God doesn't makes sense

obtuseobserver said:

The bible as far as I know doesn't discuss the moment at which life begins. I could be wrong but unless you can find me chapter and verse I'm thinking it isn't there.

Click to expand...

Backing up a few posts to answer the above, God, speaking to Jeremiah is purported to have said, "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, [and] I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5, King James)

That is indicative of a very early concept of an unborn child as a human, and not merely a pre-human cell blob. Sanctity of human life, even prebirth, is certainly not a new concept.

Psalm 139:13 speaks to the issue as well:

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. (NIV 84)

It speaks to recogizing God's role in our creation which includes the gift of life. But it doesn't address the issue in the sense that it makes specific notice of when life begins. For my part I think it means life begins at conception which is the same moment that biologically speaking a new life comes into being.

I think there is support for the notion that God knows us before we are even conceived but now we're way beyond my familiarity with the subject and the text and frankly it doesn't much matter for the purpose of this thread.

I was only addressing the religious aspect.

From a strictly legal standpoint it might be worth considering why in many states it's considered a double homicide when a mother and her unborn infant are killed, regardless of the stage of pregnancy.

yeah, I mistook which thread I was in

One of the first homicides I worked was actually a double (pregnant mother killed)

The statute in CA carves out an exception under their penal code for murder of a pregnant woman:

One defendant (Johnnie Ray Peraza was actually fairly charming; cold blooded killer but charming. I sat nwext to him for much of the trial.) kept joking with me that he wanted me to defend him. I could go on and on... his co-defendant Elisio Valdez had an attorney who was living with Peraza's attorney's ex-wife (or vice versa). On and on....

here's a link discussing the case

here's the statute

187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.


In CA it doesn't matter if killer knew woman was pregnant (tranferred intent.. if you mean to kill Bob and shoot him and the bullet hits Bill after passing through Bill it is a second homicide even if you had no clue Bill was even in the same state)

In CA it doesn't matter if the fetus was unlikely to survive long enough to be born either.

And that same law applies even if the unborn child consists of only two cells, if I'm not mistaken.

I think it would. However, it would quite probably be impossible to discover for a variety of reasons.

Yeah, one of which being that it's a bit small at that point.

A parent who tells you to wash your hands prior to supper doesn't make much sense to a six-year-old child, or so I hear. Nevertheless, it's sensible advice.

connermt said:

I don't recall either. But if it does or doesn't, that won't stop people from using it to prove their individual point. That's one reason why the bible is so popular: when there nothing to check it against, people can make whatever they want out of it.

Click to expand...

I've not read many comments from you that suggest your opinions about the bible or people of faith are very accurate.

connermt said:

Your opinion that's not shared with everyone.

Click to expand...

Agreed. However, those who do not believe that a new life is created at conception do so in the face of well established scientific fact.

connermt said:

What claim is this?

Click to expand...

Good lord. This conversation is harder when I have do yours for you.

Originally Posted by connermt
For example: some groups who believe that life begins at conception because the bible says and wanting to make abortion illegal,

And I was noting that the bible doesn't say life begins at conception. Your comment holds a false premise. People of faith may believe life begins at conception but it is not a biblical pronouncement. It is a scientific fact.

connermt said:

Many anti-abortion groups/people base their POV in their religious belief. So your all-encompassing claim isn't entirely true. You need to learn that your POV isn't the only one out there. Come out of your bubble and socialize with people - particularly others that don't share your POV

Click to expand...

Yes. So what. Many base their POV that murder is wrong based on their religious views. Ditto theft, lying, adultry etc etc etc. The motive may bother you but that doesn't mean you are being compelled to accept their POV nor does such a motive cause any problems at law with the establishment clause. Such motives are perfectly legit. However, their POV has been overruled at law.

So, your assertion boils down to you believing that people espousing a differing point of view on abortion are forcing God on you. That's not a very compelling notion.

As far as being familar with others POV.. I'm not the one complaining of having views forced on me. That's you. Perhaps you should take a little more time and get a better understanding of law, our system of government, our society and history so you can understand why your complaint is hollow. The Pro-abortion camp has largely won. No one is compelling you to believe anything. God is not being forced on you.

connermt said:

Then I would suggest you get to know "more" people. I know many people of faith that base every decision/POV on their religious belief of (in this case) being gay is sinning and sinning shouldn'y be allowed so "we must make gay marriage illegal" because we don't want sin in our country. Certainly this doesn't speak for all people, but it would be intellectually dishonest of you (or anyone else) to say this "anti-gay" movement doesn't have its basis in christianity. Just like ID.

Click to expand...

Of course not everyone will adopt the view I expressed nor did I make any claim that they did. I noted my experience with people of faith as it regards to the present issue.

Taking the group you describe this is still not people forcing God on you. It is you believing that their differing POV amounts to forcing God on you. Again, not compelling.

