhaps.

4. Contrary to popular opinion, the "God of the Old Testament" was merciful, just like He was in the New Testament:

Hosea 6:6 - For I desire mercy, not sacrifice,
and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.

He supposedly killed the entire planet's population apart from 8 people, even the animals, and that's your idea of merciful?
God can't be both merciful and just. Since mercy is a suspension of justice.

 

[GrayAngel]

They were still human beings.

Yes. So are the criminals we put on death row. Many of the worst plagues on the earth were human beings.

Yes the specific reason was, if they were unruly, you'd be justified in killing them. It doesn't matter if nobody actually did it. The fact that hardly anyone did it doesn't suddenly make the rule moral.

They were trouble-makers and drunkards, who didn't respond to any form of discipline. And the elders had to be in agreement.

Yes lucky to have such a caring ethereal father, who loves me so much that he's not electrocuting me with lightning bolts everytime I use my reasoning mind to figure out a universe in which god has obscured himself from our reasoning minds.

Dodging. If you're going to say that God's commandments are immoral, you're first going to have to convince me that God has no rights to our lives, being the one who gave us life. You'll also have to convince me that humans are not deserving of God's wrath, which would be quite an impossible task. Every time I'm cut off in traffic, I'm reminded of how selfish and stupid the human race is. We most definitely are not basically good.

How does that make the rule moral? That fact that you're here struggling to make it seem like nobody ever followed it shows that you also think it's an immoral law.

I'm not struggling to do anything. It's a fact. Just like a cop might let you off without a ticket, even though you deserve it, a parent could choose to look the other way. This is the natural (ie God-given) response, to preserve one's children.

A little sibling rivalry perhaps.

It was the sacrifice itself that God was displeased with, not his jealousy over Baal. God never approved of human sacrifice.

He supposedly killed the entire planet's population apart from 8 people, even the animals, and that's your idea of merciful?
God can't be both merciful and just. Since mercy is a suspension of justice.

It is very possible to have both mercy and justice. God's mercy and patience is His default position. Rarely does He ever strike people dead, and when He does, He usually gives them a strong warning first. It was because of Jonah's knowledge of God's mercy that he didn't want to deliver God's message to Nineveh. He knew that if he did, the city would repent, and God would hold back His anger. Who is more merciful, God or Jonah?

Jonah 4:10-11 - But the LORD said, “You have been concerned about this plant, though you did not tend it or make it grow. It sprang up overnight and died overnight. And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?”

No judge can be merciful in every offense, however. If he did, he'd be useless. God will not let any evil deed go unpunished. But in His love, He provided a way so that we wouldn't have to be the ones to take the hit.

 

[ranunculus]

Yes. So are the criminals we put on death row. Many of the worst plagues on the earth were human beings.

There are no people on death row for being 'unruly' or disobedient. Well, maybe in China.

They were trouble-makers and drunkards, who didn't respond to any form of discipline. And the elders had to be in agreement.

There are alcoholics in my family, can their elders decide whether they should be stoned to death?

Dodging. If you're going to say that God's commandments are immoral, you're first going to have to convince me that God has no rights to our lives, being the one who gave us life. You'll also have to convince me that humans are not deserving of God's wrath, which would be quite an impossible task. Every time I'm cut off in traffic, I'm reminded of how selfish and stupid the human race is. We most definitely are not basically good.

Yes I'm saying he doesn't have any right to judge us. Your argument is god is god therefore he gets to judge us. Might makes right. That's no different that saying that the dictator has every right to send you to a death camp because he's the dictator.
If person A deserves to get tortured forever because they couldn't believe in a deity for which there exists no evidence, while person B can rape and kill and get saved later on, that's not justice. There's no judgement going on. There's no assessment of your life. There's a distinction made based upon "did you believe this thing for which there is no evidence". "Did you take this one true belief on faith among all the other false beliefs that are also taken on faith?" God rewards the credulous and ignorant.
Can I decide to torture my child forever if it tells me it doesn't love me, just because I created it? Does might make right? How is that different from a mafia boss or a dictator?

I'm not struggling to do anything. It's a fact. Just like a cop might let you off without a ticket, even though you deserve it, a parent could choose to look the other way. This is the natural (ie God-given) response, to preserve one's children.

