What Does The Bible Say About False Accusers And #BelieveWomen?
-
Yes, that's where I'm going. Life is Life and death is death. How can you define the starting point for life differently than the ending point?
I can almost guarantee that if I dig into claims and citations (if there are any) from a heavily pro life or religious site they'll be found out to not be 100% true.
The link I gave stating life begins at conception was from the American College of Pediatricians. I could list many many other sites with a quick google search also stating life begins at conception. In checking they are pro life but where are they wrong?
https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins
"Yes, that's where I'm going. Life is Life and death is death. How can you define the starting point for life differently than the ending point?"
The simple answer for me is when cells start growing and when cells stop growing. A fertilized egg is in the process of growing new cells and living human beings are growing new cells constantly to replace dying ones. At death there are no new cells growing.
The link I gave stating life begins at conception was from the American College of Pediatricians. I could list many many other sites with a quick google search also stating life begins at conception. In checking they are pro life but where are they wrong?
The American College of Pediatricians is a conservative advocacy group, anti LGBT, etc.. Just FYI.
It's another example of conservative groups adapting legitimate sounding names to seem like a better source
-
Actually we have some women in our church who did have abortions. Even though they repented and God has forgiven them they have a very difficult time forgiving themselves. Today they are active in trying to keep other women from making their mistake and are trying to prevent abortions.
good for them, that's how you reduce abortions. Not through the legal system. This is what annoys me to no end about pro lifers...they think pro choice people want women to have abortions. Which essentially is like raising one's hand and saying im so stupid that I can't rationally conceptualize the term "pro choice". Pro choice people give no fuks if there were zero abortions next year so long as that was the womens "choice". If the pregnancy wasn't forced on them and they made the "choice", there's that crafty word again, then pro "choice" people have to abide by those womens "decisions". Notice these words in quotation OBF? Just digest them for a moment.
good for them, that's how you reduce abortions. Not through the legal system. This is what annoys me to no end about pro lifers...they think pro choice people want women to have abortions. Which essentially is like raising one's hand and saying im so stupid that I can't rationally conceptualize the term "pro choice". Pro choice people give no fuks if there were zero abortions next year so long as that was the womens "choice". If the pregnancy wasn't forced on them and they made the "choice", there's that crafty word again, then pro "choice" people have to abide by those womens "decisions". Notice these words in quotation OBF? Just digest them for a moment.
I am all for choice except when the choice is the right to kill a baby in the womb.
-
good for them, that's how you reduce abortions. Not through the legal system. This is what annoys me to no end about pro lifers...they think pro choice people want women to have abortions. Which essentially is like raising one's hand and saying im so stupid that I can't rationally conceptualize the term "pro choice". Pro choice people give no fuks if there were zero abortions next year so long as that was the womens "choice". If the pregnancy wasn't forced on them and they made the "choice", there's that crafty word again, then pro "choice" people have to abide by those womens "decisions". Notice these words in quotation OBF? Just digest them for a moment.
I am all for choice except when the choice is the right to kill a baby in the womb.
I am all for choice except when the choice is the right to kill a baby in the womb.
its not ur body its growing inside so its not ur call. 2000 years ago women had to understand they were baby chattel and nothing more. Societies "won" by having the most people, ie more soldiers to throw at the other cave people. He who had the largest herd won. That is the basis of ur religion. They codified that concept of over population through cool bible stories that never happened.
The people who controlled every religion, they wanted ofc to expand thrir control cause they were shitkunts. So they needed their people to have as many children as possible. Sex was purely for procreation for "the motherland" blah blah blah. Its amazing that religious leaders didnt think eventually people would catch on to this. Its just another nuance of the class warfare thats been going on since time began
-
-
I am all for choice except when the choice is the right to kill a baby in the womb.
its not ur body its growing inside so its not ur call. 2000 years ago women had to understand they were baby chattel and nothing more. Societies "won" by having the most people, ie more soldiers to throw at the other cave people. He who had the largest herd won. That is the basis of ur religion. They codified that concept of over population through cool bible stories that never happened.
