Notes From The Didache On The Early Christian View Of Abortion

[Lursa]

It is murder. I thought I made that clear.

Your OP wasnt about murder...why are you still discussing it? How about focusing on what you have "claimed" it's about...if it's wrong.

My topic stands as to why abortion is wrong.

What if people that dont believe in your Bible...or for their personal reasons...also dont believe it's murder or wrong? Here it is again:

If they dont think it's wrong, why should they be concerned either way? There is a much safer medical procedure that woman can have that enables them to keep working, continuing their education, not being sick and in pain, not requiring them to go on public assistance to pay the rent or feed their families, risking their lives over 9 months, etc.

I'm directly addressing what you stated. Can you debate it or not?

 

[CLAX1911]

God doesn't have to be religious when making and promulgating laws. And the main concept of "love your neighbor as yourself," found in all three Biblical religions and in the negative version in Buddhism and Confucianism, doesn't require that people follow a religion. It requires treating other persons as you would treat yourself.

So treating people as you treat yourself is a religious vie

So if you would allow the state to force you to keep a biological parasite inside your body for months and not be allowed to have it removed by a doctor even if you didn't put it there, didn't want it there, and it had some likelihood of deforming and disabling your body for a significant duration, then I guess you can make an anti-abortion law. But anyone who does ought to be forced to have such a parasite.

I didn't say anything about a parasite. It's a baby in the womens a parasites why aren't children after they're born?

 

[CLAX1911]

You have to be kidding.

Instead of hosting this nonsense why don't you explain how you can't act upon your own desires when you're pregnant.

 

[CLAX1911]

The majority of people in the US and almost all of its states are pro-choice.

In the strictest sense sure. But I'm willing to bet the vast majority of pro-choice people support restriction.

Did you not know that there's a huge Middle ground between no abortion at all and a proportionate nine months?

Last I looked, they didn't want Roe v Wade overturned at a rate of about 62-70%, which is huge.

The judiciary isn't elected branch of the government they also re-elected the president that chose these justices so it's clearly not as big of an issue to them and do you want it to be.

The problem isn't with voters - it's with legislators who do not attend to what the voters actually want.

Voters have no say. Believe it or not our country is not a democracy. It's a constitutional republic you don't get to vote on what rights people have. That extends to States.

And FYI, it is the anti-abortion movement that has been largely responsible for so many people leaving Christianity, as they can't stand the bullies.

I don't think that that is largely responsible for people leaving Christianity.

 

[Gordy327]

In the strictest sense sure. But I'm willing to bet the vast majority of pro-choice people support restriction.

I'm sure many do support restrictions at some point, such as viability. Personally I do not, as there is no rational or legal basis for it.

Did you not know that there's a huge Middle ground between no abortion at all and a proportionate nine months?

Viability was that proverbial and literal middle ground. That wasn't good enough for anti abortionists and Dobbs did away with it. Clearlt anti abortionists are bot interested in "meeting in the middle."

The judiciary isn't elected branch of the government they also re-elected the president that chose these justices so it's clearly not as big of an issue to them and do you want it to be.

It oy become es an issue when they have to deal with the legal challenges brought before them.

Voters have no say. Believe it or not our country is not a democracy. It's a constitutional republic you don't get to vote on what rights people have. That extends to States.

Rights are based around the Constitution. States cannot unduly restrict one's rights rights or autonomy afforded by the Constitution.

I don't think that that is largely responsible for people leaving Christianity.

I'd say people might leave because they're getting fed up with stagnant old school dogmatic BS.

 

[CLAX1911]

I'm sure many do support restrictions at some point, such as viability. Personally I do not, as there is no rational or legal basis for it.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Viability was that proverbial and literal middle ground. That wasn't good enough for anti abortionists and Dobbs did away with it.

Dobbs didn't do away with anything and put the control back in the hands of the states the states that away with it or expanded it. I don't know why you people intentionally get this wrong every single time you talk about it there is no way you don't know this.

