Thursday, October 21, 2010

Give Me Liberty: All Life Is Precious

This, my eighth column, was published in the Gainesville Daily Register on October 1, 2010.

Think of the last baby you saw. Its skin was soft and soothing; the bright eyes curiously examined you. You were delighted at the contagious grin and toothless babble.
Now think of your grandmother. Her eyes are keen and wise. Her smile is contagious too – but it’s not the wide-eyed, inquisitive smile of the baby. The never-ending twinkle of a smile that plays on Grandma’s face seems to say, “I know something you don’t.” Years of life experience lie beneath the generous, wise, cookie-baking surface.
Grandma knows exactly how to make you feel better. She knows what snack will cheer you up. She has troves of advice. Isn’t it hard to picture Grandma as anything but what she is now?
Here’s the fact that we all know but rarely acknowledge. Grandma was once a baby. Baby will someday be a grandparent.
Baby may not only be a grandparent. Perhaps Baby will become a famous singer, a politician, a renowned doctor – Baby could even discover the cure for cancer. When you look at the adorable bundle of fresh new life, it’s hard to imagine that bundle as anything else. But the baby will grow, and will become someone important. The possibilities at the beginning of a new life are endless!
On the opposite end of the spectrum, there is the end of life. It’s not so pleasant to think about, but it happens. We know this. However, if passing is painful, the passing of a young life is even more so. Why were their lives taken? They had so much to offer. Their journey had barely begun. They could have become a star – a hero. The possibilities for their life were innumerable. And now they are gone.
In the face of tragedies like these, we cling to the few memories they did leave us. Perhaps if they had lived longer they could have accomplished more, but their short lives brought us joy all the same. We remember the innocence of their babyhood, and their young, smiling eyes. We cherish the curious thoughts, the big dreams, and the open heart they possessed. Even though their lives were brief, they lived nonetheless. And we loved them.
Can there be anything more tragic than a young child’s last breath? It doesn’t seem like there could be. But I believe there is.
What if there is a life that is yet unseen, but undeniably present? This life has all the potential the newborn or the child had. The possibilities, the choices, and the paths that lay before this infant life are as endless as the sky! This new life has not yet had a chance to take in the world with its round, curious eyes. This life has never known what it is like to giggle or babble. The soft, delicate skin has never even been caressed. And then, suddenly, this life is over. Ended. Stopped. Not because of nature – not because its time had come. Its time had never even begun. It was because of a choice; another person chose that this life should never be given a chance. Yes, the life was at its newest, freshest, most infant level, but it was a life.
To snuff out a life before it is even given a chance sounds horrendous. But over four thousand lives just like these are ended every single day in America. These are four thousand lives that could have become people like you and me. They could have become the next great artist or the next President. They could have become Grandma. And all because of one decision, they and all their opportunities are thrown out, and they didn’t even have a chance to defend themselves.
We all agree that death is painful. But the purposeful, untimely death of thousands of new lives every day is even worse. The next time you are confronted with this difficult question of right and wrong, think of the last baby you saw. Think of its soothing skin, its curious eyes, its toothless smile. Think of all it could become. Think of your grandma.


Anonymous said...

I suppose you wrote this for the 40 Days for Life campaign the Catholic church does every year? Are you catholic? What are your thoughts on those people who bomb abortion clinics and shoot abortion doctors? If all life is precious, what about those people on death row? What is your stance on the death penalty?

What did Jesus or the Bible say about abortion? Nothing. What does Jewish law say about abortion? That the mother's life is paramount. That abortion is permitted.

What about all the hundreds and thousands of purposeful untimely deaths that happen everyday as a result of the US wars of occupation in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Palestine? Why were their lives ended? For profit and conquest. They had so much to offer but their lives were taken so the rich could get more wealth.