The people who controlled every religion, they wanted ofc to expand thrir control cause they were shitkunts. So they needed their people to have as many children as possible. Sex was purely for procreation for "the motherland" blah blah blah. Its amazing that religious leaders didnt think eventually people would catch on to this. Its just another nuance of the class warfare thats been going on since time began
its not ur body its growing inside so its not ur call. 2000 years ago women had to understand they were baby chattel and nothing more. Societies "won" by having the most people, ie more soldiers to throw at the other cave people. He who had the largest herd won. That is the basis of ur religion. They codified that concept of over population through cool bible stories that never happened.
The people who controlled every religion, they wanted ofc to expand thrir control cause they were shitkunts. So they needed their people to have as many children as possible. Sex was purely for procreation for "the motherland" blah blah blah. Its amazing that religious leaders didnt think eventually people would catch on to this. Its just another nuance of the class warfare thats been going on since time began
Stuart
This is as bad as when you guys play the 'Crusades' card Cleve.
-
The brave new world of the left where an accusation with no corroboration is enough to destroy any man. Women are to be believed always. It is up to the accused to prove their innocence instead of the accuser. There is no presumption of innocence for the accused. This is the stuff of the Salem witch hunts, the Spanish Inquisition and communist countries. If you dare don't go along with the mob the Soros paid mob will come for you. Thankfully it failed (barely) with Kavanaugh. Thankfully we had some people with courage who stood up to the Soros rent a mob and the screaming banshees.
In the bible Joseph was charged by a woman for attempted rape. He was innocent, the alleged victim lied and off Joseph went to prison. Please don't tell me any more stupidity that women don't lie. The left would claim Joseph's lying accuser was a survivor. The foundations of our justice system date back to Moses with witnesses and evidence needed to find the accused guilty, not just an accusation.
The brave new world of the left where an accusation with no corroboration is enough to destroy any man. Women are to be believed always. It is up to the accused to prove their innocence instead of the accuser. There is no presumption of innocence for the accused. This is the stuff of the Salem witch hunts, the Spanish Inquisition and communist countries. If you dare don't go along with the mob the Soros paid mob will come for you. Thankfully it failed (barely) with Kavanaugh. Thankfully we had some people with courage who stood up to the Soros rent a mob and the screaming banshees.
In the bible Joseph was charged by a woman for attempted rape. He was innocent, the alleged victim lied and off Joseph went to prison. Please don't tell me any more stupidity that women don't lie. The left would claim Joseph's lying accuser was a survivor. The foundations of our justice system date back to Moses with witnesses and evidence needed to find the accused guilty, not just an accusation.
It's odd that the author would use those as examples, since they were both perpetrated by Christians, in the name of Jesus and the Christian god.
Throw Ford into the nearest lake, then. If she sinks, Kavanaugh is guilty, if she floats, he's innocent.
-
The brave new world of the left where an accusation with no corroboration is enough to destroy any man. Women are to be believed always. It is up to the accused to prove their innocence instead of the accuser. There is no presumption of innocence for the accused. This is the stuff of the Salem witch hunts, the Spanish Inquisition and communist countries. If you dare don't go along with the mob the Soros paid mob will come for you. Thankfully it failed (barely) with Kavanaugh. Thankfully we had some people with courage who stood up to the Soros rent a mob and the screaming banshees.
In the bible Joseph was charged by a woman for attempted rape. He was innocent, the alleged victim lied and off Joseph went to prison. Please don't tell me any more stupidity that women don't lie. The left would claim Joseph's lying accuser was a survivor. The foundations of our justice system date back to Moses with witnesses and evidence needed to find the accused guilty, not just an accusation.
It's odd that the author would use those as examples, since they were both perpetrated by Christians, in the name of Jesus and the Christian god.
Throw Ford into the nearest lake, then. If she sinks, Kavanaugh is guilty, if she floats, he's innocent.
It's odd that the author would use those as examples, since they were both perpetrated by Christians, in the name of Jesus and the Christian god.
