Update-Heresy Watch
A Letter from another Confessional Lutheran.
I went to the lecture-thingy for this "prayerfully prochoice" thingy. I sought to be a light in the darkness, but the darkness wasn't just darkness, it was also chaos. They would make a piss-pore arguement, I would respond and then five of them (there were about 6 or 8 of them)would enter the respond to me at the same time; I swear, it was crazy. Not> only were their arguements absolute luticrist, but there were so many horrible comments coming my way at the same time and then they wouldn't> let me respond again.
The one guy even essentially argued to take out the Old Testament after he somehow used it (Numbers 5 and Exodus 21 I think it was) to argue that the Bible liturally speaks to and supports abortion.
Comments: I am not sure if she quoted Exodus 21 or Levitcus 21. John Piper addressed the Hebrew behind the Levitical text in the following post http://emerti.blogspot.com/2005/07/abortion-debate.html. As far as Leviticus 21 or Numbers 5, the idea is that if one has a blemish they should be discarded. The laws dealing with blemishes, are like laws in the Old Testament dealing with cleaniness the idea that one has to be perfect to go before God.
But as I stated on my Post concerning Heresy Watch #1 : "We don't follow Old Testament Sacrifical system because Christ is the ulitmate high preist as stated in Hebrews 6-10. So this is quite well laid out in the New Testament. Laws dealing with issues of cleaniness fall along these lines, since Christ took away any need to make pure sacrifices for sin." The number of times I have to go into the book of Leviticus, for today's relevance is amazing. People like to say we don't follow some levtical law, so we can't take anything literally in all of scripture. This is a different poor use of scripture, as they decide to poorly use these laws when they are convient.
They also used a text from Amos (Amos 5:24) to support their arguement for a woman's "right to choose" what she does... to which I of course responded with that being a poor use of that passage in light of other> lessons, most specifically 1 Corinthians 6:19, to which they responded "well, the temple has already been broken." Anyway, I just thought I'd share that with y'all.
As far as Amos 5:24 it took a while for me to figure, out what they were getting at here. But the argument seems to go being forced to have a baby is the power structure-male making the oppressed female-carry out a child. Obviously injustice occurs, when some sort of power structure is violated. Were as an Unborn Child is clearly the one with no voice in this situation, of whom justice is required. But this is somewhat inaccurate proof-texting, responding to terrible proof-texting on my part. As for the book of Amos it deals with abuse of the sacrifical system, and mistreatment of the poor.
I went to the lecture-thingy for this "prayerfully prochoice" thingy. I sought to be a light in the darkness, but the darkness wasn't just darkness, it was also chaos. They would make a piss-pore arguement, I would respond and then five of them (there were about 6 or 8 of them)would enter the respond to me at the same time; I swear, it was crazy. Not> only were their arguements absolute luticrist, but there were so many horrible comments coming my way at the same time and then they wouldn't> let me respond again.
The one guy even essentially argued to take out the Old Testament after he somehow used it (Numbers 5 and Exodus 21 I think it was) to argue that the Bible liturally speaks to and supports abortion.
Comments: I am not sure if she quoted Exodus 21 or Levitcus 21. John Piper addressed the Hebrew behind the Levitical text in the following post http://emerti.blogspot.com/2005/07/abortion-debate.html. As far as Leviticus 21 or Numbers 5, the idea is that if one has a blemish they should be discarded. The laws dealing with blemishes, are like laws in the Old Testament dealing with cleaniness the idea that one has to be perfect to go before God.
But as I stated on my Post concerning Heresy Watch #1 : "We don't follow Old Testament Sacrifical system because Christ is the ulitmate high preist as stated in Hebrews 6-10. So this is quite well laid out in the New Testament. Laws dealing with issues of cleaniness fall along these lines, since Christ took away any need to make pure sacrifices for sin." The number of times I have to go into the book of Leviticus, for today's relevance is amazing. People like to say we don't follow some levtical law, so we can't take anything literally in all of scripture. This is a different poor use of scripture, as they decide to poorly use these laws when they are convient.
They also used a text from Amos (Amos 5:24) to support their arguement for a woman's "right to choose" what she does... to which I of course responded with that being a poor use of that passage in light of other> lessons, most specifically 1 Corinthians 6:19, to which they responded "well, the temple has already been broken." Anyway, I just thought I'd share that with y'all.
As far as Amos 5:24 it took a while for me to figure, out what they were getting at here. But the argument seems to go being forced to have a baby is the power structure-male making the oppressed female-carry out a child. Obviously injustice occurs, when some sort of power structure is violated. Were as an Unborn Child is clearly the one with no voice in this situation, of whom justice is required. But this is somewhat inaccurate proof-texting, responding to terrible proof-texting on my part. As for the book of Amos it deals with abuse of the sacrifical system, and mistreatment of the poor.
posted by Stew at 2:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home