quote:

---

"Thy hands have fashioned me."

(Ps. 119:73)

---

quote:

---

PoW: DLW failed to post a position of his own. THAT should be his task. ... DAVE, MAKE YOUR OWN POSTS.

DLW: Al, I do make my own posts and set out my positions.

---

quote:

---

PoW: ...With prophecy the significance became MUCH MORE fully known LATER. We see this beginning in the prophecy of Eve's offspring.

DLW: Okay, prophecy maybe an exception whereby the initial audience does not have the fullness of understanding.

---

quote:

---

Dude,
maybe should read some of the earlier postings I made and respond directly to them. I give my positions there.
dlw

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

"Thy hands have fashioned me."

(Ps. 119:73)

---

"Thy mind has fashioned the meaning of above verse."

DLW



I-uh-scream-uh,
You-uh-scream-uh,
We-all-uh-sceam-uh for
Ice-uh-cream-uh!!!

Roberto Bernigni in
Down by Law.

ahehmAmericanzituhsen! This,varrrrrybaadfuryur
Cuntry! Varrrrrrrybaadfuryur
Cuntry!
Roberto Benigni in
Johnny Stecchenino.

---

quote:

---

Hey Pow,
how about instead of tearing into each other because we disagree about when human life begins, you could help me with feedback on the concrete suggestions I make about altering our political strategy regarding abortion politics?

I could use your assistance in getting a wider hearing on the slightly less controversial view that focusing on a gradualist, referendum-based approach to the legal redefinition of when human life begins might work and clear the way for us in general to work at changing hearts rather than Roe-V-Wade.

dlw

....etc....

---

quote:

---

The ONLY bone that I'm going to throw you is that in the situation where the mother has to be saved due to the needs of other kids who would suffer in the event of her death, THEN the human life of the unborn may be resigned to the hands of God.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

The ONLY bone that I'm going to throw you is that in the situation where the mother has to be saved due to the needs of other kids who would suffer in the event of her death, THEN the human life of the unborn may be resigned to the hands of God.

---

However, in either case since they did not reach the age of accountability the aborted human life/fetus will go to heaven and so it isn't the mother of all tragedies.

---

quote:

---

Pow,
you pound away too much on issues that are not essentials. This does not build the kingdom of God or make the brand of Christianity you advocate more attractive.
dlw

---

• WHEN:
  
  PoW: The issue is not a matter of WHEN it is convenient to define a life as more alive than before; or more unavoidably inconvenient; or more "lovable"; or more impressive; or more wanted... It is not a matter or "quickening;" or of "brain activity;" or of "viability outside the womb"; the WHEN is a matter of "before the foundations of the world."



• WHO:
  
  PoW: The issue is WHO ensouls...and that is God."




• WHAT:
  
  PoW: The issue is WHY it is ensouled...and the answer is that God wills...to create that human life. And since there is no such thing as a bodiless soul, and since the human life is ensouled from conception, that human life from the very first moment bears the image of God its creator."

quote:

---

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

The ONLY bone that I'm going to throw you is that in the situation where the mother has to be saved due to the needs of other kids who would suffer in the event of her death, THEN the human life of the unborn may be resigned to the hands of God.

---

However, in either case since they did not reach the age of accountability the aborted human life/fetus will go to heaven and so it isn't the mother of all tragedies.

---

You just chose to justify abortion: the "fetus will go to heaven "

Shame!

Why would a priest give the advice that I quoted, and to which you responded above. Here's what I think. In the case where the mother might sactifice her life for the possibility of her fetus' life, etc., what it important is that she is in the image of God. Suffering death is something that is called for when we are Christians. Monks remind themselves every day: "Remember that you are going to die." The priest's job is to guide the Christian towards their ultimate goal. "Taking up one's cross" is the highest calling possible.

