i can do the same thing with the assumption of mary, immaculate conception, praying to the saints, and any other catholic doctrine. but according to sola scriptura, unless i can be convinced that abortion is always morally wrong, i can think otherwise as i may do with other catholic doctrines.
Those are Mark Shea’s words, I’m just pointing out what his book says.
using the bible alone for my source of deciding what is considered innocent life and murder i can’t find a clear teaching on abortion. the best i find is that the Mosaic law perscribes the intentional stoning of a women who is pregnant out of wedlock so at best, it’s ambiguous.
This was my point. You can find passages to support both views, however weak, but it’s been the Church’s teaching since it’s earliest days that these types of things are sinful. There’s more evidence supporting that they are Sacred Tradition rather than strictly scriptual.
Non-responsive. Which is it?
if your aim in this thread is masked (as I think it is now) by the inevitability that you are then going to go into a “sola scriptura” debate, then I refuse to debate this issue. I must say that if that is your intent - you are deceitful and I wish to have nothing further to do with you - simply because I initially was under the impression that we were going to debate the killing of children and whether it is sinful or not.
They are wrong. I know the argument but I don’t agree that it holds any water because the key to understanding it is accidental death. If you look up the penalty for accidental death or harm elsewhere in scripture you will see that my reasoning is entirely consistent. God in His wisdom differentiates
i understand your point but nowhere does it say that it is equivalent to accidental homicide. I can’t tell if it’s punishment because of the death of potential child or a child. this is one of the few passages the relate directly to infanticide in the womb and it is pretty ambiguous.
thank you for proving my point. i guess you can’t defend the right to life (abortion) using the bible alone.
i guess i’ve hit a sore spot with those who claim the bible alone is the sole rule of faith.
Not really. “You shall not commit murder” is pretty clear. Making this an argument against Sola Scriptura is pretty lame. There is conservative Protestant Church in existence that is not pro-life. Other verse make the personhood of the unborn clear as well (John the Baptist, the Psalmist etc.). That combined with the ten commandments makes the Biblical teaching on abortion clear. Catholics and Protestants can agree on this. It should not be used as an anecdotal hammer to nail Protestants with. We are on the same side.
actually sir, you proved my point of your intent. I reiterate you posted this thread under false pretences.
Mel, I went back and looked at other posts of oatsoda’s and noticed that he is firmly pro-life, but was only using this as a platform to jump into debates over sola scriptura which I agree is pretty lame.ahimsaman72,
that is true only insofar as you can prove using the bible alone that a baby in the womb is considered an innocent life. this is what can’t be explicitly found. It is implicit, which requires tradition to understand. i’m trying to show bible alone christians that there are inconsistancies with their logic and give people a good web site to show how one can argue validly using the bible alone against the pro-life cause. when did i ever say i was pro-abortion?
“Thou shalt not murder.” comes to mind. Unless, of course, you do not believe that the life is a child.
what you just quoted of your first post was anti-thetical to what you just wrote above. Your first post was: "This is a good link of bible passages that clearly shows the bible does not explicitly teach that abortion is wrong". You were simply talking about bible passages showing the bible’s teaching on abortion as being wrong. again, you just proved my point by NOW stating the above, "the whole reason for this thread- to show the inconsistancies of sola scriptura.