Your defense was that it was rarely enforced. If you really thought it was a morally correct law, you wouldn't care how many times it was enforced. Instead you fall back on saying "Oh, but people didn't really do that."

It was the sacrifice itself that God was displeased with, not his jealousy over Baal. God never approved of human sacrifice.

I can recall the story of jephthah's daughter. Judges 11:30-31 . Jephthah sacrifices her as a burnt offering.

It is very possible to have both mercy and justice. God's mercy and patience is His default position. Rarely does He ever strike people dead, and when He does, He usually gives them a strong warning first. It was because of Jonah's knowledge of God's mercy that he didn't want to deliver God's message to Nineveh. He knew that if he did, the city would repent, and God would hold back His anger. Who is more merciful, God or Jonah?

Jonah 4:10-11 - But the LORD said, “You have been concerned about this plant, though you did not tend it or make it grow. It sprang up overnight and died overnight. And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?”

No judge can be merciful in every offense, however. If he did, he'd be useless. God will not let any evil deed go unpunished. But in His love, He provided a way so that we wouldn't have to be the ones to take the hit.

First Christianity establishes rules that are impossible to follow. And then it gives you a loophole by which you no longer have to face the consequences for breaking those rules. And it has nothing to do with how morally you act, It has to do with taking a specific belief on faith. And if you do, you no longer have to suffer punishment for anything. But if you don't,......

That's not justice and why should I care if anyone can conceive that it is?

 

[GrayAngel]

There are no people on death row for being 'unruly' or disobedient. Well, maybe in China.

Your argument was that they're human, therefore they shouldn't be killed. At least that was the inferred argument.

There are alcoholics in my family, can their elders decide whether they should be stoned to death?

The law doesn't apply to our society, so obviously not. However, if your relatives existed when the words were written, they could be killed if you could convince their parents and the third-party elders to agree to it. This isn't likely to happen unless they were causing some serious trouble. If they were violent when they were drunk, for example, regularly threatening people's safety, then these people might consider having them purged.

What else would they do? Throw them in prison? I don't know if the Jews had prisons, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

Yes I'm saying he doesn't have any right to judge us. Your argument is god is god therefore he gets to judge us. Might makes right. That's no different that saying that the dictator has every right to send you to a death camp because he's the dictator.
If person A deserves to get tortured forever because they couldn't believe in a deity for which there exists no evidence, while person B can rape and kill and get saved later on, that's not justice. There's no judgement going on. There's no assessment of your life. There's a distinction made based upon "did you believe this thing for which there is no evidence". "Did you take this one true belief on faith among all the other false beliefs that are also taken on faith?" God rewards the credulous and ignorant.
Can I decide to torture my child forever if it tells me it doesn't love me, just because I created it? Does might make right? How is that different from a mafia boss or a dictator?

You're putting words in my mouth, setting up a straw man, and making a false analogy.

God's right to judge is not because He is most powerful. Might makes right is not a Biblical concept. God has a right to judge for the same reason our nation's judges have the right. They have authority. We also just happen to be God's creation, designed and sustained by Him.

You want to talk about Hell now? Okay, I guess we're off topic already, anyway.

Contrary to popular opinion, we are not all God's children. That's a right that comes through adoption in Christ.

There is a lot we don't know about Hell. One of the things we do know is that the afterlife here is worse for some than it is for others. We will be judged based on our actions, even the saved. Punishment will be divided fairly based on the severity of one's offenses.

Also, our idea of Hell has sort of evolved through the ages. It's not this place filled with red demons carrying pitch forks. Originally, we only had one word referring to the afterlife, which translates to "grave." While in the grave, you're either accepted by God to live with Him, or you're left outside. Heaven and Hell do not seem to be completely separate, but again, we don't know much for certain.

Your defense was that it was rarely enforced. If you really thought it was a morally correct law, you wouldn't care how many times it was enforced. Instead you fall back on saying "Oh, but people didn't really do that."

No, that is not what I was saying. The punishment would be deserved, if the accused were really guilty to such an extent that their parents would consider having them killed. However, this deserved sentence would likely go unenforced in most cases. Mercy still has it's place in the law.

I can recall the story of jephthah's daughter. Judges 11:30-31 . Jephthah sacrifices her as a burnt offering.