Can you imagine a priest advising a mother to sacrifice her child and then have to try and comfort her when she lies dying anyways. Then, she has moments to prepare for heaven. And the path of her life was selfish. No. The priest has the one job of guiding the Christian in "taking up their cross" and "walking in the light of the Holy Spirit."

---

quote:

---

SORRY THAT YOU DON'T CONSIDER A HUMAN WORTH NOT KILLING ("IT WILL GO TO HEAVEN ANYWAYS," YOU SAY.)
SORRY THAT YOU DON'T CONSIDER THE NATURE OF OUR HUMANNESS "ESSENTIAL."

---

quote:

---

Wrap up:

• WHEN:
  
  PoW: The issue is not a matter of WHEN it is convenient to define a life as more alive than before; or more unavoidably inconvenient; or more "lovable"; or more impressive; or more wanted... It is not a matter or "quickening;" or of "brain activity;" or of "viability outside the womb"; the WHEN is a matter of "before the foundations of the world."



• WHO:
  
  PoW: The issue is WHO ensouls...and that is God."




• WHAT:
  
  PoW: The issue is WHY it is ensouled...and the answer is that God wills...to create that human life. And since there is no such thing as a bodiless soul, and since the human life is ensouled from conception, that human life from the very first moment bears the image of God its creator."

---

quote:

---

This thread is called: "When Human life begins: in reality and legally"

These two, the reality of when human life begins, and what a law says about whether to included one person within the protection of the law while excluding another (such as one who has the top of her head still inside the uterus while her brain is vacumed out) are two separate matters. We can make one allign with the other, if it is in our power. It is not in our power. But even so, if we are to "walk in the light as He is in the light" we must recognize the truth that God established. And we must not lie about God's will, just to "win" a few to "convert" to what is comfortable.

---

quote:

---

dlw: I think we need some mediation here. I've gone on too many exchanges like this over in the homosexuality link and they are emotionally tolling.

---

PoW: Dave, I asked you several exchanges ago to leave me out of it. You haven't done that. I don't know why!

I asked you to make your own posts, and develop your own ideas. Instead you have taken my words and presented shoddy refutations of the, often hanging emotional afterthoughts that introduced ethical nightmares into the fury.

Whatever the emotional drain on you; I'm left wondering whether you do more harm than good. That's where the scale reads right now. (Something you said in this latest volley will illustrate that last part well.)

.......................................................

quote:

---

PoW: Why would a priest give the advice that I quoted, and to which you responded above. Here's what I think. In the case where the mother might sactifice her life for the possibility of her fetus' life, etc., what it important is that she is in the image of God. Suffering death is something that is called for when we are Christians. Monks remind themselves every day: "Remember that you are going to die." The priest's job is to guide the Christian towards their ultimate goal. "Taking up one's cross" is the highest calling possible.

Can you imagine a priest advising a mother to sacrifice her child and then have to try and comfort her when she lies dying anyways. Then, she has moments to prepare for heaven. And the path of her life was selfish. No. The priest has the one job of guiding the Christian in "taking up their cross" and "walking in the light of the Holy Spirit."

DLW: Pow, I was just putting the abortion issue in perspective. I agree with you on the matter of personal conduct and the consequences of our selfishness. I disagree with you on the view that the zygote is a human life from conception on and all abortion is murder. I also try to put how we spend our political capital on the abortion in perspective in contrast to all the other ways we could spend our political capital.

---

THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE OF WHY I'D LIKE YOU TO LEAVE ME OUT OF YOUR "DISCUSSION" DAVE. YOU JUMPED FROM THE ISSUE OF THE PERSONHOOD OF THE ZIGOT TO THE HOT-BUTTON "M-WORD" (MURDER). YOU DO THIS ALL THE TIME. I'D LIKE TO BE LEFT OUT OF YOUR STEWS.

PoW: You may "disagree" with what I layed out as to the criteria for a human zigot to be a person in God's eyes, but you (1) refuted neither the standard that I presented nor (2) the the facts that connect the instance of the zigot to that standard.

