Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
A Note on Abortion
To other Christians here...in regards to the PP...
In our nation we hear two phrases commonly used in court. First, the letter of the law and second, the spirit of the law.
In Old Testament times, the Hebrew people were under strict adherence to the law, which included not only the Ten Commandments but also some 500+ other laws that told them how to dress, eat, work, worship and a whole host of other life actions.
When Jesus came, he was trained by rabbis and grew up in this same exact law. His parents followed it and so did the rest of his neighbors. When he began his ministry around the age of 30, he invited his followers to not only follow the law but to go beyond it. To paraphrase: ?The Scriptures say not to commit adultery, so I say to you go a step further and do not have lust in your hearts. The Scriptures say, do not murder, so I say to you go a step further and do not have anger in your hearts.? He took the letter of the law and made it have a spirit. The letter of the law is to not murder or sleep with someone who isn?t your spouse, but the spirit of it is to go beyond that and not have anger and not have lust. It?s a higher calling and a step of encouragement from him to his followers.
Personally, I know several women and one pastor?s wife who have had abortions.
Above all else, there is no sin or wrong doing that is unforgiveable. Many women feel self-imposed guilt over their decisions to abort a child. And, this isn?t something they must bear for the rest of their lives.
It?s true; Jesus does not say not to have an abortion. But, knowing how he invited children to himself and asked that they not be turned away, knowing how much of a miracle life and the process of birth is, and knowing his instruction for his followers to not just follow the letter of the law, but to follow its spirit too, it looks pretty clear that Jesus would not have wanted mothers to abort their babies. So often I see posters here, asking WWJD? Do you envision him condoning a mother killing her unborn child when he himself stuck up for the down trodden, small, dispised, and forgotten?
He would not have wanted this; however, he knows that we have human frailties. We are unable, myself included, to see beyond the scope our of short-term perspectives to see the bigger picture of our decades long lives. We can and do act in fear and panic and often these choices made bring more heart ache and hurt then we ever wanted or intended.
I am personally aware of the pain many women carry during their lives as a result of abortion decisions.
So to the posters who say that I?m full of hatred and judgment because of my stance on life. No. NO!
Yes you can be a Christian and have an abortion. Many do. I know some who have. And, yes there is forgiveness. There is always forgiveness.
I, and many other Christ Followers, want life to prevail. Even little life. We believe that if a baby is created that it was for some intention, for some plan, for some reason? bigger than me, bigger than its mother, bigger than its father, and bigger than itself...who are we (Christians) to stand in the way of that?
I ask that question honestly. How do you reconcil obedience to God's teachings and trust in him with our own desires and emotions which cause us to do things that separate us from him?
Jesus saves by faith. The Law isn't what we follow anymore in terms of the Hebraic tradition. But the Law didn't disappear either. It is still present as a guide for decisions, curb for behaviors, and mirror to convict us of our wrongdoings.
If I may be honest...the only time I've been filled with irritation and anger today was tonight at a store when a clerk couldn't do a complicated return. I am ashamed to say that I got a bit peeved at him and his store's return policy. I didn't swear or yell, just voiced my opinion. Once the exchange was over, I left. But about five miinutes later I came back and apologized to him. There was no excuse for my behavior. When I'm in error, I will apologize.
But, life is life. I will not apologize for my stance on it. I am sorry not everyone likes my persepctive. I can assure you, however, that it isn't one built on hatred, fear, or judgement, but it's built on Biblical words of truth about sin and the redemption in forgiveness.
If you are going to pray, why not pray for the mothers facing tough choices? Or the mothers facing hurt from choices alraedy made? Or for clarity on this from God...why not listen and see what he says?
Re: A Note on Abortion
Blerg.
Just kidding. I will pray for you, ML. Pray that you really hear God one day and stop following man's interpretation of his will. That you stop looking to find fault with others because you are so sure Christians know everything. I've got no anger towards you, but you make me feel sad. My own personal relationship with God has sent me in a very different direction than yours (it would appear). I suppose we all have our own journey. The God I talk to is the purveyor of moral ambiguity. This world is not black and white. It is many lovely shades of gray. And MAN does not know more about what God expects from me than I do. Trust.
I am always asking WWJD. I think it is pretty clear because he has already done it. He is all powerful. He can overturn Roe vs. Wade. As Christians, I think we can all agree that God can do whatever he pleases.
However, God has allowed people free will to make decisions. Sometimes these decisions are even sinful. However, God allows us to make them. Sometimes he even uses us to gospel after we have made mistakes. As you have mentioned, God is all forgiving and there is no sin too big for him to forgive. So I am not advocating for abortions, I am advocating to use the free will God gave us. If God is all forgiving, clearly I can be forgiving as well. There is nothing to reconcile in my heart or in my faith. I'm allowing people free will just as God has.
You know what? All of that is fine. You are completely free to have your own personal feelings about abortion based on your faith.
But maybe I don't share your faith. Millions of Americans don't. So why should our laws be based on YOUR faith? Or anyone's faith, for that matter. If you want a government based on religious principles, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia await you.
I'm pretty sure this question has been asked of ML many times, and she never seems to have an answer. Perhaps because she knows you are right and does not want to admit it.
I concur. I used to be pro-choice and my faith led me away from it. I let go of my pro-choice stance kicking and screaming. I put up a fight.
After seeing God's personality in my life and in lives of others and after learning more about His character through my own experience but in also hearing the testamonies of Christian women who have had abortions, - love for all, no matter their size or position in life, and His desire to have the children come to Him...I'm just not convinced our God wants us to kill our unborn children or to allow any child/His creation to suffer the same way.
I think He wants our trust and obedience to Him in our hard times. Times of scary pregnancy included. It's easy to trust God when everything is coming up roses, but at least for me, my trust is tested the most in times of trial. Am I leaning on Him or on my own understanding (as it is informed by popular culture)? I have to ask myself this a lot.
Frequently I admit that I want to lean on my own understanding, but deep down inside I know that God's way, the one that often seems impossible and difficult, is the one I should choose.
To me, that's what walking by faith, not by sight is. The Bible does say things about the path being narrow and about not falling into the ways of the world - to guard your hearts and minds, and to be in the world but not of it. All this words I'm paraphrasing are Scriptural.
I have read the entire Bible a few times and I study it weekly, and I am always amazed by God's specifics and desire for order. If you haven't, you can read a lot of this in the first few books of the Old Testament in His directions for His people in the ways they constructed buildings and cities, built altars, designed clothing, etc. This denotes that He is a God not of chaos and ambiguity, but of order and specifics.
When I marvel in the tapestry of Scripture woven so tightly together over ages and of writers, but still retaining an implicit cohesion, I am astounded. It's very mind blowing. Ambiguity isn't a word I'd use to describe it. And, I haven't ever heard that word used to describe it by other Christians or by any respected/trusted current or past theologians or writers on the topic either.
One main thing that set the Israelites apart from their neighbors was that they did not do human sacrifices. Mass graves of thousands of ancient infant skeltons have been unearthed in the Middle East and elsewhere revealing to modern students of history, the tendancy for ancient cultures to partake in this sort of activity. But, the Israelites, did not do this. Human/infant sacrifice was the "societal norm" back then. God said to His people not to do what the other cultures did.
And in New Testament times, early Christians (Gentile converts coming to faith with the mentorship of Paul and others and Jewish converts coming to faith under the mentorship of James and others), were directed in all ways not to behave or speak like their neighbors. They were permitted to interact with them - afterall, they weren't hermits, but they were told and learned to rely on God's direction all of which points to not following in the footsteps of popular behaviors and thought.
I'll admit, this is a huge challenge for me. It would be so much easier for me to just agree to taking little lives and other things. But, God values all lives. He is deeply personal and deeply loving. Who am I, a measly human, to argue with that, when I myself am so gratful for His providence and love in my own life and blunders? I dare not deny His providence or omnipotence in the life of anyone else.
Every single one of the people Jesus ministered to or healed was an outcast in Jewish society...leper, blind, lame, mute, possessed, a child, a woman, a tax collecter, a prostitute, etc.. The "government" had no desire or place for them. The religious leaders did not want to deal with them. Often their own families had turned their backs on them. Disciples wanted to kick the kids out of the area as to not bother or disturb Jesus. Every one was so focused on their own rights and their own comfort that they either outrightly refused to help these people or they turned a blind eye. Jesus wept over them. He weeps when we take innocent baby lives. They have done nothing wrong other than to exist.
Abortion is not specified in the Bible, but taking what we know from Scripture we can build a solid picture of God's/Jesus' personality and character and this can lead us to accept what JWD to these children.
This is very well worded! And I needed to hear the part in bold. Thanks for sharing!
)
Yes, the topic of abortion is not spoken of the bible. But, the Lord makes it very clear how he feels about children.
Mark 9:42 (KJV)
42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
I believe in God. I pray. I live a moral life. I respect the laws of a civilized society.
I am not a Christian. I do not believe the Bible is the word of God. I think religion is an abomination.
Our laws should not be based on a book that some people believe in.
::gavel::
ETA: The bible contains so much contradiction and hypocrisy. 99.9% of the people who believe in it pick and choose what parts are important and disregard the rest. It's just weird. Sorry.
First bolded part - Agreed!
Second bolded part - I agree too, and I'm a Christian -- I just personally don't like quoting Scripture all the time. As Shakespeare wrote "The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose."
Laws shouldn't and don't need to be based on my faith or any faith. But, laws should be based on the majority's viewpoint on the value of human life. Most, if not all major religions as well as pretty much all non-religious world views place a distinct value on life and on helping the forgotten, underpriviledged, weak, and taken advantage of.
This means unborn children.
In addition, the emotional and mental cost on women who have abortions is very dire. This is not something widely discussed, known, or even propagated in main stream discussions. But many many women suffer a great lengths for a long time due to abortion decisons made in fear and panic. Having an abortion makes the baby go away, but not the memory for life-bearing women that they once had a life inside them. The maternal instinct kicks in right away even if the woman is afraid of her circumstances. She knows she is taking a life.
While no one would say being pregnant is easy, especially when the woman carrying child has a weak support network, the negative emotional and mental results of abortion often outweigh the 9 month period of carrying a child to be given up for adoption.
You can tell a lot about the strength and character of a society by how it treats its weak.
How civilized is a society that kills its small and weak?
~~~
In addition, regardless of your worldview/religious position and also regardless of mine too, your assertion that the Bible is full of contradition and hypocrisy is not true. This is a false assertion.
I'm not saying this because I am trying to defend it due to my faith.
I'm saying this due to fact from historical, scientific, literary, and archeological study of it that has been done and is continued today by vetted and reknowned people of history, religion, and science.
It is a highly accurate description of world history and of depicting early peoples of the Middle East and Northern Africa.
While upon a cursory reading it can seem contradictory, it really isn't. The compliation of books within it are not necessarily chronological date wise (many books that seem to be written chronologically are actually recording events that happened at the same time as events written in other books so the raeder is given a perspective from a variety of viewpoints).
The variety of viewpoints might be where many people erronously assume that it is contradictory. For example, each of the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were written by different people each of whom had a different set of interests and relationship with Jesus and the other Disciples.
Matthew is written from a Jewish perspective since most if not all teh eary Christians were Jews (until Paul and others began speaking to the Gentiles or non-Jews). Matthew was a tax collector.
Mark is written from a narrative perspective that focuses on Jesus being the Son of God. Mark's occupation is never given.
Luke is written depicting Jesus' actions and words as an ethical teacher. Luke was a physician.
John was a fisherman. This Gospel discusses a lot of Jesus' origin and divine nature.
If you and five of your friends went to the same party you'd come home in the car telling a variety of stories and you'd share some same stories but from five different perspectives. Each perspective does not invalidate any other, but works to complete a more sucinct description of the evening.
The Bible does exactly the same thing.
Uh. That argument only works if you think a fetus is a person. The pregnant woman is a person. The fetus is a fetus. I care more for the 15 year old pregnant teenager (or 35 year old woman) who does not want to have a baby. That's the weak and needy person I give a sh!t about. You care more for a mass of cells. Got it.
And I'm afraid you don't speak for all woman. I personally have never had an abortion, but I know several women who have. Not a single one regrets it. Not one. I'm so happy they had THE CHOICE. Since it was their body - the fetus doesn't own it. Sorry. Your assertion that the emotional toll of an abortion is worse than being forced to have an unwanted child is hogwash. How would you know that, pray tell?
I'm sure for some woman an abortion is the wrong choice and they regret it. But that's personal. That's private. People make the wrong choices for themselves all the time. It's not up to you or our government to tell them what to do in such a complicated scenario.
In summation, whether you think having the choice to make your own medical decisions is a good thing or not, it should be a right for all women.
