Calvin-ism Leads to Heaven!

[Right Divider]

Not even close. I went out on a search, and I found what has been here for all of us, all along.

:french:

 

[Right Divider]

So you accept that the Word of God is "the whole Apostolic witness, and not just what we find in the New Testament?"

The Bible is the Word of God. Not your false prophets.

I said that you do not, and here you say 'False accusations?'
Of course. Nobody's arguing about whether murder is wrong, but whether abortion is wrong. If you receive the whole Apostolic witness, this doesn't require some sort of scriptural argument, piecing it together from this scripture and that scripture. The Apostles said abortion was wrong, full stop.

Abortion is murder and murder was shown to be wrong LONG before the first century.... full stop.

 

[Idolater]

:french:

Yes. 'French.' Indeed.

'French.'

 

[Idolater]

The Bible is the Word of God.

Yes. Do you hereby reject every other thing that the Apostles taught while here with us on earth, that was not written down for us, and found in the New Testament?

Not your false prophets.

I don't have any of those.

Abortion is murder and murder was shown to be wrong LONG before the first century.... full stop.

Oh. Chapter and verse where Scripture says, "Abortion is murder."

I'll wait.

 

[john w]

With the plainest language, we've seen that the King James Bible teaches that Christ's Resurrection is the sine qua non of the one Christian faith, and that believing in Christ, is tantamount to believing in His Resurrection.

You missed it, as usual deceiver, and continue your misdirection, creating a moving target.

 

[Idolater]

You missed it, as usual deceiver, and continue your misdirection, creating a moving target.

That 'target' is just settin there.

 

[john w]

That 'target' is just settin there.

Oh.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes. Do you hereby reject every other thing that the Apostles taught while here with us on earth, that was not written down for us, and found in the New Testament?
I don't have any of those.
Oh. Chapter and verse where Scripture says, "Abortion is murder."

I'll wait.

http://americanrtl.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about-abortion#Exodus21

 

[Idolater]

http://americanrtl.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about-abortion#Exodus21

Does it have the chapter and verse saying, "Abortion is murder?" What is it?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Does it have the chapter and verse saying, "Abortion is murder?" What is it?

Yes. It's in Exodus 21.

 

[Right Divider]

Yes. It's in Exodus 21.

He's a blind as a bat.

 

[Idolater]

Yes. It's in Exodus 21.

I have to suppose that you mean:

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

​

Is this where you read, "Abortion is murder?"

 

[JudgeRightly]

I have to suppose that you mean:

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

​

Is this where you read, "Abortion is murder?"

Crime of Killing the Unborn is Murder: "If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." –Exodus 21:22-25 Exodus 21:22 is the first fetal homicide law and concerns the child harmed during a separate assault. Pro-abortion theologians wrongly interpret this passage to refer to miscarriage, and only if the woman also dies is the penalty then life for life. But the passage distinguishes between the baby who survives the assault and the baby who dies. The meaning turns on whether the woman has a miscarriage or gives birth prematurely. And the Hebrew verb used is NOT that for miscarriage. Therefore the passage imposes only a fine on the criminal who accidentally causes a premature birth, but the punishment is life for life if the baby then dies. This shows that God equated the life of the unborn with that of the born, and abortion with murder. This passage, like Exodus 21:33-36, 22:5-6, and others, teaches that those who cause injury are responsible for their actions, even if the harm was unintentional. Therefore, this passage is the biblical model for any principled Unborn Victims of Crime Act. However, if the harm to the unborn in Exodus 21:22 spoke only of miscarriage, the teaching would then support legalized abortion by valuing the life of a fetus only with a fine, and only if the mother later died, would her death require taking the criminal's life. But note the word used to describe the consequence of the crime described in Exodus 21:22, "If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely," the Hebrew word for miscarriage, shaw-kole, is NOT used. If the baby came out dead, a monetary fine would indicate a less than human value for the life of the fetus. (And that is exactly how the pagan Code of Hammurabi, section 209, undervalued a child.) However, because Exodus 21:22 says premature birth, and not miscarriage, the passage does not support a right to kill an unborn child, as contended by many who mistranslate this text. Rather, the text values the unborn child's life equal to that of any other person. The author Moses (Mat. 12:26) mentions the idea of a baby coming out of the womb twice within three chapters. In Exodus 23:26, he uses the Hebrew word for miscarriage, speaking of barrenness and shaw-kole (miscarriage). But the word at Exodus 21:22 is yaw-tsaw, which means to come out, come forth, bring forth, and has no connotation of death but in fact the opposite. The Hebrew Scriptures use yaw-tsaw 1,043 times beginning with Genesis 1:24 where God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature…” In Genesis and Exodus alone Moses uses this word about 150 times such as in Genesis 25 describing the births of twins Jacob and Esau. Thus the Mosaic law requires the criminal to pay financial restitution to a woman unintentionally injured by a criminal if she "gives birth prematurely." But then if that living being dies (i.e., the baby, soul, nephesh, which Hebrew word is always feminine, e.g., Lev. 19:8; Ps. 11:1) the text then applies the full Hebrew idiom which means that the punishment should fit the crime. If there is harm beyond a premature birth, and the unborn child dies, then the punishment is "life for life."​