As to "political captital" THAT seems to be your REAL interst. You should do a thread just on that. As to this thread, you included as half of the title the matter of the "reality...of when life begins." I've layed that out. What you, perhaps, would find more fulfilling is just dealing with the "political captital" matter; and not get stymied when someone disagrees with you in ethics.

Think about it.

quote:

---

DLW: you do really slam down hard and over differences on which there is room for disagreement.

---

PoW: When you justify abortion based on the determinative criteria that the "fetus will go to heaven" then a responsible person will take you to the wood shed. You have opened a pandora's box...again. You opened as moral (under your "certain situations") the euthenasia of those who don't fit your standard of mental abilities, and several other catagories of human persons. (You need to be discipled by someone.)

quote:

---

DLW: A major problem of mine is that I am playing God in how I view the fetal development process and make a judgment regarding it that differs from the Christian Tradition you hold to.

---

PoW: I underlined the saleint part. You are trying to "play God." I am making statements that I believe to be based on devotion to NOT usurping God's role. By "playing God" doctors eliminate God from his role. God allows such sins; but is not the author of the sin of abortion--any more than any other sin. (See John of Damascus quote, previous.)

quote:

---

DLW: Look, the issue we are discussing is abortion and how we obey the commandment "Thou Shall Not Kill".

---

PoW: No. That is YOUR issue. You habitually compound two issues by conflating them into one issue, thus mangling the most important part. The issue is not "Thou Shall Not Kill." the issue is the Life that God has created, sustains, and is responsible for. That's the center. You keep loosing center.

quote:

---

My response pointed to the fallen sinful circumstances that make some people consider abortions. The point is that it is because of the prevalence of sin and our going against God's will that people get abortions.

---

PoW: You seem to be arguing both sides here.

But let me just say that the "prevalence of sin" does not make God love that human zigot that he ensouled by creating it a personally unique being in His image.

Again, your topic seems to be "people consider abortions." THAt is the "legal" part of the thread title. It does not affect the unchanging nature of the "reality of when human life beings." THAT continues to be when God makes it alive. That's conception.

quote:

---

God does not will lots of things. Does God will "just" wars? Does God will self-interest, materialistically driven Capitalist Economies? But such does exist and how we confront such aspects of the reality of evil is what we discuss on this forum.

---

PoW: But the "Royal Law" Jesus gave us, to "love one another" is undetered by any sin, plague, war, evil. The standard is that "God is the giver of life."

It becomes obvious after seeing the threads where Calvinists and Arminians are beatin up on each other that the attention slips off of God and onto circumstances. What EVERYONE needs to do is to remember that: "God is the giver of life." "Theodicy" is useless. What matters is: "God is the giver of life." Even a loved one who seemingly is snatched from the grasp of our control beyond our ability to help is STILL in the arms of Him who created their live. "God is the giver of life." Even death is not stronger than THAT Love. All other laws either find their center in the Royal Law, or else they become laws unto themselves as their framers "play God."

quote:

---

BUT HERE'S WHAT I *DID* SAY:

quote:

---

PoW: 2. The problem with your poposition is that it confuses WHEN with WHO and WHY. It is not a matter of "when" an conceived human is. It is ensouled all the while. The issue is WHO ensouls: and that is God. and the issue is WHY it is ensouled: and the answer is that God wills. What you say is so wrong because it denies God's will! WHO and WHY are the issues. And those are not available for you to bargain away, as you seem to be trying to do.

DLW: I don't see how me expressing ambiguity over when the fetus becomes a human life denies God's will and role played in the development of a human fetus.

---

---

PoW: What "denies God's will and role played in the development of a human fetus?" KILLING IT DOES!!!

