Search results

The mother is dying. The way to save the mother is either remove the baby or transplant the baby to the uterus (see below). Murdering the baby is not a valid option. There's no exception to be had. Outlaw abortion (the killing of the baby in the womb), no exceptions. Removing the baby to...

That doesn't make them rights. Saying it doesn't make it so. Wrongfully so. Begging the question. They aren't rights to begin with.

I have never denied that all of scripture is given by God and profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. However, that DOES NOT mean that everything was written to everyone, much less only to the Body of Christ. If you're going to read other...

It is legalism. Paul clearly states that we are NOT under the law, but under grace. The 10 Commandments are law. We in the Body of Christ live by faith, not by law. No, I told you that they were all addressed to a different audience, that being national Israel. The Body of Christ is not...

Talk about targeting minorities...

Obedience to the law is attempting to do that, yes. In the context of Christianity, what you say next is, by definition, legalism: In contrast, here's what Paul says about obedience: What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?For if Abraham was justified...

When did the show air?

I'm not a leftist.

This is why intent matters. If the intent is to kill the baby, then yes, it is murder. But if the goal is to save mom and the baby if possible, then it's not murder. Again, letting a dying person die is NOT murder. Intentionally killing a dying person is murder. If a doctor can only save...

Removing the baby from the woman's body will end the baby's life, but it's not murder unless you intentionally kill the baby. Letting a dying person die =/= killing a dying person That's the point I'm trying to make, Anna. Now you're moving the goalposts. Currently, in an abortion...

Only if your intent is to kill the baby. Otherwise, you only terminate the pregnancy, not the baby's life. This crucial difference is what determines whether the procedure is moral or immoral. Again, the difference is intent. The goal is to save the mother and the baby if possible. If that...

What you believe or don't believe doesn't trump what scripture says, B57. Again, WHICH church? There are at least two. Espoused doesn't mean "predestinated" (sic). It means "betrothed."

Now you're equivocating. I made it clear above what I was talking about. Again, abortion can be used to mean either "the intentional killing of the baby in the womb" (where what's being aborted is the life of the baby) or it can mean "the ending of the pregnancy" (where what's being aborted is...

Because he's hilarious!

But Paul never mentions the word "bride"... So how could he be talking about that church being the Bride of Christ?

He's trolling, because he doesn't like what doser said. Prediction: He'll do the same with my above post.

Guess what, that's because our current government (including the documents involved) are flawed, to the point where this today is where it has led us. All symptoms of a greater problem, not the problem itself. Again, symptoms of a larger problem. The government IS totally and completely...

Something else: I wonder how far we would be in medical technology if all the money that has been wasted on providing abortions was instead used on researching ways to save the babies in ectopic pregnancies. I guarantee that we would be much, MUCH farther than we are today. But that's what...

Which church?

NO. Intent matters here, Anna. The goal is not to kill the baby, even if the baby ends up dying as a result. Actually, what happened here was that I thought I had read somewhere that it had become possible recently, but it seems I was mistaken. That doesn't mean I don't have a general idea of...