Clearlt anti abortionists are bot interested in "meeting in the middle."

So convinced the other people. You're never in a million years is going to convince the pro-lifers. Apparently they're better at convincing other people. Probably because they're not arrogant snobs.

It oy become es an issue when they have to deal with the legal challenges brought before them.

Someone challenged roe v wade

Rights are based around the Constitution. States cannot unduly restrict one's rights rights or autonomy afforded by the Constitution.

Make your argument to the supreme Court. Right now it's just your opinion.

I'd say people might leave because they're getting fed up with stagnant old school dogmatic BS.

I doubt that's it either.

 

[Jason Warfield]

Many in today’s churches whistle past the graveyard when it comes to abortion.

It is clear here that yes, God does abhor abortion.

————————

“The Didache is in two or three parts. The first part draws heavily from the gospels and follows the “two-ways” ethical tradition of Proverbs and the Psalms. It quotes and elaborates subtly upon the Sermon on the Mount, which elaborations (e.g., substituting “fasting” for blessing one’s enemies) seem to locate it more in the 2nd century than the first. The second part of the work is a fairly detailed account of the early Christian practice of baptism (by effusion) and the Lord’s Supper. The Didache knows nothing of transubstantiation or a memorial eucharistic sacrifice. The third part is a brief apocalyptic section. Naturally, there is much discussion among scholars about the source criticism and how to relate the three aspects of the document to each other.”

“Yesterday, in class, as we worked through chapter 2 I was struck by this portion of 2:2: “You shall not murder a child in destruction nor shall you kill one just born” (οὐ φονεύσεις τέκνον ἐν φθορᾷ οὐδὲ γεννηθέντα ἀποκτενεῖς). Michael Holmes, in his excellent edition of the Apostolic Fathers (3rd edition) translates these clauses, “you shall not abort a child or commit infanticide.” This seems perfect.”

Notes From The Didache On The Early Christian View Of Abortion - The Heidelblog

One of the more difficult and fascinating texts in the collection of texts known as the Apostolic Fathers is the Teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles by the Twelve Apostles usually known as a the Didache (Διδαχὴ). It is difficult because there are genuine questions as to its original…

heidelblog.net

If this has already been brought up, my apologies, but....

The Didache isn't canonized in the New Testament. The reason being is because the authors cannot be verified by Christian scholars. Another reason is that this is part of orthodoxy not recognized by Protestants, which are most Americans (and they also require a corresponding Hebrew text which does not exist for the Didache) and it was linked to the New Prophecy teaching which most Christians don't recognize. Also...if it couldn't be used in all churches, then it wasn't canonized.

It is brought up in religious studies as it is a relevant document, but in terms of faith and belief, not so much. Basically, again, you have to subscribe to a church that Protestants don't recognize. So, if you are an Orthodox Christian, then ok. If you are Catholic, there is debate. If you are Protestant...this is a no go. So, as usual, it depends on your religion, but one thing is certain...

This is NOT considered Christian thought across all version of Christianity. So, don't make the premise that it is.

Side note: Numbers 5:11 thru 31.

 

[choiceone]

So treating people as you treat yourself is a religious vie

Did you mean to say "view"? Lots of atheists believe in this message without believing in God, Buddha, or any other divine being.

I didn't say anything about a parasite. It's a baby in the womens a parasites why aren't children after they're born?

Children after they are born do not depend physically and biologically on any particular person's biological body for survival. They depend on the social community of persons for survival and therefore anyone can care for them and people can take turns. No individual person's life and health ever has to be harmed by the born. But almost all individual women who continue pregnancy and give birth are harmed biologically, even if only by tearing when giving birth, etc.

 

[CLAX1911]

Did you mean to say "view"? Lots of atheists believe in this message without believing in God, Buddha, or any other divine being.

Yeah I'm well aware atheists borrow from religions all the time.

Children after they are born do not depend physically and biologically on any particular person's biological body for survival.

But they are dependent to some degree in biologically.