Throw Ford into the nearest lake, then. If she sinks, Kavanaugh is guilty, if she floats, he's innocent.
It is called being intellectually honest. I knew those were not good examples of Christianity. These were evil deeds done in the name of Jesus. You are aware Jesus warned there were going to be those who claimed to know Him and do things in His name that He is going to tell them He never knew Them.
-
That sounds like the standard "well those aren't real Christians" response while all of those terrorists are real Islam.
-
That sounds like the standard "well those aren't real Christians" response while all of those terrorists are real Islam.
That sounds like the standard "well those aren't real Christians" response while all of those terrorists are real Islam.
The difference is the Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence. The Islamic radical terrorists claim they are the real Muslims because they are following the koran.
-
That sounds like the standard "well those aren't real Christians" response while all of those terrorists are real Islam.
The difference is the Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence. The Islamic radical terrorists claim they are the real Muslims because they are following the koran.
The difference is the Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence. The Islamic radical terrorists claim they are the real Muslims because they are following the koran.
didnt christians in decades past use bible scrips to justify not only discrimibation but also acts of physixal violence against gay people?
and do christians not abide by the forceful ejection of palestinians from their lands in 1948 based on biblical scriptures? people who did nothing to jews btw...
-
I was on manueuvers in Germany when this attack took place.
-
so that would have taken place 24 years "after" the eviction of palestinians from their land, right dh?
-
I was on manueuvers in Germany when this attack took place.
I was on manueuvers in Germany when this attack took place.
Wow. All U.S. military went on alert?
-
The difference is the Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence. The Islamic radical terrorists claim they are the real Muslims because they are following the koran.
didnt christians in decades past use bible scrips to justify not only discrimibation but also acts of physixal violence against gay people?
and do christians not abide by the forceful ejection of palestinians from their lands in 1948 based on biblical scriptures? people who did nothing to jews btw...
didnt christians in decades past use bible scrips to justify not only discrimibation but also acts of physixal violence against gay people?
and do christians not abide by the forceful ejection of palestinians from their lands in 1948 based on biblical scriptures? people who did nothing to jews btw...
What scriptures are in the New Covenant that speak of using violence against gays? There aren't any. This only proves my point that Muslims are actually following the koran when committing acts of terrorism while some who call themselves Christians are going against bible teachings.
-
"palestinians" don't really exist.
-
It's odd that the author would use those as examples, since they were both perpetrated by Christians, in the name of Jesus and the Christian god.
Throw Ford into the nearest lake, then. If she sinks, Kavanaugh is guilty, if she floats, he's innocent.
It is called being intellectually honest. I knew those were not good examples of Christianity. These were evil deeds done in the name of Jesus. You are aware Jesus warned there were going to be those who claimed to know Him and do things in His name that He is going to tell them He never knew Them.
It is called being intellectually honest. I knew those were not good examples of Christianity. These were evil deeds done in the name of Jesus. You are aware Jesus warned there were going to be those who claimed to know Him and do things in His name that He is going to tell them He never knew Them.
Intellectual honesty would be doing yourself and your religion a favor and calling your belief in it what it really is: faith, not facts. Intellectual honesty, when it comes to the atheist argument is that while one cannot conclusively disprove the existence of God/gods, there is also not enough reliable, tangible evidence to demonstrate his existence in the first place in order to prove the validity of a religion's tenets.
Objective facts are quantifiable, testable, and - most importantly - able to be demonstrated to be false when tested and better evidence presents itself. Christianity, and all supernatural religions in general, are unable to meet these basic requirements; that is the essence of faith itself. Faith is the continuing belief in God and his associated dogmas in spite of the lack of evidence and objective facts to support the existence of said God. To call your religious beliefs "facts" and not faith is to belittle your own position.
The difference is the Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence. The Islamic radical terrorists claim they are the real Muslims because they are following the koran.