Somehow I knew you would bring that up. The story of Jephthah was a story of one man's stupidity and bad judgement. God did not ask Jephthah to do anything. It was Jephthah's idea make an unbreakable vow to sacrifice the first person to meet him after the battle.

God did not even threaten Jephthah that He would punish him if he didn't do as he promised. However, Jephthah did it anyway. What's really remarkable about this story, however, is his daughter's response. She didn't try to argue to save her life, but she told her father that he should keep his promise, and she became a willing sacrifice.

This is a very different story than with the worshipers of Baal, who gave their infants as unwilling sacrifices to be burned to please the god. God would be offended if such a sacrifice were offered in His name. Even within the realm of animal sacrifice, there were some things He considered too cruel. And, you know, God values human life much more than he does animal life.

First Christianity establishes rules that are impossible to follow. And then it gives you a loophole by which you no longer have to face the consequences for breaking those rules. And it has nothing to do with how morally you act, It has to do with taking a specific belief on faith. And if you do, you no longer have to suffer punishment for anything. But if you don't,......

That's not justice and why should I care if anyone can conceive that it is?

Christianity didn't establish many rules, if any. They carried over some of the laws that the Jews followed, being originally a Jewish sect. But there were many that were removed when the New Covenant was put in place, such as the laws that declared some foods unclean (unhealthy foods, by the way).

Also, if you couldn't follow the rules perfectly, that's the point. The point of the law is not to keep you safe from judgement, but it's to show you all of the ways you are imperfect.

As for justice, read what I said about Hell earlier. God judges according to one's deeds, and this applies to Christians as well as the unsaved. Christians avoid punishment because Jesus had paid the price for them, but their rewards are based on their service. If you're a Christian and you don't serve, you won't get in at all.

Sounds like justice to me.

 

[ranunculus]

Your argument was that they're human, therefore they shouldn't be killed. At least that was the inferred argument.

My argument is that no human beings deserves to be stoned to death for being unruly, whether they are mentally ill or criminally insane. But I guess well have to disagree on that one.

The law doesn't apply to our society, so obviously not. However, if your relatives existed when the words were written, they could be killed if you could convince their parents and the third-party elders to agree to it. This isn't likely to happen unless they were causing some serious trouble. If they were violent when they were drunk, for example, regularly threatening people's safety, then these people might consider having them purged.

What else would they do? Throw them in prison? I don't know if the Jews had prisons, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

No you're right, they didn't have prisons. So the best solution god could come up with was to stone them to death?

You're putting words in my mouth, setting up a straw man, and making a false analogy.

God's right to judge is not because He is most powerful. Might makes right is not a Biblical concept. God has a right to judge for the same reason our nation's judges have the right. They have authority. We also just happen to be God's creation, designed and sustained by Him.

This is a weak metaphor for the following reasons. God's authority is self granted because he is the creator. A judge has authority because that authority was collectively granted by the people he judges. God's authority is self-derived, unalterable and undeniable, and he is the most powerful. A judge's authority, on the other hand, is subject to interpretation, defiance, rejection, and even reversal or removal should the external source of his authority rescind it.

From a previous post:

If you're going to say that God's commandments are immoral, you're first going to have to convince me that God has no rights to our lives, being the one who gave us life.

What you're saying here is because god put you into this world, he can take you out. I don't accept that.

You want to talk about Hell now? Okay, I guess we're off topic already, anyway.

Contrary to popular opinion, we are not all God's children. That's a right that comes through adoption in Christ.

There is a lot we don't know about Hell. One of the things we do know is that the afterlife here is worse for some than it is for others. We will be judged based on our actions, even the saved. Punishment will be divided fairly based on the severity of one's offenses.

Also, our idea of Hell has sort of evolved through the ages. It's not this place filled with red demons carrying pitch forks. Originally, we only had one word referring to the afterlife, which translates to "grave." While in the grave, you're either accepted by God to live with Him, or you're left outside. Heaven and Hell do not seem to be completely separate, but again, we don't know much for certain.

What's the punishment for the rapist who get's saved? What's the punishment for the hindu boy who didn't accept jesus as his saviour?