These aren't babies. They are fetuses. Tissue. They have not developed and been brought to term and given birth to, to become self sustaining independent life forms. This isn't a baby living and breathing on its own in a crib. If these "babies" time had never begun, then that means they didn't exist as a life. That they never had life. If its a fetus in the womb, its not an infant. The term infant applies to a baby, a fetus that has developed fully and is no longer a fetus and has been given birth to that now exists outside the womb.

I'm willing to bet you'd find plenty of pro-choice grandmas out there. Who if you said this to them would reply "Thats nice honey. But its my body, and my choice. Its a woman's right. Let women live their own lives and make their own choices. And don't force your beliefs on them through big government laws".

Its not a question of right and wrong. Morality is relative. It's all about choice and the freedom to choose, the freedom for women to make decisions for themselves. A woman choosing to do what's best for her with her own body. Her body her choice. And no one elses. Whether a woman wants to carry a pregnancy to term and give birth, or whether she opts to have an abortion. Her choice. A pro choice person doesn't have the right to force you to have an abortion or believe that its morally correct. And conversely an anti-choicer doesn't have the right to force their beliefs on others, to make them think that abortion is murder and wrong, and that a woman be forced to go to term with a pregnancy and give birth. The next time you look at a baby and think of abortion, think about this. Think perhaps "I believe abortion is wrong and murder. I'm never getting an abortion and I'm going to adovocate against abortion. Thats my choice. But what other people choose to believe and do, thats their choice. I'm not their judge, and they are not my judge".

Nicki said...

Gosh, Mr. Anonymous, there's so much in your comment that could be argued with, but I'll just pick one: Do you really believe grandmas would be pro-choice? If they are grandmas, they most likely dote on their grandchildren. Without those grandchildren, they would not be grandmas. How your statement make any logical sense?

You seem to be stuck reading a blog you clearly don't agree with. I'm not really sure why.

Nicki said...

Gosh, Mr. Anonymous, there's so much in your comment that could be argued with, but I'll just pick one: Do you really believe grandmas would be pro-choice? If they are grandmas, they most likely dote on their grandchildren. Without those grandchildren, they would not be grandmas. How your statement make any logical sense?

You seem to be stuck reading a blog you clearly don't agree with. I'm not really sure why.

Nicki said...

I'd like to add this to the 'it's not really a baby' argument.

About 6 years ago, I was pregnant with what would be my 3rd child. At 17 weeks gestation, the baby's heart stopped beating. I didn't know this for a few days, until the sonogram that I thought would reveal the gender, actually revealed that I had lost my baby.

Since I have home births, I also had a home delivery for this child. We were able to hold and observe this little tiny being. Let me tell you, it was a real baby. It's fingers and toes were formed, and its gender was already determined. It was extremely small, but it was real. Life had been in it just a few days before.

Just because a baby cannot survive outside it's mother's womb for 9 months does not mean it's not alive. It needs the safety of that womb to prepare itself for the outside world, just as animals need the mother's womb or an egg to begin life.

Liberty is a Christian, and I am a Christian. We both believe that life begins at conception. The Bible is very clear about when a baby is a life:

"For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.

I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful, I know that full well.

My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place.

When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body.

All the days ordained for me
were written in your book before one of them came to be."

- Psalm 139:13-16

I am currently 7 1/2 months pregnant. All day, every day, I feel the impatient kicking and tumbling of a baby girl who is running out of room. I feel hiccups. I know when a loud noise has startled her. I know she can see bright lights. There is real life there.

I don't know how anyone could ever go through pregnacy and still deny that life exists before birth.

Anonymous said...

Nicki - yes I do believe grandma's can be pro-choice. As any mother can. A woman can have an abortion and still choose to have children at some point in her life. Just because she has had an abortion/s at some point doesn't mean she won't ever choose to have children.

You are right. I disagree with Liberty and her conservative views. I'm on the opposing side. But I enjoy debate.

Liberty said...