And the Bible doesn't? Did you honestly think this was a justifiable retort to Cleve's point? The Torah is littered with rape, murder of men, women and children, torture, genocide, etc - all perpetrated by God's chosen people, in the name of God, and at the very least, observed indifferently or turned a blind eye to by God, and at its most sinister, actively endorsed and commanded by God himself. To use the argument that Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence while being cognitively dissonant about the atrocities endorsed your own religious texts demonstrates a lack of understanding on the part of you and the other faithful about what is actually written in the Bible.
And, to nip the your whole "Jesus and the New Testament isnt the Jews and Old Testament" feint that inevitably comes from arguments such as these in the bud before it's even mentioned, lets not forget that Jesus himself endorsed the Old Testament teachings and believed that the actions written in it were true and divinely inspired. And seeing as how Jesus is the Son of God, is God, or is a part of God (Christians can't even agree to which definition is true among themselves - another testament to the human derivation of religion), that means at the very least, he acknowledged God's and the Israelites actions in the Old Testament to be factually accurate and divinely ordained; at the other end, Jesus himself is God or a part of the very God who endorsed and commanded the rape of women, genocide, etc. And this is the person/deity by which we're supposed to square our moral beliefs? Nonsense. If you want to go down this road and explore these things and claim that your religious morals are superior to those of other religions or the non-religious, I am here for you.
To claim that the Judeo-Christian doctrine is the pinnacle of moral belief is to demonstrate an abject lack of understanding of what is actually written in the Bible and the implications that follow it. And to claim that these teachings are the only thing that prevents the religious from committing immoral actions such as rape and murder says more about the moral standing of you and the other religious than it does to me.
-
It is called being intellectually honest. I knew those were not good examples of Christianity. These were evil deeds done in the name of Jesus. You are aware Jesus warned there were going to be those who claimed to know Him and do things in His name that He is going to tell them He never knew Them.
Intellectual honesty would be doing yourself and your religion a favor and calling your belief in it what it really is: faith, not facts. Intellectual honesty, when it comes to the atheist argument is that while one cannot conclusively disprove the existence of God/gods, there is also not enough reliable, tangible evidence to demonstrate his existence in the first place in order to prove the validity of a religion's tenets.
Objective facts are quantifiable, testable, and - most importantly - able to be demonstrated to be false when tested and better evidence presents itself. Christianity, and all supernatural religions in general, are unable to meet these basic requirements; that is the essence of faith itself. Faith is the continuing belief in God and his associated dogmas in spite of the lack of evidence and objective facts to support the existence of said God. To call your religious beliefs "facts" and not faith is to belittle your own position.
The difference is the Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence. The Islamic radical terrorists claim they are the real Muslims because they are following the koran.
And the Bible doesn't? Did you honestly think this was a justifiable retort to Cleve's point? The Torah is littered with rape, murder of men, women and children, torture, genocide, etc - all perpetrated by God's chosen people, in the name of God, and at the very least, observed indifferently or turned a blind eye to by God, and at its most sinister, actively endorsed and commanded by God himself. To use the argument that Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence while being cognitively dissonant about the atrocities endorsed your own religious texts demonstrates a lack of understanding on the part of you and the other faithful about what is actually written in the Bible.
And, to nip the your whole "Jesus and the New Testament isnt the Jews and Old Testament" feint that inevitably comes from arguments such as these in the bud before it's even mentioned, lets not forget that Jesus himself endorsed the Old Testament teachings and believed that the actions written in it were true and divinely inspired. And seeing as how Jesus is the Son of God, is God, or is a part of God (Christians can't even agree to which definition is true among themselves - another testament to the human derivation of religion), that means at the very least, he acknowledged God's and the Israelites actions in the Old Testament to be factually accurate and divinely ordained; at the other end, Jesus himself is God or a part of the very God who endorsed and commanded the rape of women, genocide, etc. And this is the person/deity by which we're supposed to square our moral beliefs? Nonsense. If you want to go down this road and explore these things and claim that your religious morals are superior to those of other religions or the non-religious, I am here for you.