 

[Idolater]

He's a blind as a bat.

lain:

You are.

Fun!

 

[JudgeRightly]

He's a blind as a bat.

To be fair to the bats, they (the bats) aren't that blind...

 

[Idolater]

Crime of Killing the Unborn is Murder: "If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." –Exodus 21:22-25 Exodus 21:22 is the first fetal homicide law and concerns the child harmed during a separate assault. Pro-abortion theologians wrongly interpret this passage to refer to miscarriage, and only if the woman also dies is the penalty then life for life. But the passage distinguishes between the baby who survives the assault and the baby who dies. The meaning turns on whether the woman has a miscarriage or gives birth prematurely. And the Hebrew verb used is NOT that for miscarriage. Therefore the passage imposes only a fine on the criminal who accidentally causes a premature birth, but the punishment is life for life if the baby then dies. This shows that God equated the life of the unborn with that of the born, and abortion with murder. This passage, like Exodus 21:33-36, 22:5-6, and others, teaches that those who cause injury are responsible for their actions, even if the harm was unintentional. Therefore, this passage is the biblical model for any principled Unborn Victims of Crime Act. However, if the harm to the unborn in Exodus 21:22 spoke only of miscarriage, the teaching would then support legalized abortion by valuing the life of a fetus only with a fine, and only if the mother later died, would her death require taking the criminal's life. But note the word used to describe the consequence of the crime described in Exodus 21:22, "If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely," the Hebrew word for miscarriage, shaw-kole, is NOT used. If the baby came out dead, a monetary fine would indicate a less than human value for the life of the fetus. (And that is exactly how the pagan Code of Hammurabi, section 209, undervalued a child.) However, because Exodus 21:22 says premature birth, and not miscarriage, the passage does not support a right to kill an unborn child, as contended by many who mistranslate this text. Rather, the text values the unborn child's life equal to that of any other person. The author Moses (Mat. 12:26) mentions the idea of a baby coming out of the womb twice within three chapters. In Exodus 23:26, he uses the Hebrew word for miscarriage, speaking of barrenness and shaw-kole (miscarriage). But the word at Exodus 21:22 is yaw-tsaw, which means to come out, come forth, bring forth, and has no connotation of death but in fact the opposite. The Hebrew Scriptures use yaw-tsaw 1,043 times beginning with Genesis 1:24 where God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature…” In Genesis and Exodus alone Moses uses this word about 150 times such as in Genesis 25 describing the births of twins Jacob and Esau. Thus the Mosaic law requires the criminal to pay financial restitution to a woman unintentionally injured by a criminal if she "gives birth prematurely." But then if that living being dies (i.e., the baby, soul, nephesh, which Hebrew word is always feminine, e.g., Lev. 19:8; Ps. 11:1) the text then applies the full Hebrew idiom which means that the punishment should fit the crime. If there is harm beyond a premature birth, and the unborn child dies, then the punishment is "life for life."​

So instead of providing the asked for chapter and verse saying that, "Abortion is murder," I have to read this lengthy explanation by someone who isn't a scriptural author telling me that this is what 'Exodus 21' means, even though it doesn't say it?

