Active Users:1132 Time:22/11/2024 09:25:38 PM
You're technically right, Joel, but... Tom Send a noteboard - 26/10/2012 07:32:10 PM
...the problem is that if you're looking at it from a traditional Christian perspective then your nine week statement is just as arbitrary as any other. While the Bible doesn't say anything about abortion, there are plenty of early Christian works that nearly made the Bible that do explicitly prohibit abortion generally:

οὐ φονευσεις τεκνον ἐν φθορᾷ οὐδε γεννηθεν αποκτενεις - Didache 2:2.

Thou shalt not kill a child in the womb, nor shalt thou kill one born.

NB: Barnabas repeats the exact phrase with the sole modification that it puts the word παλιν, "already" before γεννηθεν, "born". The text of "thou shalt not kill" in the Septuagint is identical: οὐ φονευσεις.

Because I know how touchy you are on dating issues, let me quote from the critical apparatus:

The Didache may have been put into its present form as late as 150, though a date considerably closer to the end of the first century seems more probable. The materials from which it was composed reflect the state of the church at an even earlier time. The relative simplicity of the prayers, the continuing concern to differentiate Christian practice from Jewish rituals (8.1), and in particular the form of church structure - note the twofold structure of bishops and deacons (cf. Phil. 1:1) and the continued existence of traveling apostles and prophets alongside a resident ministry - reflect a time closer to that of Paul and James (who died in the 60s) than Ignatius (who died sometime after 110).

As a result, while I applaud your newly-found logical skills ( ;) ), Jeordam can fall back on a Christian tradition that makes no distinction on the timing of abortion unless you can somehow qualify the statements made in the Early Church.
Political correctness is the pettiest form of casuistry.

ἡ δὲ κἀκ τριῶν τρυπημάτων ἐργαζομένη ἐνεκάλει τῇ φύσει, δυσφορουμένη, ὅτι δὴ μὴ καὶ τοὺς τιτθοὺς αὐτῇ εὐρύτερον ἢ νῦν εἰσι τρυπώη, ὅπως καὶ ἄλλην ἐνταῦθα μίξιν ἐπιτεχνᾶσθαι δυνατὴ εἴη. – Procopius

Ummaka qinnassa nīk!

*MySmiley*
This message last edited by Tom on 26/10/2012 at 07:33:16 PM
Reply to message
God Distances Self From Christian Right - 26/10/2012 01:56:18 PM 1221 Views
Do you really think God would condone abortion? *NM* - 26/10/2012 03:28:25 PM 356 Views
Depends on when a fetus is a being, which the GOP contends is "at the moment of fertilization." - 26/10/2012 03:57:44 PM 551 Views
Actually, I don't see any place in the Bible where God is.... - 26/10/2012 04:00:19 PM 725 Views
Where did I say one word about God accommodating our sin? - 26/10/2012 05:55:52 PM 587 Views
You're technically right, Joel, but... - 26/10/2012 07:32:10 PM 595 Views
Almost may count in hand grenades, but definitely not in canon. - 26/10/2012 10:28:57 PM 632 Views
That's a dangerous stance to take as a Christian - 27/10/2012 01:11:14 AM 570 Views
I agree it is good reading; that does not make it binding. - 27/10/2012 01:37:20 AM 585 Views
Jesus that Greek sounds weird to my ears. - 27/10/2012 03:43:40 AM 680 Views
It's really just simplified Attic. - 27/10/2012 06:11:48 AM 566 Views
Condemn women to die? What a strange way to look at this. - 26/10/2012 07:17:16 PM 639 Views
women *did* die before abortion was legalized, there should be no dispute of this aspect - 26/10/2012 07:27:28 PM 644 Views
Very good point, but that was not (at least soley) what I meant, no. - 26/10/2012 11:12:32 PM 564 Views
If something should be illegal in its own right, it is nonsense to legalize it because criminals - 26/10/2012 11:40:41 PM 588 Views
If banning it saves no lives but inevitably takes more, the ban is counterproductive. - 27/10/2012 12:48:51 AM 610 Views
That is absolutely absurd. It saves the lives of all... - 27/10/2012 12:59:16 AM 627 Views
you're still missing the point that abortions will still be performed if it were illegal - 27/10/2012 01:02:57 AM 529 Views
I'm not missing the point, you are. - 27/10/2012 01:21:39 AM 687 Views
People who want abortions badly enough to have one will, whether or not law makes it "convenient." - 27/10/2012 02:58:52 AM 529 Views
You're stuck. - 27/10/2012 07:07:36 AM 651 Views
not entirely - 27/10/2012 03:23:07 PM 653 Views
Give me facts, not supposition. - 27/10/2012 04:10:57 PM 598 Views
Perfect example of media sensationalism - 26/10/2012 04:13:41 PM 631 Views
I agree with your larger point and am not trying to be argumentative - 26/10/2012 04:29:23 PM 606 Views
THAT is the whole problem with his comment. - 26/10/2012 05:59:40 PM 530 Views
Or it could mean.... - 26/10/2012 11:50:53 PM 585 Views
Re: Or it could mean.... - 27/10/2012 12:14:31 AM 566 Views
I agree - 26/10/2012 07:27:21 PM 621 Views
It's always a slippery slope, talking about what God did and did not intend. - 27/10/2012 12:06:22 AM 585 Views
Yes - 27/10/2012 02:20:46 AM 605 Views
I suppose it is splitting hairs. - 27/10/2012 04:32:43 PM 572 Views
Pregnancy cannot be separated from its cause. - 26/10/2012 05:51:28 PM 577 Views
Re: Pregnancy cannot be separated from its cause. - 27/10/2012 01:17:04 AM 577 Views
Who said anything about denying them funds? - 27/10/2012 01:54:39 AM 602 Views
God intends everything. - 27/10/2012 04:40:58 PM 662 Views
"Intends" is a big word. - 27/10/2012 09:23:13 PM 607 Views
Re: "Intends" is a big word. - 29/10/2012 04:56:49 PM 550 Views
I am familiar with the Problem of Evil. - 29/10/2012 06:41:13 PM 561 Views
Absolutely agree. *NM* - 26/10/2012 11:47:04 PM 311 Views
It is sad that this is getting more press than the Bengazi scandal *NM* - 26/10/2012 05:58:22 PM 313 Views
It is sad partisanship trumps policy for so many. - 26/10/2012 10:52:34 PM 509 Views
The comment that sparked this was moronic even to the vast majority of religious conservatives. *NM* - 26/10/2012 09:42:51 PM 332 Views
Yet its author remains the only Senate nominee for whom Romney is running ads. - 26/10/2012 10:53:37 PM 551 Views
Is the senator's comment more disgusting to you than the President's vote against the - 26/10/2012 11:54:55 PM 560 Views
how does one vote against a bill which passed by unanimous consent? - 27/10/2012 12:11:37 AM 563 Views
As a state senator in 2001 in illinois he was the sole opponent to the aforementioned bill. *NM* - 27/10/2012 12:14:08 AM 330 Views
[citation needed] - 27/10/2012 12:15:41 AM 515 Views
It was an illinois state bill. *NM* - 27/10/2012 12:23:12 AM 316 Views
yes, i finally found *something* regarding a state bill which he did oppose - 27/10/2012 12:34:40 AM 555 Views
It is not hard to find, really. - 27/10/2012 02:40:06 AM 523 Views
Links: - 27/10/2012 12:51:12 AM 582 Views
Double post. *NM* - 27/10/2012 12:18:42 AM 311 Views
amazing - 28/10/2012 05:04:21 AM 666 Views

Reply to Message