To claim that the Judeo-Christian doctrine is the pinnacle of moral belief is to demonstrate an abject lack of understanding of what is actually written in the Bible and the implications that follow it. And to claim that these teachings are the only thing that prevents the religious from committing immoral actions such as rape and murder says more about the moral standing of you and the other religious than it does to me.
Intellectual honesty would be doing yourself and your religion a favor and calling your belief in it what it really is: faith, not facts. Intellectual honesty, when it comes to the atheist argument is that while one cannot conclusively disprove the existence of God/gods, there is also not enough reliable, tangible evidence to demonstrate his existence in the first place in order to prove the validity of a religion's tenets.
Objective facts are quantifiable, testable, and - most importantly - able to be demonstrated to be false when tested and better evidence presents itself. Christianity, and all supernatural religions in general, are unable to meet these basic requirements; that is the essence of faith itself. Faith is the continuing belief in God and his associated dogmas in spite of the lack of evidence and objective facts to support the existence of said God. To call your religious beliefs "facts" and not faith is to belittle your own position.
And the Bible doesn't? Did you honestly think this was a justifiable retort to Cleve's point? The Torah is littered with rape, murder of men, women and children, torture, genocide, etc - all perpetrated by God's chosen people, in the name of God, and at the very least, observed indifferently or turned a blind eye to by God, and at its most sinister, actively endorsed and commanded by God himself. To use the argument that Islamic terrorists have scriptures in the koran they use to justify their acts of violence while being cognitively dissonant about the atrocities endorsed your own religious texts demonstrates a lack of understanding on the part of you and the other faithful about what is actually written in the Bible.
And, to nip the your whole "Jesus and the New Testament isnt the Jews and Old Testament" feint that inevitably comes from arguments such as these in the bud before it's even mentioned, lets not forget that Jesus himself endorsed the Old Testament teachings and believed that the actions written in it were true and divinely inspired. And seeing as how Jesus is the Son of God, is God, or is a part of God (Christians can't even agree to which definition is true among themselves - another testament to the human derivation of religion), that means at the very least, he acknowledged God's and the Israelites actions in the Old Testament to be factually accurate and divinely ordained; at the other end, Jesus himself is God or a part of the very God who performed and commanded the rape of women, genocide, etc. And this is the person/deity by which we're supposed to square our moral beliefs? Nonsense. If you want to go down this road and explore these things and claim that your religious morals are superior to those of other religions or the non-religious, I am here for you.
To claim that the Judeo-Christian doctrine is the pinnacle of moral belief is to demonstrate an abject lack of understanding of what is actually written in the Bible and the implications that follow it. And to claim that these teachings are the only thing that prevents the religious from committing immoral actions such as rape and murder says more about the moral standing of you and the other religious than it does to me.
You are free to believe or not believe. You can believe that out of nothing somehow came the universe and all that we see. I won't waste my time arguing with you. I choose to believe and faith does play a huge part of a believer. Heb 11:3 through FAITH we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God so that things which are SEEN were created by things NOT SEEN. As much as you try to hate on Jesus His teachings were the opposite of your hate. Here is a quote from the Old Testament that is one of my favorites: And if it seem evil for you to serve the Lord choose you this day whom you will serve but as for me and my house we will serve the Lord. On May 5 1982 at a little past 11:00 PM I turned to the Lord and made Jesus my Lord and Savior. It was the best decision I ever made . Not only the blessings I have gotten in this life but knowing my Lord and Savior has created a place for believers and physical death is not the end that when believers take their last breath in this life they will take their first breath in heaven. If you want to live without hope that is your decision. I see a life line being thrown to us from our creator (Jesus) and I choose to take it gratefully and thankfully.
-
First of all if we agree that it's not your body so you have no rights what's the weather then should we not eliminate the practice of Child Support?
Second if it's your body and your choice why should it be illegal to abort a healthy fetus in the ninth month?
WSS
-
7 illogical things pro-choicers said
https://www.liveaction.org/news/9-illogical-comebacks-pro-choicers/
-
What does the Bible say about people living inside of a whale?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login