They depend on the social community of persons for survival and therefore anyone can care for them and people can take turns. No individual person's life and health ever has to be harmed by the born.

Unless they were born because yes they do.

But almost all individual women who continue pregnancy and give birth are harmed biologically, even if only by tearing when giving birth, etc.

So we should go extinct?

 

[choiceone]

Yeah I'm well aware atheists borrow from religions all the time.

I'm suggesting that, without reference to God or any other spiritual being, the message of love your neighbor as yourself is one of reciprocity, and that is not necessarily religious. Little kids who know zilch about religion still know tit for tat, and though its not as nice a way of saying it, the message has great similarity.

But they are dependent to some degree in biologically.

No, none of the born are dependent on one individual person biologically. If a woman does have breast milk, the baby can survive anyway. They used soy in East Asia, coconut milk in Southeast Asia, goat milk in Tibet, etc., and in many places, lactating women fed unrelated children when the women who gave birth didn't have milk. There is absolutely no biological dependence on one person's biological body. That's why adoption at birth can be total and the birth parents can hide their identity.

Unless they were born because yes they do.

?

So we should go extinct?

Huge numbers of women want to give birth in moderation, so there's no danger of our extinction from abortion or, indeed, contraception or even some women deciding not to have sex with men. This is an entirely over the top argument.

 

[VySky]

Did you mean to say "view"? Lots of atheists believe in this message without believing in God, Buddha, or any other divine being.

Children after they are born do not depend physically and biologically on any particular person's biological body for survival. They depend on the social community of persons for survival and therefore anyone can care for them and people can take turns. No individual person's life and health ever has to be harmed by the born. But almost all individual women who continue pregnancy and give birth are harmed biologically, even if only by tearing when giving birth, etc.

That is by Gods desire as a result of the original sin.

 

[Gordy327]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I'll let you know when I give it. For now, I'll stick to facts.

Dobbs didn't do away with anything and put the control back in the hands of the states the states that away with it or expanded it. I don't know why you people intentionally get this wrong every single time you talk about it there is no way you don't know this.

Dobbs effeectively Invalidated the viability standard by putting abortion in the hands of the states. The states themselves may maintain that standard on their own accord or they may not.

So convinced the other people. You're never in a million years is going to convince the pro-lifers. Apparently they're better at convincing other people. Probably because they're not arrogant snobs.

No, they're simply more irrational and not interested in compromise, as I've already said! They're arrogant and sanctimonious enough to involve themselves in other peoples lives or decisions when it's really none of their business or concern at ll.

Someone challenged roe v wade

And now the states will be challenged again. History repeats.

Make your argument to the supreme Court. Right now it's just your opinion.

No, still fact. The Constitution enumerates and establishes our rights. That is just a legal fact.

I doubt that's it either.

I'd bet it plays a part.

 

[choiceone]

That is by Gods desire as a result of the original sin.

No, it isn't. God specifically desires that rape not occur, and girls who are raped are not guilty of anything, and the Bible basically says they shouldn't be punished. But underage rape victims can die giving birth and there have been famous cases. If that's because of something Eve did, it's totally unjust and contradicts stuff in the Bible, too. The whole idea that anyone is punished for original sin after Jesus Christ is, from a Christian perspective, a lie, anyway. This is just what men desire when they want to ruin all girls for not having penises.

 

[choiceone]

In the strictest sense sure. But I'm willing to bet the vast majority of pro-choice people support restriction.

Of course, they do. They support time limit restrictions. See the following collection of results of abortion polls and scroll down to find Gallup, a conservative polling organization. In their results, scrolled down, you can find the poll that separates support by the first three months, etc. About 67% support abortion in the first three months.

Abortion

Did you not know that there's a huge Middle ground between no abortion at all and a proportionate nine months?

Answered above.

The judiciary isn't elected branch of the government they also re-elected the president that chose these justices so it's clearly not as big of an issue to them and do you want it to be.