First of all, no, I am not Catholic. I did not write this for the 40 day campaign for life. In fact, I'll admit that I was not even aware of that movement. I wrote this from my heart, for my newspaper column.
I have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and I try my best to follow Him. He has saved me by His grace, and I know I cannot earn salvation. I know that when I die, I'll go to Heaven. Until then, He's called me to spread the Good News. That's what I believe, just to get that straight.
For your next point- I do disagree with the bombing of abortion clinics and actions of that nature. I believe that murdering anyone is morally wrong, and since I believe a child is a living human being from the time of conception, I believe that abortion is murder. I think it is hypocritical to try to stop murder with more murder. All I can assume is that the people who bomb abortion clinics are crazy radicals that don't really understand the issue or how to deal with it. I am not on their side. Now, that's straight.
As far as the death penalty, that is a complicated issue. In brief, I believe that the death penalty and murder are two separate things. In order to preserve peace and safety as much as possible in our imperfect, fallen world, laws must be put in place. As the old joke goes, when you die, if you see a list of rules posted on the wall, you know you're in hell. That's just to say that perfect people don't need laws. Our world isn't perfect. There have to be consequences. Punishing someone because they murdered an innocent person is part of the process of protecting humanity. Perhaps it's unfortunate. It was unfortunate that the criminal murdered the innocent person in the first place.
It is the same with war. There ARE blood-thirsty, wealth-seeking countries that go to war for fame and conquest. I don't agree with that kind of war. But when America goes to war, we fight on behalf of people who are being tyrannized by the OTHER kind of war. We fight to preserve freedom and peace. Again, it's unfortunate. War is never nice. It's ugly. But the world would be a lot uglier if we allowed all the blood-thirsty, wealth-seeking, tyrants to rule unchecked.
As for whether a fetus is a living baby, I don’t think I can say it any better than Nicki. You can’t tell someone who has had that kind of experience that their baby wasn’t a human being – that it didn’t matter. Ok, if you say that life does not begin at conception, then you have to define when life DOES begin. Does it begin three weeks into the pregnancy? Three months into the pregnancy? At birth? What about the baby who is born months prematurely? There have been many babies are born so small that they can fit in their father’s hand. Many times they have to have life support and cannot live on their own at first. In this case, doctors fight with all they have to save that little spark of delicate life. A three month old baby born prematurely is clearly a baby. Its life is fought for. If that three month old baby is in the womb, is it any different? Is it a fetus, just because it is still inside its mother’s body? The only difference is the location of the baby.
Technically, we must keep up with the times. According to recent scientific studies, it has been proven that a fetus IS a human being. It has its own genetic make-up, and it is alive and functioning from conception. The debate is no longer about whether the unborn fetus is biologically alive; it’s about whether or not the mother has the choice to kill that fetus.

Liberty said...

And this brings me to my last point. Abortion IS a moral issue, and morality is NOT relative. As a Christian, I believe that there is right and wrong. They are two, separate, distinctive things. The Bible does address abortion. First of all, there is the verse Nicki posted. There is also the commandment that tells us not to murder. “Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.” (Matt. 10:29 – NIV). If God cares about sparrows, how much more must he care about the unborn baby?
These arguments are based on my Christian belief. Therefore, it is my opinion that just as there should be no choice about things such as stealing and murder, there should be no choice about abortion. None of us agree with the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Centers. Neither do we say, “I disagree with terrorism, but who am I to tell you that you can’t be a terrorist?”
Abortion is wrong. It should be illegal. It not only kills a life, but wounds another. I am not judging anyone – you’re right. That’s not my job. But I must stand by what I know to be true.
Anonymous, I would like to thank you for reading my blog. I know we disagree on pretty much everything, but just the same, it’s good to know that someone cares enough to read what I have to say. Hopefully in our debates we are both trying to improve our nation.
You’ve said multiple times that you enjoy debating. So do I. In a previous comment you said that you would like to go deeper – get down to why we believe the way we do. I’ve stated why I believe the way I do; it’s because of my faith in Jesus. I believe His Word is absolute truth. I’ll be willing to expound on that if you wish. But I want to ask, why DO you believe the way you do? What is your foundation for your beliefs? Let’s talk about it.