I believe abortion is grave sin, like you do. I knew it was grave sin before ever looking for it in the Bible (where I continue to maintain, Exodus 21 notwithstanding, since it's clearly not clear about it, 'Abortion is murder' is not found), and while I didn't find any clear witness that abortion is gravely immoral, what I did find was the bishops, and the bishops teach that abortion is grave sin, and they claim that the Apostles taught as much, by word-of-mouth, right in the Apostolic age.

Because of being Catholic in my theology, I don't have any trouble knowing that and why abortion is grave sin, it's really rather trivial, just like how the Apostles taught on the Trinity, even though it takes some real work to tease out the Trinity from just what we read in Scripture.

 

[JudgeRightly]

So instead of providing the asked for chapter and verse saying that, "Abortion is murder," I have to read this lengthy explanation by someone who isn't a scriptural author telling me that this is what 'Exodus 21' means, even though it doesn't say it?

Yes, because the commonly used interpretation is incorrect.

I believe abortion is grave sin, like you do.

No, actually, you don't. If you did, you would recognize that abortion is ALSO a CRIME.

I knew it was grave sin before ever looking for it in the Bible (where I continue to maintain, Exodus 21 notwithstanding, since it's clearly not clear about it, 'Abortion is murder' is not found),

You don't seem to be very capable of connecting the dots, are you?

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C.

Here's what the passage says:

Killing a baby in the womb is a capital crime, because it's killing an innocent person, and the criminal should be put to death (life for life).

Killing innocent people is called murder.

Abortion is taking the life of an innocent baby in the womb.

Ergo, abortion is murder.

See, that wasn't so hard. Now you know exactly where in the Bible that it calls abortion murder.

and while I didn't find any clear witness that abortion is gravely immoral, what I did find was the bishops, and the bishops teach that abortion is grave sin, and they claim that the Apostles taught as much, by word-of-mouth, right in the Apostolic age.

Back to the bishops again, I see, instead of just reading scripture plainly. lain:

Because of being Catholic in my theology, I don't have any trouble knowing that and why abortion is grave sin, it's really rather trivial, just like how the Apostles taught on the Trinity, even though it takes some real work to tease out the Trinity from just what we read in Scripture.

And yet you seem completely unwilling to tease out the above meaning of the passage in Exodus 21. How ironic.

 

[Idolater]

Yes, because the commonly used interpretation is incorrect.

What is the 'commonly used interpretation?'

No, actually, you don't.

Yes I do.

If you did, you would recognize that abortion is ALSO a CRIME.

How do you define 'crime?' Isn't it just, that which is against some law? And you believe that the law should be changed to make it a crime, correct?

You don't seem to be very capable of connecting the dots, are you?

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C.

I'm with you so far.

Here's what the passage says:

Killing a baby in the womb is a capital crime

Where does it say that?

, because it's killing an innocent person

Where does it say a baby in the womb is an innocent person? In Psalm 51 David says of himself, "I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." It doesn't sound like he thought that he was an innocent person in the womb.

, and the criminal should be put to death (life for life).

Killing innocent people is called murder.

Right, agreed.

Abortion is taking the life of an innocent baby in the womb.

Ergo, abortion is murder.

It's murder when not performed in defense of the mother.

See, that wasn't so hard. Now you know exactly where in the Bible that it calls abortion murder.

And you cannot produce a scripture that says 'abortion is murder' because there isn't one. There's no scripture that mentions what abortion actually is; a pregnant woman electing to terminate her pregnancy, it's not in there anywhere.

Probably, back when the Law was written, there was never anybody who would ever elect to terminate their own pregnancy, because all pregnancies were rightly considered blessings, but we can only guess at that. What we don't have to guess at, is that abortion per se is never mentioned in Scripture, Old or New Testament.

Exodus 21 has to do with accidentally causing a miscarriage, or intentionally causing one, in someone else's wife. It's not what the abortion issue is concerned with. You're having to do exactly what I've said, you have to extrapolate from the text to arrive at your position.

Back to the bishops again, I see, instead of just reading scripture plainly.

As compared with the lack of any plain treatment of the matter of abortion in the Bible, it does plainly treat the existence and authenticity of Church bishops. Why do you hold fast to positions that are not at all plain in Scripture, while simultaneously rejecting something that is plain?