And what you describe as "ambiguity" is just a blanket declaration of "open game" on whole classes of human beings. And not only that, you then also provide extension to "open game" on other classes of humans too. WHAT YOU DON'T, PERHAPS, KNOW, IS THAT YOUR METHOD HERE GIVES AWAY "POLITICAL CAPITAL" INSTEAD OF PRESERVING IT. (YOU ARE DANGEROUS TO YOUW OWN CAUSE.)

quote:

---

DLW: Now, I was born with a hole in my heart. It likely may have been part of God's greater plan for me to be born with such a defect. However, given the current prevalence of abortions in our world, it seems that one could say that such abortions apparently are also part of God's will.

---

This belongs on the other threads. Someone's going to respond to this one!!!

PoW: So DLW, you are saying that God is the cause of sin. (YOU SUPER-CALVINIST YOU!!!) You are saying that since people kill millions of human persons it must be OK with God now. That makes war good. Infantacide in Baal worship God-ordained...


===========================================================

NOW IS WHERE DAVE GETS CLOSER TO WHERE HE SHOULD BE.
But the same propensity he shows in saying that the Devil should be partially disregarded -- in Greg's thread -- takes another form while being pretty much the same thing here: "I don't see how bringing in God's will and purpose in the development of the human fetus contributes..."

quote:

---

DLW: The issues are what fallible rules should we use to guide ourselves wrt to abortion and how we should interact with the State for the legal rules governing abortion. I don't see how bringing in God's will and purpose in the development of the human fetus contributes to such a discussion except as intimidation devices for one who is questioning their received answers to these questions.

---

PoW: Standards of good brain sergery can be "intimidating" to those who can't do it, too. But its only those who have everything right that I want to have touch my scalp...

quote:

---

DLW: What I am saying is that God did not will how we should obey the commandment "Thou shall not kill" for all times.

---

PoW: Whatever you might mean by that statment (I don't know.), NEITHER the "Royal Law" ("Love one another.") NOR the ontological status of all humans as ensouled persons changes with time, fashion, tradition, situational pressures, or social agreements.

quote:

---

DLW: As such, the view that human life begins at conception is not above reconsideration.

---

PoW: You have no basis for saying that.

quote:

---

DLW: It is worthy to consider the crap-filled situations that we fall under in which some abortions, while still tragic and sin, may be the lesser of two evils.

---

PoW: A quicky title for that is SITUATION ETHICS. (Dave, you are a liberal.)

quote:

---

DLW: It is because we are caught up in sinful situations that we must make difficult choices sometimes and choose the lesser of the two evils. This includes taking some aspects of sinfulness as unlikely for us to be able to change immediately and others that we can do something about.

---

Someone fill in a response! _____________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________.

quote:

---

DLW: And I know you feel strongly, but discussing these issues constructively does require some emotional distance.

---

PoW: That's why YOU need to stop conflating the two aspects -- that of partially wrong laws and true Creational Norms -- together. THAT makes everything an immediate ball of emotions for you. You try to deny God's law because it makes you uncomfortable. But that is wrong. God is the "Giver of Life." He upholds those who die, and those who's life is full of shit. YOU want to solve all that FOR God -- by "playing God."


===========================================================

quote:

---

quote:

---

DLW: Pow, you pound away too much on issues that are not essentials.

PoW: SORRY THAT YOU DON'T CONSIDER A HUMAN WORTH NOT KILLING ("IT WILL GO TO HEAVEN ANYWAYS," YOU SAY.)
SORRY THAT YOU DON'T CONSIDER THE NATURE OF OUR HUMANNESS "ESSENTIAL."

---

I am opposed to abortion and do consider the sanctity of human life as essential. I was putting the abortion issue in perspective. There are many issues that impinge on life and death and how we as the Church let our light shine. I was saying that witnessing to the world and saving souls is, ultimately, of greater importance than preventing all abortions.

---

PoW: It seems like you are doing some good clarifying here, Dave!

quote:

---

quote:

---

PoW: TOO BAD THAT, AS IT SEEMS, YOU CONSIDER THE "KINGDOM" TO BE A POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL THING. THAT FITS WITH YOUR CONFLATION OF "ECCLESSIAL" WITH "ECCLESSIAL PROBLEM OF ORDER" (conflating an order/institutional governance issue with a Spiritual reality into something where the second disolves.)