P.S. I'm having some trouble posting if I accidentally posted a comment twice or something, sorry.

Anonymous said...

A problem with the argument that a woman has the right to choose is that this is honoring the woman right but ignoring the potential child's right. When does a piece of living tissue become a human life? Well..... It is unknown. Many assume that it is not a life untill birth, but I think life enters before that. Is a baby 5 minute before birth not a life? I think not. Is a germinated seed a" life". I am not convinced of that either. Until this issue is resolved I vote we play it safe and outlaw abortion at any stage of development. Better not risk murder to keep those without self-control from dealing with consequences.

Anonymous said...

If a piece of tissue, a fetus, is attached to a host body and feeds off of it to develop and it cannot survive and develop on its own that means it is not an independent life form. It is dependent and biologically a part of the host body. Therefore that host has the right to let this tissue grow or to not to, to expel it. The dependent tissue has no rights since it not a separate entity from the host. It is a part of the host body. And the host has the rights over its own body. And in the case of a pregnancy those rights extend up until when that fetus leaves the birth canal, exits the host body and begins to breathe on its own and is no longer attached physically and biologically to the host mother.

Regarding abortion and abortion clinic bombers, you think they are wrong because in your view it is hypocritical to try to stop murder with more murder. I agree.
But wouldn't that same argument apply to the death penalty? If someone did murder someone else, isn't is pointless to try to stop/deter murder with more murder?
In this case, state-sponsored murder? Obviously having the death penalty doesn't deter murder. Texas has many people on death row and many have been executed for murder here.

Is a woman who was raped or a victim of incest without self control? Is a woman who had sex but whose birth control didn't work or the condom broke without self control also? Regarding the term "potential child": would you consider birth control wrong/pre-emptive murder? Since using birth control would stop and prevent the creation of a fetus and the possible birth of a baby later on if birth control weren't used?

Anonymous said...


I think you are taking that Bible verse out of context and drawing something out of it that wasn't intended. There is a commandment that forbids people to murder.
But it doesn't say that aborting a fetus is considered murder. You consider abortion murder and are applying the commandment against murder to abortion.

Morality is relative. Different cultures have different moral codes and values. In the world today and in ages past. The term terrorism is also relative. I don't agree with what the 9/11 attackers did. Just as I don't agree with the wars the US government is waging. But the 9/11 attackers didn't see themselves as terrorists. Theres an old saying that "one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter".
The British saw the American colonists as terrorists. And many people in the middle east and elsewhere see the US government as terroristic.

You say you believe as you do because of your faith in Jesus. That his word is absolute truth. Ok. I realize you are a Christian. But many of your views I cannot find in Jesus' words in the Bible.
I can't find them or justification for them in Christ's teachings.

Thanks for responding Liberty. Btw my replies aren't ever intended to be antagonistic and mean. I don't read your blog and post to irritate you. I'm interested in
debating things and talking. Sorry for the late reply. I haven't been home very much the last few days. I will compose a reply explaining about why I believe as I do and will try to post that in the next couple days. Yes lets indeed talk about things.

Anonymous said...

Just because something is Dependant does not mean it is part of the host body. It has it's own DNA, the blood of the child and that of the mothers to not mix. A child outside the womb is dependant on the parents or other caretaker and could not survive without them. How is that different?????

I did not use self control synonymously with restraint. Restraint is a part of self control. In the case of rape victims, they haven't failed in restraint. they have to have to use self control to persevere through the trials God has set before them.

Anonymous said...


It's different because a child outside of the womb is just that, OUTSIDE of the womb. No longer a fetus inside the body. Its no longer physically connected to the host-mother. In the case of rape victims and incest, do you believe that women in these cases should be allowed to get an abortion?