And yet you seem completely unwilling to tease out the above meaning of the passage in Exodus 21. How ironic.

I just said that I don't have to tease out anything from Scripture. The bishops are right there in front of us, explicitly, and I listen to them. There isn't any irony here.

 

[JudgeRightly]

What is the 'commonly used interpretation?'

Explained in the article linked above.

Yes I do.

No, you don't.

How do you define 'crime?'

"An action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law."

Isn't it just, that which is against some law?

See above.

And you believe that the law should be changed to make it a crime, correct?

I'm a theonomist. Look that up. That's my answer.

I'm with you so far.
Where does it say that?
Where does it say a baby in the womb is an innocent person?

Do you consider the baby in the womb a person, first of all, and if so, what crime have they committed?

In Psalm 51 David says of himself, "I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

Please show how that means that David had sinned/committed a crime in his mother's womb.

It doesn't sound like he thought that he was an innocent person in the womb.

It sounds like you're reading things into the text.

Right, agreed.
It's murder when not performed in defense of the mother.

Please provide an example where "defense of the mother" (whatever that means) is a valid reason to kill a baby, a person, in the womb.

And you cannot produce a scripture that says 'abortion is murder' because there isn't one.

Neither is there scripture that contains the word "trinity" or a condemnation of pedophilia. So what? What's your point? That because a word or phrase isn't found in the Bible, therefore God isn't against it?

That's called an argument from silence. It's a logical fallacy.

There's no scripture that mentions what abortion actually is;

If this were true (which is isn't), it would also be an argument from silence.

a pregnant woman electing to terminate her pregnancy, it's not in there anywhere.

The Bible calls the baby in the womb a "child". It says that in the commission of an unrelated crime, if the baby dies, the criminal should be put to death, reason given is "life for life."
The Bible says do not kill the innocent. A baby in the womb, a child, is the most innocent thing in the world.

Abortion is killing the baby in the womb, also known as killing an innocent person, also known as murder.

Probably,

Probably? Meaning, you don't know?

Your basis for your arguments is getting sandier and sandier.

back when the Law was written, there was never anybody who would ever elect to terminate their own pregnancy, because all pregnancies were rightly considered blessings,

Perhaps it's that they had a respect for life that society today has lost, don't you think?

I mean, we kill thousands of babies a day, hundreds of thousands per year, we kill the elderly and infirm because they're "unwanted," and we promote suicide.

I'd say we have definitely lost the respect for life we SHOULD have.

but we can only guess at that.

Or, you know, we could just look at what scripture says...

What we don't have to guess at, is that abortion per se is never mentioned in Scripture, Old or New Testament.

Neither is "trinity" or "pedophilia is wrong", so again, what's your point?

Exodus 21 has to do with accidentally causing a miscarriage, or intentionally causing one, in someone else's wife.

This is what tells me that you didn't bother to read the portion of the article I linked to (and quoted) before. I recommend you actually read through what was said there.

It's not what the abortion issue is concerned with.

If the fetus in the mother's womb is a person, then abortion is wrong, because it's killing an innocent person. Killing an innocent person is murder. The Bible calls the baby in the womb a child.

Not sure why those statements are so hard to understand.

You're having to do exactly what I've said, you have to extrapolate from the text to arrive at your position.

No, I'm simply reading what it says and putting the pieces together. Something it seems you are incapable of doing.

As compared with the lack of any plain treatment of the matter of abortion in the Bible, it does plainly treat the existence and authenticity of Church bishops.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with abortion. I honestly don't care what any "bishop" says.

I care what the Bible says, because THAT is God's word, not the opinion of some guy in a funny hat.

Why do you hold fast to positions that are not at all plain in Scripture,

I could ask the same of you? Why do you hold to the teaching of the trinity when it is not plainly said in the Bible?

I hold to the position that abortion is murder because it's the truth. It's murder because it's a baby, an innocent person, free of ALL guilt, made in God's image. It's ALWAYS wrong to kill a baby.

while simultaneously rejecting something that is plain?

Plain according to whom?

I just said that I don't have to tease out anything from Scripture.

The bishops are right there in front of us,

The bishops are not God. They do not speak on behalf of God. They do not have the same authority that the Twelve or Paul does. They do not have the same authority that the authors of the Bible do.