---

Dude, the spiritual reality you speak of has failed so miserably so many times that one can only conclude that we fallible humans must play an inexorable role in its governance since the leading of the spirit would never have let us fall so much.

---

PoW: That "spiritual reality" you say I speak of, is God's creation. Don't you get that? Because of that failure Christ went to the Cross. Because of that failure we are also called to immitate Him in taking up OUR crosses. The "spiritual reality" is the human soul, which is the unity of spirit and body.

Here, again, you seem to say that the problems in the world invalidate God's very creation. You will probably say that you think it alters what should be done -- in some modification of what God said to do (claiming that those statements can't hold for all situations--is that how you put it?). But the realith is that in God's eyes that conceived person, though only one cell, is unique in all the world, and infinitely loved, and of immeasurable worth.


DO, DLW, explore ways of politik-ing. But I hope that you will consider that God is still sovereign. And though there are failures, the goodness of his creation still endures.

quote:

---

dlw

Those that obscure the political,"contested" nature of our ecclesiastical decision-making are ultimately protecting their authority to lead Christianity down paths we've gone down several times before; Where we defend as Truth our truths and undermine our witness to the whole by over-presumption on the particular.

---

PoW: This is cynicism. You still won't accept a definition of the Church that centers on God. You believe that the church is only a human institution. The Church is humanity embodied in Christ by the Spirit. The Church's ministry is understood as the ministry of Christ, and what that is. And then what you understand from that should be modified in such a way as to take into account that it is administered by the Spirit in the way the Spirit works, and in the conditions that fit with the Spirit's ministry. (Pneumatologically conditioned Christology equals biblical Ecclessiology.) And THAT is not whatever (take your pick) of the historically undeniable hijackings of assemblies and resources. Often the true Ecclesia has to be dug for in the koinonia of the local body. Sometimes it has endured in the monk's recluse. Sometimes it has been preserved in the praying grandmother.

But nothing about the God-breathed personhood of each human being is political. It is "in-spirition" by Spirit and Word. 'God done it!'

===========================================================

quote:

---

quote:

---

Wrap up:

• WHEN:
  
  PoW: The issue is not a matter of WHEN it is convenient to define a life as more alive than before; or more unavoidably inconvenient; or more "lovable"; or more impressive; or more wanted... It is not a matter or "quickening;" or of "brain activity;" or of "viability outside the womb"; the WHEN is a matter of "before the foundations of the world."



• WHO:
  
  PoW: The issue is WHO ensouls...and that is God.



• WHAT:
  
  PoW: The issue is WHY it is ensouled...and the answer is that God wills...to create that human life. And since there is no such thing as a bodiless soul, and since the human life is ensouled from conception, that human life from the very first moment bears the image of God its creator."

---

DLW: Pow, I'm sorry but this really doesn't contribute to the specific discussion that was ongoing on this link.

---

PoW: Addressing the matter of "When Human life begins...in reality" certainly DOES belong on this thread.

Thing is, Dave, that I waited a LONG TIME into the progress and lifespan of this thread before making ONE POST. Some sort of rebutal to what you were assuming to be true, but which flies in the face of BOTH Scripture and the Chruch's tradition of understanding Scripture. Scripture is KING in this, Dave; not your rationalizations. Scripture!!!

quote:

---

DLW: God ensouling life does not mean God ensouls life at conception.

---

PoW: You have not shown your statement to be true. I have shown that God's giving that unique individual human his/her life is ensouling, as his/her life is inseparable from his/her unique relationship with God. Even the zigot does not "have" a soul, but is in the words of Genesis "a living soul."

quote:

---

dlw: God willing that all fetuses should live is the same as God willing that there be no war. There is war.