Trump won a plurality, not a majority, of the popular vote, sort of like Bill Clinton.
Some judges are elected. Moreover, we expect judges to know more about the law and how to follow it than presidents, who should follow SC rulings, and that goes double for unanimous rulings.

Voters have no say. Believe it or not our country is not a democracy. It's a constitutional republic you don't get to vote on what rights people have. That extends to States.

This is what conservatives say when they disagree with you. Our country is more than a constitutional republic. It is a constitutional democratic republic. Democratic modifies republic, and constitutional modifies democratic republic.

Representatives are supposed to represent people in their districts. Senators are supposed to represent people in their states. Governors are supposed to represent people in their states, and the President is supposed to represent people in all the districts and states.

And judges are supposed to represent the principles of their state and federal constitutions.

The Republican state legislatures in some red states have actually tried to get around their state constitutions to make laws that violate principles in those constitutions that they don't like. It's disgusting.

I don't think that that is largely responsible for people leaving Christianity.

So we disagree. Big woo. But many things are responsible for it, and the fact that many young people think that many older church members are hypocrites or support values they think un-Christian is not a surprise.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Lots of Christians have had abortions. Lots of pretend Christians have had abortions.

 

[VySky]

No, it isn't. God specifically desires that rape not occur, and girls who are raped are not guilty of anything, and the Bible basically says they shouldn't be punished. But underage rape victims can die giving birth and there have been famous cases. If that's because of something Eve did, it's totally unjust and contradicts stuff in the Bible, too. The whole idea that anyone is punished for original sin after Jesus Christ is, from a Christian perspective, a lie, anyway. This is just what men desire when they want to ruin all girls for not having penises.

God has a very high view about children, i.e., life in the womb.

Note the key words

Children and Life

Child is defined as
1 : a young person.

Person is defined as
1: human, individual

Emphasis mine


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

Exodus 21:22-25

`22 “When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine.

23 But if there is harm,d then you shall pay life for life,

24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

 

[VySky]

So we disagree. Big woo. But many things are responsible for it, and the fact that many young people think that many older church members are hypocrites or support values they think un-Christian is not a surprise.

What is no surprise is that people fall away from Christ. Scripture tells us this would happen and will continue to be so.

 

[BirdinHand]

What is no surprise is that people fall away from Christ. Scripture tells us this would happen and will continue to be so.

We see all sorts of MAGAs act in ways completely antithesis to the teachings of Christ.

Scripture told us it would happen.

That individuals would follow a false god.

 

[VySky]

We see all sorts of MAGAs act in ways completely antithesis to the teachings of Christ.

Scripture told us it would happen.

That individuals would follow a false god.

Would or will?

 

[BirdinHand]

Would or will?

Do you think you live your life and demonstrate by your words and actions the teachings of Christ?

I support rounding them up and shipping them out.

It'ss time to arrest these terrorist and send them to GITMO, or El Salvador

Where is the whittle narcissist Anthony Fauci these days?

Probably in his study licking petri dishes while watching his favorite gay porn

. I couldn't even shoot a guy who kicked my door in

when someone tries to normalize transgenders for example

I wonder if El Salvador has any quaint women’s prisons?

I don’t

 

[VySky]

Do you think you live your life and demonstrate by your words and actions the teachings of Christ?

So you can't or will not answer the question?

 

[BirdinHand]

So you can't or will not answer the question?

I did.

 

[Gordy327]

God has a very high view about children, i.e., life in the womb.

Note the key words

Children and Life

Child is defined as
1 : a young person.

Person is defined as
1: human, individual

Emphasis mine


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

Exodus 21:22-25

`22 “When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine.

23 But if there is harm,d then you shall pay life for life,

24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

"Person" is a legal term and does not apply to the unborn. Neither is the unborn a child yet.

 

[VySky]

I did.

No, no you didn't.

 

[VySky]

"Person" is a legal term and does not apply to the unborn. Neither is the unborn a child yet.

The laws definition is irrelevant. The definition above is in alignment with God's definition.