Today is Shlishli, Aviv 11.You don't sound that happy about the facts of your scripture.
Stuart
What? I have no problem with Scripture, facts, or the facts of Scripture.
Today is Shlishli, Aviv 11.You don't sound that happy about the facts of your scripture.
Stuart
It sounds like you are trying to deny that in the 'flood', your god directly and intentionally drowned innocent 'unborn children'. Genesis says is was your god that did it.Today is Shlishli, Aviv 11.
What? I have no problem with Scripture, facts, or the facts of Scripture.
It sounds like you are trying to deny that in the 'flood', your god directly and intentionally drowned innocent 'unborn children'. Genesis says is was your god that did it.
Stuart
No unborn child drowned in the flood.It sounds like you are trying to deny that in the 'flood', your god directly and intentionally drowned innocent 'unborn children'. Genesis says is was your god that did it.
Stuart
Surely all of them did. To drown is to 'die through submersion in and inhalation of water', and it was through immersion in and inhalation of water that the foetuses were intentionally killed by your god.No unborn child drowned in the flood.
No, it wouldn't say that in Genesis, would it. It may not cause you to see your god differently, but it does mean a god that made it 'law' not to kill 'innocent' foetuses intentionally is a hypocrite for killing innocent foetuses intentionally itself.That is not included in the Genesis account though it may be true. It does not change my view of God at all.
No, it wouldn't say that in Genesis, would it. It may not cause you to see your god differently, but it does mean a god that made it 'law' not to kill 'innocent' foetuses intentionally is a hypocrite for killing innocent foetuses intentionally itself.
Stuart
No unborn child drowned in the flood.
Exactly.To drown is to 'die through submersion in and inhalation of water'
You mistakenly claim that God caused the flood in order to murder unborn children.It may not cause you to see your god differently, but it does mean a god that made it 'law' not to kill 'innocent' foetuses intentionally is a hypocrite for killing innocent foetuses intentionally itself.
I estimate that 400,000 foetuses died in that manner, according to Genesis.Exactly.
No unborn child died in that manner.
Genesis 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.You mistakenly claim that God caused the flood in order to murder unborn children.
I wasn't counting the abortions performed by humans, this is the abortions caused by your god specifically when it drowned almost the whole population intentionally.God is not the cause of the abortions (murders) man performs.
I wasn't counting the abortions performed by humans, this is the abortions caused by your god specifically when it drowned almost the whole population intentionally.
Stuart
Whatever you call it, it amounts to the same result for the foetus. It is an intentional killing of a foetus by your god, probably 400,000 times over.This can be said that abortions are not mentioned and neither are pregnant women. What can be supposed is that there may have been pregnant women. I have no problem with this. Should God kill a pregnant woman that is not an abortion.
Whatever you call it, it amounts to the same result for the foetus. It is an intentional killing of a foetus by your god, probably 400,000 times over.
Stuart
You have been wrong before, you are wrong now, and you will be wrong again.I estimate that 400,000 foetuses died in that manner, according to Genesis.
As you just showed, God did not have mass abortions as the intent of the flood.Genesis 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
No mistake about it.
Genesis 6:17 17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. |
What was the cause of death then, if not drowning?You have been wrong before, you are wrong now, and you will be wrong again.
No unborn child died by drowning.
As you just showed, God did not have mass abortions as the intent of the flood.
Genesis 6:17
17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
There was not even one unborn child that drowned in the flood.
So abortion is OK if the pregnant woman is wicked?No. Yours is an invented argument. Like I said, the wicked die. Sometimes this includes their children.
Today is Chamishi. It is Yom, Day. It is Aviv 13.So abortion is OK if the pregnant woman is wicked?
Stuart
The official term is intra-uterine fetal death.What was the cause of death then, if not drowning?
Stuart
Caused by what?The official term is intra-uterine fetal death.
But the killing of the foetus is still intentional. You can't call it accidental or unintended.Today is Chamishi. It is Yom, Day. It is Aviv 13.
No. Killing the woman who commits adultery may be something that God wants to happen.