Im afraid I don't buy your argument that just because the bible may seem contradictory, it's really not! Lol. It is. I'm not going to go through all the contradictions as I'm sure you are well aware of what they are.
I don't dispute any historical value the bible has. Of course. It's a very interesting book. A very primitive book, but an interesting one nonetheless.
No please. Enlighten me. Share some of the contradictions. What are they? Oh, BTW, I am going on vacation so if I don't response for awhile that's why...just didn't want you to think you scared me off.
Jan8: So if God did overturn Roe v. Wade, as you assert, He created or wanted it it the first place (I don't think so, but anyway), would you all of a sudden become pro-life?
Would a Roe V. Wade reversal cause you to change your stance on abortion since the all powerful God of ours must have ordained its reversal? If such a reversal occurred, to still be pro-choice would not be aligned with God's new- found pro-life stance, correct?
To remain pro-choice would be in contradiction of God's will. Kind of a sticky spot isn't this?
Do you know what else it means? The poor. The elderly. The disenfranchised. The disabled. The mentally ill. The sick.
Do you support the government stepping in to make sure these people are taken care of as well?
Do you feel as strongly about these babies once they're already born? Do you support mandatory paid maternity leave so that their mothers can care for them, can nurse them, can keep the jobs they need to support and feed them? Do you support guaranteed healthcare for these babies so that they are ensured care regardless of their parents' ability to pay for it? Do you support food stamp and WIC programs that make sure they get proper nutrition? Do you support public assistance programs that ensure they have a roof over their heads, and government regulations that ensure those homes have heat and running water?
Or is it no longer your or the government's responsibility to protect them once they're outside the womb?
Yes to all your questions. I think the government can and should have a role in caring for the weak, poor, and underpriviledged AND the unborn. Alongside charities and religious organizations.
I actually am okay with higher taxes to do these things. But I vote Republican, I am not a Republican though, just because of the pro-life stance and the focus on spending cuts.
But my caveat on taxes is that (because I know they CAN do this if they cared to) they also cut spending in meaningful ways - not giving it to dumb, now bank-rupt companies like Solandra, but instead putting it where it really matters.
The idea of taking taking taking and not cutting spending is what drives people crazy. It's not that they dislike helping in charitable ways via taxes, it's that they want to but not have the other crud of out of control spending continue.
People are just putting their feet down. On a federal level the red tape is cumbersome...why not let the states handle their own sensitive social issues for poor, etc.?
YES!!!!!! This.
http://news.discovery.com/human/life/fetus-pain-abortion-law.htm
Here's a few more studies,
http://www.academia.edu/151199/Can_fetuses_feel_pain
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19089-24week-fetuses-cannot-feel-pain.html
Oh look what I found, herbal abortion in the bible.
Numbers 5:11-28
New International Version (NIV)
The Test for an Unfaithful Wife
11 Then the Lord said to Moses, 12 ?Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ?If a man?s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure?or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure? 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephaha]">[a] of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.
16 ??The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, ?If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband?? 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse??may the Lord cause you to become a curseb]">[b] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.?
??Then the woman is to say, ?Amen. So be it.?
23 ??The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorialc]">[c] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.
Yes. The New International Version (NIV) of the Bible was recently redone in 2011. It was previously done back in 1970. It is one of many English Translations of the Bible. You may also know the names New King James, The Message, and the New Living Translation, just to name a few. Each one was done at various times, and in many cases, they are done to make understanding and ease of Scriptural reading simple for the lay reader.
However, going back to the original language of the Old Testament, which was/is Hebrew, you can see that it reads, not "womb miscarries," as the new NIV reads, but "and thy belly to swell."
Here are two sites to visit with the Hebrew text...
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0405.htm
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/num5.pdf
People have poured over this forever to justify a position. But, to get out of the mire of debate, all we need to do is go back to the original language.
This is not a case for being pro-choice - it's a misrepresentation of Scripture. Also, I have not come across any other translations misdirecting this verse as much as this new NIV has. Thank you for alerting me to it. I was not aware of it until now.
I was raised in a very religious Catholic family. I have read more version, in different languages, than I can shake a stick at, including hand written bibles from France. You know from when monks sat in their little dorms all day and night writing the Bible over and over. Many older versions talk about the belly swelling. Some the "her womb will expel the filth of her sins" and all that good stuff. Religious scholars have also found documented cases of these herbal abortions.