No, that is not what I was saying. The punishment would be deserved, if the accused were really guilty to such an extent that their parents would consider having them killed. However, this deserved sentence would likely go unenforced in most cases. Mercy still has it's place in the law.

So what's the point of having the law if it's likely to go unenforced? How is that going to solve the problems of the person with Tourettes or the person suffering from alcohol addiction and people around them?
Can you think of any crime fitting the definition of unruly that would convince you that a hail of rocks to the head is the best course for justice?

Somehow I knew you would bring that up. The story of Jephthah was a story of one man's stupidity and bad judgement. God did not ask Jephthah to do anything. It was Jephthah's idea make an unbreakable vow to sacrifice the first person to meet him after the battle.

God did not even threaten Jephthah that He would punish him if he didn't do as he promised. However, Jephthah did it anyway. What's really remarkable about this story, however, is his daughter's response. She didn't try to argue to save her life, but she told her father that he should keep his promise, and she became a willing sacrifice.

This is a very different story than with the worshipers of Baal, who gave their infants as unwilling sacrifices to be burned to please the god. God would be offended if such a sacrifice were offered in His name. Even within the realm of animal sacrifice, there were some things He considered too cruel. And, you know, God values human life much more than he does animal life.

You said, "God never approved of human sacrifice". Yet Jephthah offered to sacrifice the first thing to come out of his house to god if god would let him win a battle. God supposedly let's him win the battle knowing in advance that it would be his daughter, therefore god is endorsing human sacrifice. Where was his mercy then? Jephthah does something stupid and his daughter pays for his stupidity.
You said it was an unbreakable vow. Does that mean even god couldn't break it with his omnipotence? He couldn't show mercy to an innocent girl when it was her father who, unknowingly I might add, made the deal for her life?

Christianity didn't establish many rules, if any. They carried over some of the laws that the Jews followed, being originally a Jewish sect. But there were many that were removed when the New Covenant was put in place, such as the laws that declared some foods unclean (unhealthy foods, by the way).

Also, if you couldn't follow the rules perfectly, that's the point. The point of the law is not to keep you safe from judgement, but it's to show you all of the ways you are imperfect.

As for justice, read what I said about Hell earlier. God judges according to one's deeds, and this applies to Christians as well as the unsaved. Christians avoid punishment because Jesus had paid the price for them, but their rewards are based on their service. If you're a Christian and you don't serve, you won't get in at all.

Sounds like justice to me.

The NT does establish some new rules. Infinite punishment for finite crimes is one of them. Which, according to me, is immoral. It doesn't become moral because some old book says it's moral. How exactly does god judge the rapist and the murderer who get saved? Not by their actions. Yet he's willing to torture people who have spent their entire lives doing good, helping others and contributing in a positive way to the one and only life we're sure to get. He rewards beliefs over deeds. He awards salvation based on faith or grace. And yes actions may come along afterwards but the gist is you can live a decent and good life and still go to hell.

 

[Buy Bologna]

1. They were not children in your connotation of the word. They were old enough to make their own decisions, and it was accepted for specific reasons, and as a last resort.

Not children in my connotation? Well then, by all means, tell me how old you have to be to not qualify as a child in the context it is speaking. 15? 18? Stone em?

And as a last resort? So a 17 year old goes out and works on the Sabbath then they will let that slide? I suggest you read your bible again.

2. All sin is punishable by death. You're just lucky God isn't quick to strike you dead every time you slander Him. He's very patient.

Well he's either patient or doesn't exist. Either way, it's allowing me to live on and type this post. I just have to measure which option is more logical.

3. Such laws would rarely ever be enforced. Parents don't usually like the idea of having their children killed. Although, at one point, they did regularly perform child (infant) sacrifices to Baal--which, by the way, God was not too happy about.

Why don't you look up the word 'Law?' For these laws to even be written is DISGUSTING! First, you try to scapegoat the barbarism of the mosaic law by saying things like 'last resort' like they gave them chances. Guess what, the law is the law. Black and white. you mess up, you die....period.

And of course sacrificing children or anything is wrong. What kind of sick god would want such a thing?

4. Contrary to popular opinion, the "God of the Old Testament" was merciful, just like He was in the New Testament:

Are we talking about the same god who drowned the whole world here?

Hosea 6:6 - For I desire mercy, not sacrifice,
and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.[/quote]