To say otherwise is blasphemy.

explicitly, and I listen to them.

You should instead listen to God.

"Let God be true, and every man a liar."

There isn't any irony here.

There's plenty.

 

[Idolater]

Explained in the article linked above.

The only thing that article explained was that I should listen to some other source, other than the Scripture itself, to understand something about my faith. I already do that, with the Church's own authentic and authorized teachers of the faith, not someone who wrote an article.

No, you don't.

Yes I do. I've said as much, and provided my reasoning for it, and you have no reason to doubt me.

"An action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law."

See above.

So yes then. A crime is something that is against the law.

I'm a theonomist. Look that up. That's my answer.

So you believe in some form of Christendom then, that the civil authorities ought to force people to abide by Christian morality. How are you different from the Catholic Church, who you hate so much, of the middle ages?

Do you consider the baby in the womb a person, first of all, and if so, what crime have they committed?

Yes, and none. And you didn't answer my questions.

Please show how that means that David had sinned/committed a crime in his mother's womb.

I don't need to do that. All I was showing was that David doesn't sound like he thought that he was an innocent person in the womb, when he says, "I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

It sounds like you're reading things into the text.

I'm not. "I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

Please provide an example where "defense of the mother" (whatever that means) is a valid reason to kill a baby, a person, in the womb.

When bringing the baby to full term endangers the mother's life. It does happen. It has happened. We know of many examples throughout history of it happening. It can happen today.

Neither is there scripture that contains the word "trinity" or a condemnation of pedophilia. So what? What's your point?

I've been making my point. It's that abortion, the Trinity, rape, pedophilia, pornography, masturbation, are not found explicitly in the Bible, are not issues for me, since I heed the teaching office of the Church, which is found explicitly in the Bible, and they teach explicitly on all these things, besides that which the Bible does explicitly teach.

That because a word or phrase isn't found in the Bible, therefore God isn't against it?

No, just that, for you all who insist on 'Sola Scriptura,' then if something does not happen to be mentioned explicitly in Scripture, means that you all have to extrapolate and interpolate from the text, and that those who heed the bishops don't have to do that.

That's called an argument from silence. It's a logical fallacy.

If I were making an argument, then perhaps I'd agree with your estimation, but I wasn't. I made a factual claim, that "you cannot produce a scripture that says 'abortion is murder' because there isn't one."

If this were true (which is isn't), it would also be an argument from silence.

It is true, but it's still not an argument, but just a factual statement.

The Bible calls the baby in the womb a "child".

Right, John the Baptist is said to have already "filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb," (Lk1:15KJV), and that he "leaped" (Lk2:41KJV Lk2:44KJV) when the Lord, also Himself still in the Blessed Virgin's womb, was nigh.

It says that in the commission of an unrelated crime, if the baby dies, the criminal should be put to death, reason given is "life for life."

Right, which is not abortion, which is when the pregnant woman elects to terminate her own pregnancy.

The Bible says do not kill the innocent. A baby in the womb, a child, is the most innocent thing in the world.

And yet David says, "I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." I'm not saying that because of what David said, that abortion isn't gravely immoral, it is, but you're making a claim about the innocence of an unborn child, without providing any scriptural reference to back that up, and yet here is a scriptural reference that defies your claim, at the very least, in the case of David.

Abortion is killing the baby in the womb, also known as killing an innocent person, also known as murder.

You're building a house of cards that can crumble. Me? I listen to the bishops. No house of cards.

Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law: You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish. God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.​

​

Probably? Meaning, you don't know?

Yeah. Because it's not in the text. I'm just going by what the Bible says, and doesn't say. You're trying to make the text say something it doesn't.

Your basis for your arguments is getting sandier and sandier.

This was really just an aside. The point/fact is that abortion as we know it today isn't mentioned in the Bible, and I was offering up a conjecture about why perhaps it isn't there. A bit overzealous with the logical fallacies there, JR. You're a person with only a hammer, and everything looks like a nail to you.

Perhaps it's that they had a respect for life that society today has lost, don't you think?

What's the difference between that, and what I said, that, "all pregnancies were rightly considered blessings?"