There is no "anti-gay" movement. Many people oppose same sex marriage (though many of those people support civil unions) but that doesn't equate to "anti-gay." Further, those who oppose same sex marriage may do so as a result of their faith but pretty much every society on the planet for the duration of human hitory has not accepted same sex marriage and a pretty good percentage of them are not Christians. So, it is not intellectually dishonest. The problem is your lack of familiarity with the issue.

connermt said:

Poor language for a believer in God I must say.

Click to expand...

You'll have to clarify what in the world you're talking about.

connermt said:

Beyond that, it's difficult not to pay attention to those people when they get involved in pushing their beliefs (in thinly veiled disguises) to the general public.

Click to expand...

I don't find it very difficult to do.

connermt said:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. No it doesn't. It has been proven that ID is nothing more than creationism which is church based. Any respect I had for you just went out the window when you said ID has scientific merit. So sad that it's not even funny

Click to expand...

You dismiss the claim out of hand because you don't wish to consider the issue. Nor, was your response direct to my comment. I never claimed ID was proved, disproved or other.

I said:

It actually has some scientific merit. I reject it but there are statiticians and other scientists who have posited that given rates of mutation the age of the earth is insufficient for those rates to have resulted in our current biodiversity. Some say that this makes design more likely than random chance. Personally I think that so much order procedes from chaos to be a bigger stretch than the converse but what I think the statisticians have done is show us that we must look to other causes for biodiversity than just random genetic mutation... whatever cause(s) that may be.

But, once again, teaching the concept of ID is not compelling you to believe in God. Hell, when I was in school we were taught all kinds of theories for the origin of life and the diversification of life.

You reponded to my comments out of context. There are quite a few scientists who argue in favor of ID (including many Nobel Laureates). As I said, I reject it but for me to claim all those physicists, statisticians etc etc are wrong would be very arrogant of me.

connermt said:

Any one that believes ID has ANY scientific merit really needs to dig out their college education receipt and get their money back.
I have seen/heard/read many "professors" and leaders of the ID movement (AKA creationism) be put in their place on many occassions but scientists in regards to ID. And yet people still want to consider it bases in science?
Beyond ignorant.

And with that, I don't find it necessary to carry on this conversation with you when in one thread you talk about science and biology then the next you show your intellectual misfiring about considering ID related to science.
My god...so sad.

Click to expand...

see previous comment

connermt said:

And yet, the christian concept of God STILL doesn't make common sense - especially for an all knowing/powerful being.

Click to expand...

You seem to think that God has to play by your rules. He doesn't.

You think God makes no sense. Ok. I'm not arguing with you that you are wrong.

Let me ask, do you ever doubt your disbelief in God?

I doubt my faith often. I'm human. I'm fallible.

Who is more open minded? The person who never doubts their disbelief or the one who doubts their belief?

Damned good question. ..............................................................

connermt said:

God should play by its own rules to be worthy of worship IMO.

Click to expand...

And he does. As I have noted repeatedly in this thread your complaint has been that he doesn't play by your rules.

connermt said:

But everyone can worship anything they want for any reason.
I don't doubt me disbelief int he christian god. Is there a god (all powerful being)? It's possible. The christian god that I once worshiped? Not at all.

Click to expand...

Trying to unpack that... If you are saying that your understanding of the God you once worshipped was not very good; ok.

If you are saying the God as Christians understand God does not exist; you cannot make that claim with anymore certaintly than another can claim he does.

connermt said:

Doubt has nothing to do with being open minded, it has everything to do with human's flaws and inability to believe in anything 100% IMO.

Click to expand...

I'd comment but you did a good enough job of refuting your own premise.

connermt said:

Still, god makes no sense. For example: he created people perfect, then allowed them to sin then complains about being upset of the outcome, even though he had to know the outcome?
That's a very simple example, but still, it doesn't make any sense.
If something doesn't make sense, it must be questioned. And questioning god is a no-no.

Click to expand...

Back to requiring God to play by your rules. If this is so nonsensical to you why do you continue to tell me why God makes no sense to you? I haven't bothered telling AK_ID that he's insane for liking potato salad yet here we are again with you citing pedestrian examples of why you think God makes no sense.

And.... your question above has been addressed many times over the millenia. Feel free to crack open a book and check out what some of western civ's greatest minds have had to say about it. Free will, problem with evil, original sin etc etc all factor into the process.

As far as questioning God goes. Not sure who you are referring to but questioning plays a vital and central role in the faith of the people I know regardless of which brand of Christianity they adhere to. Without it, we stagnate, calicify and wither. Questioning (doubt) is the engine that drives us to greater understanding.

So, what Christian variant holds that questioning is a no-no?

connermt said:

Not at all. Thou shall not kill seems to be a rule he put out to humans (which is his rule). He doesn't abide by that rule. You may ask Should he? I say yes, if it's good for imperfect beings such as human, it's good for perfect beings such as him. You won't agree. That's fine.

Click to expand...

First, the commandment is a prohibition against murder not killing. Just check out the list of capital offenses in the Torah.

Second, you are still requiring God to adhere to your concepts and demand he adhere to law given to humans. However, he mostly does even if you did not understand this. The problem is your misunderstanding of that commandment.

