SDA's and Abortion

[Ed Edwards]

Targus:

You (Targus) would be better if you (Targus) stuck to what you (Targus) believe. You never have figured out what Mr. Ryan believes. One (anybody) needs to understand what another (anybody) means before one (anybody) can argue against the other (anybody).

Sorry about the names or 'anybody' but some people (but not anybody posting on this topic) who post on this board can't seem to figure out when I'm talking to them or somebody else. (and their guilt gets them in trouble).

 

[targus]

Targus:

You (Targus) would be better if you (Targus) stuck to what you (Targus) believe. You never have figured out what Mr. Ryan believes. One (anybody) needs to understand what another (anybody) means before one (anybody) can argue against the other (anybody).

And that is exactly why I am asking him if I got it right.

Although it would be much easier if he would answer a simple question in a direct manner.

Sorry about the names or 'anybody' but some people (but not anybody posting on this topic) who post on this board can't seem to figure out when I'm talking to them or somebody else. (and their guilt gets them in trouble).

Well I sure don't know what you are saying here.

 

[steaver]

I am not pro-abortion - But I also do not know the moment when a single cell becomes a "living soul".

On this subject I simply "go for the obvious". One of the obvious points is that the State government itself admits that it is murder to kill a baby once it is born. I think that ALL Christians should be able to agree that "the location of the Baby" does not change that fact and only a scenario where the life of the Baby is killing the mother would it be even reasonable to consider the death of the Baby "in self defense" for the Mother.

My, my, my. I thought I would never see the day when BobRyan did not have a biblical answer for a position held. Using the state government, really Bob.

Scripture is perfectly clear that a soul begins at conception. God forbid a choice be presented that one life must be taken to spare another. But does this choice really ever present itself?

It boils down to a doctors opinion as to whether or not the mother will die if the pregnancy goes forth. How many times to we witness doctors being proven wrong in their analysis of a situation?

The safest thing to do is to allow God to decide if both will live or die or one or the other.

The reallity is that these life threatening situations are so few and far between that it is only used as a loop hole for one to justify supporting abortions (murders) in some manner, even if limitted.

Good thread. I did not know the SDA church had this darkness hanging over them. I would be jumping ship in a heart beat whether it is "doctrine" or not, it appears to be widely accepted and taught which is very sad.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[Crabtownboy]

Whel life begins

According to the bible, life begins at birth--when a baby draws its first breath. The bible defines life as "breath" in several significant passages, including the story of Adam's creation in Genesis 2:7, when God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Jewish law traditionally considers that personhood begins at birth.

Gen. 2:7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

 

[BobRyan]

As I said - "repeatedly" this is NOT a doctrine of the SDA church.

It seems that the same list of suspects who "pay no attention to details" in the past - are finding it convenient to do the same on this topic as well.

Oh well I don't mind staying in the role of "the one pointing out the obvious".

It is a hard job - but somebody has to do it.:laugh:

And when they look for "volunteers" I am always there with hand raised "me...me -- please let me do it" - again. :type: .

In Christ,

Bob

 

[targus]

As I said - "repeatedly" this is NOT a doctrine of the SDA church.

It seems that the same list of suspects who "pay no attention to details" in the past - are finding it convenient to do the same on this topic as well.

Oh well I don't mind staying in the role of "the one pointing out the obvious".

It is a hard job - but somebody has to do it.:laugh:

And when they look for "volunteers" I am always there with hand raised "me...me -- please let me do it" - again. :type: .

In Christ,

Bob

You keep saying that condoning abortion is not doctrine of the SDA.
Fair enough - however it is equally fair to point out that the offical website of the General Conference of the SDA says that the SDA voted that abortion is o.k. under a list of circumstances.

This is a detail that I did not miss. The stated doctrine is one thing - the SDA accepted practice is something else.

As for you being a volunteer with your hand up... you sure avoid answering my direct questions.

Let's try one more time....

Do you agree with the other SDA exceptions for abortion such as rape, incest, and the emotional well being of the mother?

Since you seem to believe that the unborn in the early stages of life have no body and therefore no soul and killing the unborn at that stage is acceptable... do you agree with unlimited abortion rights at that stage - such as abortion based on the babies sex or as a method of birth control?

If you accept abortion to "spare" the life of the mother... do you place any limits on this? How about an abortion to "spare" the life of the mother in the eigth month?

It would be really great if you could answer these questions as directly as you are able.

 

[BobRyan]

You keep saying that condoning abortion is not doctrine of the SDA.
Fair enough - however it is equally fair to point out that the offical website of the General Conference of the SDA says that the SDA voted that abortion is o.k. under a list of circumstances.

1. What "SDA voted it"??

Recall that in the 5 year recurring meeting representatives from ALL SDA divisions world wide meet to vote on the doctrinal statements.

2. Opinions vary on this topic within the SDA membership. Some agree with my daughter's position - and some with mine and still others with one one you keep promoting for SDAs.

When it comes to "opinions" I have no more control in making everyone agree with my daughter's view than with my own. You seem to be struggling with that.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[targus]

1. What "SDA voted it"??

Recall that in the 5 year recurring meeting representatives from ALL SDA divisions world wide meet to vote on the doctrinal statements.