I mean, we kill thousands of babies a day, hundreds of thousands per year, we kill the elderly and infirm because they're "unwanted," and we promote suicide.

I'd say we have definitely lost the respect for life we SHOULD have.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but again, this whole line was an aside, and a conjecture.

Or, you know, we could just look at what scripture says...

It doesn't say anything, about why abortion as we know it today, isn't mentioned. That's why the conjecture.

Neither is "trinity" or "pedophilia is wrong", so again, what's your point?

That we have the bishops, if we avail ourselves of their service and heed them, and who do mention these things per se.

We firmly believe and confess without reservation that there is only one true God, eternal infinite (immensus) and unchangeable, incomprehensible, almighty and ineffable, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; three persons indeed, but one essence, substance or nature entirely simple.

Rape is the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person. It does injury to justice and charity. Rape deeply wounds the respect, freedom, and physical and moral integrity to which every person has a right. It causes grave damage that can mark the victim for life. It is always an intrinsically evil act. Graver still is the rape of children committed by parents (incest) or those responsible for the education of the children entrusted to them.

​

This is what tells me that you didn't bother to read the portion of the article I linked to (and quoted) before. I recommend you actually read through what was said there.

I read the Scripture itself. What need should I have to read something else?

If the fetus in the mother's womb is a person, then abortion is wrong, because it's killing an innocent person. Killing an innocent person is murder. The Bible calls the baby in the womb a child.

Not sure why those statements are so hard to understand.

That wasn't hard, and I agree with you, as I've continued to say. We agree that abortion is grave sin. You continue to resist what I'm saying is a fact, that abortion, as the pregnant woman's election to terminate her own pregnancy, is not mentioned in the Bible. It's not in the text.

No, I'm simply reading what it says and putting the pieces together.

But you don't have all the pieces, not from the Scripture. They're not all in the text. You introduce pieces that aren't in the text.

Something it seems you are incapable of doing.

I'm fully capable of doing Protestant hermeneutics. I've been trained in the activity. I've done it for many years. It's how I finally found the bishops, and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. "This is My body" x 4.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with abortion.

It has to do with explicit and authoritative teaching on the matter, something the Bible does not do here.

I honestly don't care what any "bishop" says.

No, but you do care what some biblical commentators and interpreters say, so long as it agrees with your own private interpretation. idk why you don't accept the reality that the Apostles designated certain men to be bishops, and that they instituted the method by which new bishops are created, both of which are found in the New Testament.

I care what the Bible says, because THAT is God's word

We agree.

, not the opinion of some guy in a funny hat.

The bishops don't teach their opinion. In fact, I heard once the bishop of my own archdiocese put forth an opinion of his that is contrary to Apostolic teaching, but submitted himself to their teaching authority, rather than arrogantly believe that his opinion was correct. He is a humble pastor, even though he is a 'senior' pastor, one of the highest ranking bishops the Church has. He heeds the Apostles, and he teaches what they taught, not his own opinions that differ with what they taught.

I could ask the same of you? Why do you hold to the teaching of the trinity when it is not plainly said in the Bible?

Because the bishops are 'plainly said in the Bible,' and the bishops plainly teach the Trinity.

I hold to the position that abortion is murder because it's the truth.

That's circular. Logical fallacy.

It's murder because it's a baby, an innocent person, free of ALL guilt, made in God's image. It's ALWAYS wrong to kill a baby.

God commanded killing babies. That's also in the text.

Plain according to whom?

You do read the same words that I do wrt bishops and elders and overseers, right? I mean 'plain' like, in black-and-white.

The bishops are not God.

No one, is claiming that. Straw man. Logical fallacy.

They do not speak on behalf of God. They do not have the same authority that the Twelve or Paul does. They do not have the same authority that the authors of the Bible do.

To say otherwise is blasphemy.

Why do the non-Apostle authors of the New Testament have the authority to pen Scripture? Luke? Mark? Not Apostles, yet they wrote Scripture. How? Because the Apostles confirmed what they wrote was accurate Apostolic teaching, and so now, it's Scripture.

You should instead listen to God.

False dilemma. Logical fallacy.

"Let God be true, and every man a liar."

Yep.

There's plenty.

'Not seeing it, not on my end.