Anonymous said...

Well it is a bit different inside or outside the womb. A child inside the womb is more dependant than a child outside but that doesn't mean it doesn't have rights. It has it's own DNA. It is not part of the mother and shouldn't be treated like it is. As far as your other question, NO. The only time I MIGHT approve is if either or both the mother or child will die in the birthing proses.

Anonymous said...

If its not part of the mother then how come its inside her body feeding off of it and otherwise would not exist?

So you believe that a woman that was violated should be forced to carry to term a pregnancy of her attacker that forced himself upon her?

Anonymous said...

Just Because it was created by the mothers body does not mean that it is the mothers body. A rape victim becoming pregnant is a heartbreaking and most unfortunate event, but it does not justify murder. I don't really see the point in bringing that up anyway. If we determine that a baby inside the womb is a life than an abortion would be murder. if not than it would not be murder. No matter how sad the situation is it never justifies the taking of an innocent life.

Anonymous said...

Consider for a moment that a developing fetus is considered a human life

an abortion is considered murder, no matter how sad the situation.

Consider that a fetus is not considered a human life.

Any abortion would easily be justifyed

so bringing up a story of a rape victim or any other heartbreaking event to try to maker feel guilty niether confems nor denys your arguement..

Anonymous said...

I didn't bring it up to confirm or deny my argument. But to gauge how extreme your anti-choice stance is. That to you a woman who was violated against her will and not only has to deal with the trauma of being raped, also should be forced to deal with the humiliation and shame of carrying to term the child of her rapist. Thats what I wanted to find out.

Anonymous said...

All life is sacred. even the child of a rapist has rights.

Do you believe that a rapists child has no rights?

Liberty said...

It isn't the child's fault that its mother was a victim. The child shouldn't be punished. No one is telling the mother she has to raise the child. We're just defending that child's right to "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Of course, that all comes from us believing that the child is in fact a CHILD from the moment of conception - not just a wad of tissue.

Anonymous said...

I don't believe that its a child. I believe it is a piece of tissue. A fetus. I believe that at all times a woman has complete rights over her body and what to do with it or not do with it. A woman that was raped shouldn't be punished by forcing her to bear the child of her rapist.

Liberty said...

Ok, well this comes back to why we believe what we believe. Yes, many scientists today are admitting that the fetus is not just tissue; it is a biological human being. However, whether the scientists said so or not, I would still believe that the fetus is alive because of my faith. What makes you believe the way you do?

Anonymous said...

It is unknown when the soul enters the body. There are many ideas (at birth, first heartbeat, at conception) but these are all just speculation. What do you base your belief off of? To make a relatively uneducated guess and expect law to be made on it (your speculation) is absurd. I am not a expert in the field and I don't suspect any of you are either and even those who are experts are divided. I believe that we should play it safe until there is no doubt when tissue becomes a human life.

Anonymous said...

But where do you base your faith on that a fetus is a live human being? On scripture that is torn out of context or that you interpret what you want to believe out of it? If you give Old Testament scripture as reference, how do you reconcile your belief with Jewish law which permits abortion? There is no scripture in the Old or New Testaments that says aborting a fetus is murder because a fetus is a human life. And while we are talking about the sanctity of life, there are many examples in the Old Testament that shows God himself obviously doesn't hold life very dear. Examples: Deuteronomy 21:18-21 - stone a child to death for being disobedient. Deuteronomy 22:21 - If a husband finds that his bride isn't a virgin on their wedding day, stone her to death on her father's doorstep. Numbers 31: 17-18 - God instructed Moses to kill all male children and every non-virgin woman. But virgin females the men can take and keep. So God gives his approval for the murder and rape of children.

I think it's absurd to base one's beliefs on a text thats riddled with many contradictions.

Anonymous said...