---

PoW: Who says that all fetuses will live???????? God calls some of them home to himself before they are born. My sister-in-law among them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Living even to "term" is not a requirement for personhood.

But ALL humans are in the image of God, and are unique persons, and are of INFINITE WORTH to the Father, the God of Life.

quote:

---

DLW: The reason is because of the sinful, outside of God's will conditions we live under on this planet.

---

Martin Luther: And though this world with devils filled should threaten to undo us, we will not fear for God has willed His truth to triumph through us. ... The Spirit and the gifts are ours through Him Who with us sideth: Let goods and kindred go, this mortal life also; The body they may kill: God’s truth abideth still, His kingdom is forever.




-----------------------------------------

quote:

---

PoW: This thread is called: "When Human life begins: in reality and legally"

These two, the reality of when human life begins, and what a law says about whether to included one person within the protection of the law while excluding another (such as one who has the top of her head still inside the uterus while her brain is vacumed out) are two separate matters. We can make one allign with the other, if it is in our power. It is not in our power. But even so, if we are to "walk in the light as He is in the light" we must recognize the truth that God established. And we must not lie about God's will, just to "win" a few to "convert" to what is comfortable.

DLW: Where have I lied about God's will? What do others think of this? How can you miss my point, which is to try and prevent as many abortions through political activism that takes into account the lay of the land politically and the opportunity costs of what we seek to acheive through politics.

---

PoW: You made comments to justify abortion.

quote:

---

PoW: Christ calls to "pick up your cross." That's the "call" he gives to everyone.

God does not call or allow his servants to barter away what he establishes by his Word in Creation. Nothing comes into begin except God speaks it--by His Word, the Son.

DLW: God did not establish the position you are defending in his Word. You are pulling out the big-guns over a difference that in practice is not very great between you and I.

---

Yes I did post that position from Scripture. And Yes God did establish the image of God in man from the outset of each of our lives.

And you have only made lame excusses that you would prefer to consider other "possibilities" or things that you can construe. My "big guns" include the Books of Genesis and Psalms.

Where you look for "a difference that in practice is not very great between you and I" you might find it. But you WON'T FIND IT in matters of what God makes things to be, or mean, or intends their lives to be. That's all in God's hands.

The areas where I presume we will embrace each other's prayers are in mercy and support for the individuals who are wrecked by the sinful world. In forgiveness for those who sin. In understanding for those who are crushed by weights unbearable.

But in all that we must do it WITH the Lord. In the case of the abused person who commits suicide though they love and trust the Lord, but sometimes can't take it (another chapter in Breck), we can know that God loves, and love is stronger than death! God is the God of the Living.

quote:

---

PoW: Dare we disagree with Christ our Judge??? Dare we disagree with the one "who alone is worthy to open the scrolls"?

DLw: I'm sorry but God as my witness I am only frustrated by your casuistry.

---

PoW: I had to look that word up:

quote:

---

casuistry
'kazhooistree
[n] "moral philosophy based on the application of general ethical principles to resolve moral dilemmas"

---

PoW: Well, I certainly don't try to iron out the world's problems.

Again, I just entered this thread with a single post. And you launched off into trying to take it apart. But you never did. And I just kept my single course steared straight. That's all I did.

- - - -

You have a point to make, Dave.

Find that ONE course, and stear straight. Don't try to resolve all the other things on the left and the right.

Leave what God has done along. Don't try and take his place. Don't try and protect God from your definitions of failure. Be open to learning what God's victory is.

Be willing to stand by those who suffer.

Don't condemn those who look the sinful world straight in the face and weap for it all.


Edited by - PotOnWheel on 07/25/2003 8:40:08 PM

quote:

---

DLW ...an important thing for us to consider(especially for me). ... If soul signifies the way in which life is manifested in man then we would still need to consider the way in which life is manifested in the human fetus. ... The external manifestations of human fetal development, which we now can observe, are the key to its signs of life.

---