Yes you keep saying that. And as I have repeatedly pointed out, I am getting my information from the website for the "GENERAL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS"

And on that website for the "GENERAL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS" they say " These pages present statements and guidelines discussed, approved and voted by the church leadership since 1980"

Who is voting? THE CHURCH LEADERSHIP of GENERAL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS.

2. Opinions vary on this topic within the SDA membership. Some agree with my daughter's position - and some with mine and still others with one one you keep promoting for SDAs.

When it comes to "opinions" I have no more control in making everyone agree with my daughter's view than with my own. You seem to be struggling with that.

in Christ,

Bob

Opinions vary... o.k. - fine. But I have been REPEATEDLY asking for YOUR OPINION.

Why do you not answer my very simple and very direct questions?

Because they don't line up with Scripture? Hint - "Thou shalt not kill".

 

[BobRyan]

Yes you keep saying that. And as I have repeatedly pointed out, I am getting my information from the website for the "GENERAL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS"

And on that website for the "GENERAL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS" they say " These pages present statements and guidelines discussed, approved and voted by the church leadership since 1980"

Who is voting? THE CHURCH LEADERSHIP of GENERAL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS.

There is a "tiny detail" that you keep ignoring -- the size of an elelphant in the living room. The statement published is NOT the position EVEN of all SDAs who work for/in the General Conference much LESS a voted position by the world wide church. I know a few of these people personnally and they do not hold to that published "opinion" just as I don't and my daughter does not.

When it comes to NON-doctrinal opinions -- "Opinions may vary".

You keep arguing that is is a VOTED position of the Adventist Church itself even though I keep pointing out that your statement is not correct.

But I guess I am not the one to convince you that you should let this inconvenient detail get in the way of good story-telling.

Opinions vary... o.k. - fine. But I have been REPEATEDLY asking for YOUR OPINION.

I understand that you want to get into a debate about opinion and not doctrine - but frankly I can not argue my opinion as the "official position of all Adventists" any more than I would claim that the differing opinion that my daughter holds on this subject is the "one for all SDAs" or that the opinion printed by the women's ministry department of the GC (which is yet a 3rd position) is held by any SDA that I know of personnally.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

2. Opinions vary on this topic within the SDA membership. Some agree with my daughter's position - and some with mine and still others with one one you keep promoting for SDAs.

This begs the question, why is it up for "opinion"? The scriptures are clear that a soul begins at conception and murder is forbidden. No opinion needed!

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[Joe]

Death is when a heart stops beating
So...maybe life is when the heart starts beating

This occurs around the 18th day of conception
So by the time a woman misses her period
It's too late, it's a person. And Sue gave great reasons why we shouldn't intervene upon God's plan. They are a gift from God, a blessing from God.

I held about a 4 week ?? embryo? not sure what it was in my hand. This occured many years ago. I took the blob out of the toilet, easy to do since it stayed attatched. I examined it. It was about the size around of a round roll of masking tape, the kind used for painting. By the way she was rolled up into a ball on the floor, you would have thought an elephant came out of her. Funny that there was NO blood whatsoever.

Never saw a heartbeat...or a baby. Just a slimy blob. The outer sides looked clear and the substance was similar in texture and appearance to a jelly fish one would find on the sand by the ocean. The middle nucleas was thicker and more whitish, a different texture than the clearjellyfish outside.
She told me a week into conception she was pregnant and something was very wrong. Never said anything like that before except the time she really was pregnant, we had one son already. We waited 4 weeks to do a pregnancy test because at one week, it won't show.

We prayed and God took it from her. She was on birth control pills, guess they didn't work. Otherwise, we attended the medical appointment in a nearby city (for anonymity) made already to have an abortion. They stuck some divice, kinda like a vaccum inside her to get what was left inside attatched to the walls of her uteris.

It feels like an abortion took place since we both know that would have occured if God didn't intervene. Maybe there is a little boy or girl soul in heaven who is going to introduce themselves and ask why we made that appointment to have them killed? This child would be around 15 years old now.:tear:

 

[targus]

There is a "tiny detail" that you keep ignoring -- the size of an elelphant in the living room. The statement published is NOT the position EVEN of all SDAs who work for/in the General Conference much LESS a voted position by the world wide church.

Great - then how about directing me to the statement on abortion voted by the "world wide church".

I have a suspicion that the "GENERAL CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS" really is the "world wide church".

 

[targus]

I understand that you want to get into a debate about opinion and not doctrine - but frankly I can not argue my opinion as the "official position of all Adventists"

I am not asking you to argue your opinion as the "offical position of all Adventists".

You have made statements of opinion in this discussion. I am asking you to expand on them. Your opinon as expressed thus far is at odds with Scripture and logically flawed.

So again....

Do YOU (Bob Ryan personally - NOT as a representative of SDA beliefs) believe that there are any circumstances other than sparing the life of the mother whereby abortion does not violate God's commandment of "Thou shalt not kill."?