The laws you are referring to were directed toward a nomadic people and are not all applicable to the U.S. Today and I didn't say that a fetus was a life I said it is unknown. Risking murder is always bad idea.

A preme baby that can't breath or live without a machine and is not fully devoloped differs from a baby inside the womb in one way..... Location. Does location determin whether somthing is a life or not.

Anonymous said...

Even if these laws were directed toward a nomadic people it doesn't make any difference! Its still horrible! Can we agree that killing male children, non virgin women and the rape of virgin girls is horrible under any conditions at any time? That its never justifiable?

The difference in a premature baby is that it's no longer physically attached and part of the host body. It's outside and unattached to the host body.

Anonymous said...

Those things you quoted were intended for a certain time and place

It's not attaches to the mothers body, but it is attached to the doctors machine. Why does it matter if the host the baby is leeching off of is biological or not????
And if the baby could live attached to a machine then wouldn't it fit your definition of life??

And what makes you or I an expert. I am not convinced anyone even knows when life enters the body. It is only speculation.
What makes what you are saying true??
How is your farely uneducated guess any better than my farely uneducated guess.
I have done no research in the field and do not claim to be an expert in the field.
Are you and expert that has done research or are you just believing something without concrete evidence.
I do not believe law should be made untill there is concrete evidence pointing toward something.( as of now there is not) I only argue that life exists before birth, how long before birth I do not know.

Liberty said...

I’m sorry that I haven’t ever replied to these last several comments. But I would like to say this.
God’s Word never contradicts itself. I believe it is infallible. I do not pretend to understand everything in the Bible, but I know God well enough to trust His very own Word. And I know that God is a God of love. He does not approve murder or rape, or any such act. Nowhere in the Bible does he give permission for such deeds. (And I’m not familiar with the Jewish law that permits abortion. Fill me in?)
Again, consider Ecclesiastes 3:
"There is a time to be born and a time to die...
“There is a time to kill and a time to heal.
"There is a time to destroy and a time to build...
"There is a time for war and a time for peace."
I don’t understand everything in the Bible. We must take into consideration that the people of the Old Testament were bound by the law. They had to obey rules upon rules, sacrifice animals for their sins, and destroy evil at the root. When Jesus came to die on the cross, He was the ultimate sacrifice. He did not destroy the law, but fulfilled it. Now we do not have to make sacrifices or live perfectly. We are covered in Jesus’ blood – God’s grace. This calls for a different life style. God still calls us to live for His glory, but when we mess up, we’re covered in the blood of Jesus. God doesn’t look at our sins anymore. He sees us as pure and holy – washed clean. I’m so thankful we are no longer bound to the law.
Perhaps there is no scripture that specifically says “A fetus is a living human being,” but there is this verse.
Psalm 139:13-16
“You made my whole being; you formed me in my mother’s body. You saw my bones being formed as I took shape in my mother’s body…When I was put together there, you saw my body as it was formed. All the days planned for me were written in your book before I was one day old.”
It sounds to me as if God knows us and forms us before we are even ONE DAY OLD - still inside the mother’s womb. He has all our days planned out for us before we are born. He begins to form our bones – while we were inside our mother’s womb. It sounds like He knows and loves the baby before it is born. The verses don’t specify if He knows us a week after conception or 3 months before birth. But they do state that He knows us before we are born. He doesn’t love wads of tissue. He loves babies.
In addition to this, I have a cousin who is pregnant. She had a sonogram at 13 weeks, and they could see the baby. At sonograms this early and even earlier, one can see the heartbeat of a baby. Many parents don’t find out they’re expecting until the pregnancy is quite a few weeks along. At the same time they’re going to get an abortion because they’ve been told that it’s only a wad of tissue, they could be going to the doctor and catching a glimpse of their baby’s heartbeat.

Anonymous said...

Contradictions continued:

Jesus said the end of the world would come in the lifetime of the present generation (Matthew 4,17; 10,23; 16,28; 24,34; Mark 1,15; 9,1; 13,30; Luke 21,32; John5,25 John the Baptist (Matthew 3,2) and the aposltes say the same (1 Corinthians 7,29) (1Peter 4,7) (James 5,8). But the world didn't come to an end during their lifetimes.

Jesus said no one but himself ever ascended into heaven - John 3,13 But the Bible says Elijah (2 Kins 2,11) and Enoch (Genesis 5,24 and Hebrews 11,5) both did.

Jesus said no man has ever seen God - John 1,18 and 1 Timothy 6,16. He forgets that Moses did (Exodus 33,23) Jacob saw God face to face - Gen 32,30 and Isaiah saw God sitting on his throne - Isaiah 6,1. Ezekiel and Amos also saw God - Ez 1,26-28, 3,23 and Amos 9,1.

When Jesus' disciples are challenged by the Pharisees for plucking corn on the Sabbath Jesus said David and his companions took the shewbread to eat in the time of Abiathar the high priest - Mark 2,23-25. But the high priest at the time was not Abiathar but Ahimelech - 1 Samuel 21, 1-6

The discovery of Jesus's tomb on Easter Sunday is different in each of the 4 gospels. The events are differnt. The time is different - its dawn in Mark, night in John. The people who were there were different. The only name they agree upon is Mary Magdalene.

According to Matthew 28 12-15 the soldiers guarding Jesus' body were bribed to say his disciples took the body while they slept. Would anyone believe they knew who stole Jesus' body if they had been asleep? How could they have known if they had been asleep?

The death of Judas is different:
Matthew 27,5-8 he hangs himself.
Acts 1, 18-19 he falls over and his bowels gush out.

God's rules contradict:
"The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father" - Ezekiel 18,20. But he says the exact opposite "The Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children" - Exodus 20,5

Regarding free will, that we have a choice, that we are not robots, the Bible says that God has already chosen those whom he will save - John 6,44; 13,18 Romans 8,29; 9,18) If God has already chosen whom will be saved then its not up to us and we don't have a choice.

Why is God so hard on those he has not chosen? Paul's only answer is you must not criticize God - Romans 9,20. Hes basically saying you shouldn't ask the question. How can God justify condemning those people who's hearts he has hardened? It's a divine injustice.

God chooses to harden people's hearts - John 12,40. God deliberatly deceives them - 2 Thessalonians 2, 1-12. In such cases it would seem some people have no choice and its not possible for them to win eternal life by faith in Jesus.

Anonymous said...

I had replied a first part to the above but it didn't take for some reason. I will type it out again.

Regarding abortion, a friend of mine recently said "across the world, 6 million children die of hunger every year. That's a HOLOCAUST of children-- living, breathing children, every year. Lets tackle that statistic first."

The Bible, God's word, does indeed contradict itself. There are many instances throughout the Bible. Heres some examples:

Jesus described the Torah as true and unchangable - Matthew 5,18; Luke 16,17 Although at times the teaching of Jesus is in conflict with the old Scriptures and particularly with the books of the law - Matthew 5, 21-48; Mark 3, 2-4; Luke 14, 3-6; John 8, 5-7

In Genesis there are 2 versions of creation - Genesis 1-2,4 God creates the world, then animals, then mankind and gave mankind authority over animals. Genesis 2, 4-24 God made Adam out of dust and breathes life into him, then God creates animals for him to rule over. In 1st version, God creates animals first then mankind. In the 2nd version God creates mankind then animals afterwards. Which version is correct?

In Genesis there are 2 versions of the flood story that are confused - Genesis 6, 5-9, 17.

Regarding Ecclesiastes: the writer of that book of the Bible believes that the future is fixed, death is certain, and there is nothing after death; therefore, since his earthly life is all we have, all we can do is try to enjoy it. The same death comes to us all, and so it makes no difference whether we are righteous or wicked, whether we sacrifice or not, whether we sin or try to avoid sinning (Eccles 9,2-4) A young man should enjoy his youth before it passes and he returns to th dust from whence he came. All is vanity. Such sentiments do not agree with either Jewish or Christian teaching. They seem more likely to have been inspired by the stoic philosophers of Greece than the Holy Spirit of God.

Anonymous said...

Biblical contradictions continued:

The writers of the gospels sometimes quote prophecies which cannot be found in the books of the prophets - example - Matthew 26,56, copying Mark 14,49 claims that the prophets foretold that Jesus would be arrested.

Some of the prophecies quote in the New Testament come from books which are not in the Bible - Jude 14 quotes a prophecy from the book of Enoch, a book which is not recognized by either Jews or Christians.

Regarding the Bible being God's word, which version of the Bible is God's word? There are many different versions.

The Bible says that Jehoiachin was 8 when he began to reign, and he reigned 3 months and 10 days in Jerusalem - 2 Chronicles 36,9 but elsewhere the Bible says Jehoiachin was 18 years old when he began to reign and he reigned in Jerusalem 3 months - 2 Kings 24,9 Which one is correct? They cannot both be right.

Ahaziah was both 22 years old - 2 Kings 8,26 and 42 yrs old 2nd Chronicles 22,2 when he ascended the throne - the 2nd of these texts makes him 2 years older than his father!

In 2 Samuel 6,23 we are told Michal, the daughter of Saul, had no child unto the day of her death. But soon afterward in 2 Samuel 21,8 we are told she had 5 sons.

In Genesis we meet Salah, the son of Arphaxad - Genesis 11,12 whome Luke quotes as Sala "which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad - Luke 3,36

In Leviticus 11,6 God describes the hare as an animal that chews the cud. Hares do not chew cud.

In Judges 1,19 God himself was unable to drive off an enemy tribe because they had chariots of iron.

In 2 Kings 8,22 the people of Edom rebelled after Joab had killed every male of that race (1 Kings 11,16).

Similarly every male of the Midianites was slain and every female captured (Numbers 31, 7-18) yet the Midianites later managed to defeat the children of Israel - Judges 6, 1-5

The Amalekites were utterly destroyed by Saul (1 Samuel 15, 7-20) but they rose against David, who defeated them and left neither man nor woman alive (1 Samuel 27,9) after which they attacked David again (1 Samuel 30, 1-17). They attacked David after they were all dead somehow.

Noahs ark - the obvious discrepency between the size of the ark and the number of different species known to biological science today that would have been able to fit into the ark. Also, how was it that every speices of animal on the planet on different continents was able to be gathered up by Noah who could only walk around?

Incorrect math - Solomon makes a circular bowl for the temple with a diameter of 10 cubits and a circumference measuring 30 cubits in 1 Kings 7,23 and 2 Chronicles 4,2. But these measurements make pi=3. Which we know that pi=2.

Jesus' ancestry - the list of Joseph's ancestors since David in Matthew has 25 ancestors ad 41 in Luke and the great majority of the names are different - the contradictions begin with Joseph's father. Matthew calls Joseph the son of Jacob. In Luke he is the son of Heli.

According to Matthew the angel came only to Joseph in a dream about Jesus. In Luke's version Luke 1, 28-35 the angel only tells Mary.

In the gospel of Mark 6,8 it says Jesus sent his disciples to preach and commanded them to take nothing with them except 1 staff. Another gospel Matthew 10,10 says he commanded them to take nothing, no coat, no shoes, not staff.

1 gospel says Jesus was silent and did not answer those who accused him - Matthew 27,12-14. Another says that Jesus answered his accusers and quote the very words that Jesus said - John 18, 19-38

John tells us that Jesus baptized people (John 3,22) but then soon afterwards the same gospel says that Jesus did not baptize people, though his disciples did and the Pharisees falesly accused him of it John 4,1-2