Now, he doesn't always... and such is the privilege of being God. To require him to always comply with your notions is to limit God.

Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. God is telling Job that God is God and that he doesn't owe Job an explanation. You, however, are demanding one.

connermt said:

Why? Why is it ok to say that and not this: "...the God as Christians understand God does not exist"?

Click to expand...

As I explained, I can no more prove that he does exist than you can prove he doesn't. It is a matter of faith on both of our parts. I have faith (believe - as well as I can) that he exists and you believe (have faith) that he doesn't. That seems to be quite logical doesn't it?

connermt said:

There's no logic to that, other than it's what you want to believe. And that's not logic, it's arrogance in your own belief you see with christian blinders.

Click to expand...

Well, back to the point I made a post or two ago. I know my faith is imperfect and that I doubt.

Which is more arrogant? My imperfect belief that he exists or your unwavering belief that doesn't?

connermt said:

Like for believers, it's all in what you believe. There is no proof in this christian god. I have come to the understanding, through flawed biblical teachings, contradictory bible verses, history of christianty's "good" deeds, etc. that the christin god doesn't exist.

Click to expand...

I am quite impressed with how shallow and poor that learning is. You seem to have read some criticism of the Bible and then shut off your brain. There are some very good reasons for a great many of the "contradictions" if you'd care to turn your brain back on and investigate more deeply.

There is no proving God. There is no disproving God. Believe or don't. When you offer reasons for the choice not to believe one is left to wonder, if sufficient evidence were offered to explain those passages that trouble you would you then believe? I am going to guess no. That being the case your reasons are immaterial and sound an awful lot like connermt doth protest too much.

connermt said:

You can try to refute that until your fingers fall of, it won't change my mind. And for me, personally, that's all that matters.

Click to expand...

Like I said, and you now confirm, your mind is closed to learning. OK.

connermt said:

Thank goodness. Is that all it took?!?

Click to expand...

Well, when you propose X as fact and in the second clause of the same sentence deny that X is a fact one needn't much bother.

connermt said:

I'm not telling YOU, I'm making a statement.

Click to expand...

In a reply to my comments which you quoted. It is a fair inference that you were telling me.

connermt said:

To think this entire thread is directed at you is, initially, suprising, but after thinking about it, is very indicative of chrisians/believers - "Everything spken about god is directed towards us!"
Pitiful in every aspect.

Click to expand...

Again, had a lot more to do with you quoting me and responding directly to my comments. Generally when a person asks a question of or directs a statement to another person they are speaking to that other person.

May I simplify things a bit? No, I don't suppose God makes sense (and God not making sense to humans is a basic tenet of my people's belief system). But do YOU make sense to your dog or cat? Do you expect your pets to understand why you leave them home alone every day, or why they eat kibble while you eat prime rib? Would they understand if you explained it to them? Doubtful. Extrapolate, kids.

AK_ID said:

May I simplify things a bit? No, I don't suppose God makes sense (and God not making sense to humans is a basic tenet of my people's belief system). But do YOU make sense to your dog or cat? Do you expect your pets to understand why you leave them home alone every day, or why they eat kibble while you eat prime rib? Would they understand if you explained it to them? Doubtful. Extrapolate, kids.

Click to expand...

Your peoples?

Our peoples dammit....

Paul was well read as a Pharisee.. he knew the law and of course the Prophets (the allegation that he was a lawyer is not far off).

As Saul he wasn't kindly disposed to my ancient cultural ancestors.

His trip to Damascus is well known... blah blah blah

my point.... the difference between my faith and yours is slight and massive.

A much wiser man that I once said that blasphemy is in the narrowness of difference not the length, depth or breadth, though he said it much more eloquently... (I think it was Scrouton though it may have been Chesterton).

My Messiah has come. You tin eared doofuses missed the boat. However, IMO, no matter. You, you and your people, cannot escape the designation of the chosen - for me it is a choice. For your it is in your blood. And, as you know and as most others don't... that's not a privilege or get out of jail free card. It is an enhanced duty to God and God's creation. And that cracks me up to no end!

I'm in the mood to wax philosophic on Noachide Law and what not but accepting that the most superficial concepts, in these forums, make little sense I'll decline.

fwiw AKID.... been trying to work my way through RAMBAM the last few years. Started w/just historical crap to get the frame of reference which is hard enough but .. but .. I'm pretty certain I'm gonna need to learn the language and the importance of the roots to really get it... which means.... I'm going to Disneyland!!@!!! Screw all that studying noise... that is your job.... mine... much easier.

Starting to think your ancestors chose poorly?

Bwaaahhaha



edit..... that started with me wanting to quote Isaiah in one or another of Paul's epistles... kinda took on a life of its own.

The lawyah asks: Starting to think your ancestors chose poorly?

Yessir, that Covenant doesn't always live up to the Madison Ave. hype. It's like the White Man's burden, but more burdensome. That's why wiser folks than I discourage conversion. It's probably also why we produce comedians out of proportion to our numbers -- the very fact of our existence is fraught with humor. God, I'm certain, laughs.