Since you have stated that the unborn at an early stage does not have a body and therefore no soul abortion is allowed - do you believe that abortion at that stage is Scriptural for any reason such as convience or as a method of birth control?

Since you have stated that abortion is allowable Scripturally to "spare the life of the mother" would you make that same arguement at a late stage such as the eight month?

Are you aware that not answering any of my direct questions "speaks volumes"?

 

[steaver]

According to the bible, life begins at birth--when a baby draws its first breath. The bible defines life as "breath" in several significant passages, including the story of Adam's creation in Genesis 2:7, when God "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Jewish law traditionally considers that personhood begins at birth.

Gen. 2:7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

I don't think it is wise to equate the first Adam's creation with a baby drawing it's first breath of air. The bible says much more about life than this.

It is true that without air we cannot live, but scripture declares the life is in the blood (Lev 17) in many passages just as well as the breath of life keeps man alive.

So here is a fact. From conception the Zygote is being kept alive through the blood. The breath of life the Zygote needs is being channeled through the mother's nostrals until the child departs from the mother's womb and is able to use it's own nostrals.

It is the blood that is important here and in play. Air must reach the blood stream, but it is a blood issue.

Secondly i heard this passage presented in error, God only knows why...


Exd 21:22¶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].Exd 21:23And if [any] mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

Now I don't see how anyone could conclude that this passage is speaking about the woman dieing here. If you know of any such commentary that suggest it is not the lost fruit of the womb I would like to see it.

"life for life" clearly indicates that a human being was killed and that life was the fruit departing from the womb.

Do a search on the shedding of innocent blood. The bible puts much emphasis on the blood!

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[steaver]

It feels like an abortion took place since we both know that would have occured if God didn't intervene. Maybe there is a little boy or girl soul in heaven who is going to introduce themselves and ask why we made that appointment to have them killed? This child would be around 15 years old now.:tear:

My wife has a child in heaven as well. She had an abortion when she was 16. I did not know her then. She knows what she has done and at the time really had no choice but to do as her father commanded and kill the child. She later became a Christian and knows full well the scriptures of life begins with conception. Sometimes she thinks of the day she will see the child.

God bless! :jesus:

 

[steaver]

Crabtownboy,

If you thoroughly examine your view about Adam and the breath of life and try to fit it into a baby's life it causes some issues.

Did Adam have blood pumping through his viens before God gave him air? I say no and therefore Adam was not alive until God gave him air. As the scripture declares, when the breath of life was given then was Adam a living soul.

This creates a problem with equating Adam's coming to life through his nostrals with air and with a baby coming to life the same way for the baby is already alive before any air ever goes through it's nostrals. The breath of life or the air it needs for life is already given through the mother's nostrals. Through the blood.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[Joe]

My wife has a child in heaven as well. She had an abortion when she was 16. I did not know her then. She knows what she has done and at the time really had no choice but to do as her father commanded and kill the child. She later became a Christian and knows full well the scriptures of life begins with conception. Sometimes she thinks of the day she will see the child.

God bless! :jesus:

I guess that is the only good thing about it. Had the child had grown up, the chances of them burning in hell would be much greater. Our 17 year old son rejects the truth, so it appears this baby we killed will be saved, we will see her again. I am sure there was something wrong with her, my wife was fine & joyous with the other pregnancy.
One day after you become a Christian it hits like a ton of bricks. The worst pain and guilt than all of the other past sins combined.
At least your wife had no choice, but your father in law, that's a different story. Hope he is saved now raying: Blessings to you and your family

 

[BobRyan]

Crabtownboy,

If you thoroughly examine your view about Adam and the breath of life and try to fit it into a baby's life it causes some issues.

Did Adam have blood pumping through his viens before God gave him air? I say no and therefore Adam was not alive until God gave him air. As the scripture declares, when the breath of life was given then was Adam a living soul.

skin cells "Are alive" before they die -- yet all agreed that we do not want to name each one and hold a funeral each time one dies.

The single-celled zygote has the exact same DNA as that skin cell but it has the property of having the "activators" turned "on" so that the biologic "build function" works on the entire DNA as it begins to build a human body. (Can anyone say polymorphism?)

Given that detail already found on this thread alone - crabtown's point stands.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

One day after you become a Christian it hits like a ton of bricks. The worst pain and guilt than all of the other past sins combined.
At least your wife had no choice, but your father in law, that's a different story. Hope he is saved now raying: Blessings to you and your family

Praise Jesus that He is able to take that guilt and shame and restore us. As for my wife's father, he died a heart attack at the age of 59, he was a devout atheist. My wife has to live with the reallity that he is in hell. A terrible thing to have to live with, but God has given her much grace. She and her mother became saved a feww years after her father's death. She wonders why she was not given a chance to witness her changed life to him. But God is in control. What can we do?

God Bless! raying:

 

[steaver]

skin cells "Are alive" before they die -- yet all agreed that we do not want to name each one and hold a funeral each time one dies.

Given that detail already found on this thread alone - crabtown's point stands.

in Christ,

Bob

No one is talking about skin cells, maybe start a new thread on it. This is about living souls.

Crabtownboy's point has been found lacking.

God Bless! :thumbs: