I’m discussing Jesus and Jewish law with a guy who prefers ignorance of Jewish law at the time of Jesus.
I keep asking him variations of this question:
If abortion is such a sin explain why Jesus who was conversant with the law never mentioned it? The usual answer I get is “they didn’t know” which is obviously false. Read the law. They knew. In detail. Of course not as much detail as we have now. But sufficient.
So far I have gotten a lot of avoidance of the question. It seems to embarrass Christians.
This set of facts also embarrasses them:
There are more endocannabinoid receptors in the body than any other receptor type.
The endocannabinoid system is a major regulator in the body implicated in almost all diseases including cancer.
Medical Marijuana prohibition is a crime against humanity and a violation of the religious precept – heal the sick.
Especially when I start quoting the NIH that cannabinoids like THC are a cure for cancer. There are thousand more cannabinoid cites by the NIH in a similar vein.
I was a bit unkind to this Christian though. I said after I had countered a bunch of misinformation he spouted, including “marijuana makes people stupid”:
Marijuana makes YOU stupid. And you don’t even use it. It is a MIRACLE. Praise Jesus!
Comments
34 responses to “Did Jesus Know Jewish Law?”
At the time of Christ many women died during childbirth and protecting the life of the mother is not at odds with most Christian’s belief. It was almost impossible then to determine the actual risks of any individual pregnancy and a woman’s fear was quite enough reason to allow an abortion. I doubt however that many late term abortions were performed on the basis of ‘fear’ since the available abortion methods at that stage were as great a risk to the mother’s life as actual birth. There is a strong possibility that this is still true of most late term abortions but you can’t trust anyone’s numbers anymore.
He never mentioned rape either, so I guess it’s okay.
Jesus was a big fan of the Ten Commandments. When a rich young man asked him, just before he was to leave to go to Jerusalem, what he must do to gain eternal life, Jesus answered:
“but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:7)
Among those commandments is “Thou Shalt Not Kill.”
Just because this particular kind of killing is not mentioned by name does not mean that it gets Jesus’ seal of approval. It’s still killing. It doesn’t go into the various kinds of killing because they’re all covered by the catch-all Thou Shalt Not Kill.
“So far I have gotten a lot of avoidance of the question. It seems to embarrass Christians.”
I haven’t avoided the question and I’m not embarrassed.
Your understanding of classical values includes violence against the unborn? Have you been following the Kermit Gosnell murder trial?
Argument used as a cudgel does not convince anyone, it just sharpens divisions. It’s almost as annoying as Atheists borrowing someone else’s morals to make their points.
Well I argue these points because it amuses me. After age 25 most people’s minds can’t be changed because endocannabinoid production has declined and thus mental plasticity.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20121015/Cannabis-and-the-endocannabinoid-system-an-interview-with-Dr-Leonora-Long.aspx
===
Note – rape is obviously a crime because it is an attack of one human on another.
===
In Jewish law causing a baby to die in the womb by an altercation was equivalent to breaking an arm.
And there is a whole bunch of other stuff relating to abortion. The details of which you can find out by reading the appropriate section of the Talmud.
It never rose to the level of murder and was not even a sin until quickening. After that it depended on circumstances.
Now if the Jews got it wrong wouldn’t Jesus have said something? He was not shy about adultery – which was a commandment.
In any case I have no problem with people’s beliefs on the matter. As long as they don’t turn them into laws.
Just as I have no problem with people’s beliefs about cannabis. It is the law that is wrong.
I don’t care for laws that create significant black markets.
Abortion is murder. Premeditated intentional murder. So we need to institute the death penalty for every woman who has one since the woman initiated the crime.
And we need to get rid of birth control pills which can be used the “morning after”. That would be murder.
Every miscarriage will require a murder investigation.
Sounds like a good idea to me.
Re: Kermit Gosnell – in Jewish Law once the head emerges from the womb it becomes an independent human. Or half the body if it is a breech birth.
The man obviously committed murder.
And yes. – I had to look Kermit up.
===
And Joey – you are not embarrassed to be ignorant of Jewish law at the time of Jesus? Biblical scholarship just ain’t what it used to be. I AM amused.
Once upon a time you had to know Greek, Hebrew, and Latin to be a Bible scholar.
“Note – rape is obviously a crime because it is an attack of one human on another.”
Yeah, so’s abortion. That’s not germane to my point however. Whether or not it’s a crime is irrelevant. It’s a question of whether Jesus would approve. Jesus said nothing about rape, so Christians should condone it. Is that the conclusion I should draw?
Silence on the part of Jesus=approval. If you accept this formulation you should apply it across the board. I do not, however, accept this formulation.
I wonder if it ever occurred to you that Jesus probably said many things were not recorded in the four short biographies (Gospels) that we know, three of which are so similar that they are basically three versions of the same story.
“Abortion is murder. Premeditated intentional murder. So we need to institute the death penalty for every woman who has one since the woman initiated the crime.”
This kind of argumentation is spurious. It simply means that if we follow an argument to its logical end we find a scary conclusion, so let’s not go there. Here’s the answer to your question. Yes, it is murder, but I am also opposed to the death penalty, so that rules out capital punishment for women who have abortions. Also, murder laws vary according to circumstances. There is first, second, and third degree murder, there are crimes of passion. There is something called justifiable homocide. Not all murders are treated the same. I do think that a woman who kills a child in her womb needs to face some punishment, but not life imprisonment and definitely not the death penalty. The abotionist, on the other hand, deserves to be a in a tiny cell for the rest of his earthly existence, eating bread and water.
Yours is a non-sequitur: Because we don’t have the will to punish all of the millions of women who have had abortions, that must mean that it cannot be murder, therefor the thing growing in her womb must not have been a person in the first place.
You’re going to have to show me the Biblical references for the other facts you mentioned.
“In any case I have no problem with people’s beliefs on the matter. As long as they don’t turn them into laws.”
And I have no problem if you believe that abortion is fine, just as long as you don’t force that decision upon the unborn child.
Hey, aren’t you a Constitutuionalist? How did we get here if not by federal interference in what should be a tenth amendment issue? Sounds like you think it’s just fine for the feds to dictate to the states when your policy preference is the one being shoved down our throats.
In a just country, with a media that isn’t as corrupt as ours, kermit Gosnell would be a household name because his story would be front page news, bigger than Abu Graib or Trayvon Martin or Rodney King.
Sounds like you think it’s just fine for the feds to dictate to the states when your policy preference is the one being shoved down our throats.
Well pass a Constitutional Amendment. That should solve the problem.
Hell. I’m even in favor of State anti-abortion laws as long as we start killin women who have them. Premeditated murder. I can think of no faster way to put an end to such laws. What woman will want the risk that she might die from a miscarriage at the hands of he state? Not even the most conservative women will go for that.
All this founders on practical considerations. Like black markets in abortion pills and herbs.
What woman is going to want to be poked and prodded by the government medical establishment for every miscarriage? Or just to check to see if she is pregnant?
But I got to tell ya – I’d like to be a member of the vagina police. Should be lots of opportunity there. There will always be corrupt police. I’d like to be one.
In any case with the kids these days being what they are your chances of getting such laws passed are not real good except in a few states.
And BTW when a sperm-egg combination becomes a human is a viability question. Viable outside the mother’s body = human. But if you can change the law on that fine. Except if you go for conception a lot of birth control methods get outlawed. Lots of women will object. i.e. you will be moving women to the Democrat side even more than currently. The “war on women” chants will get much louder. A stupid move politically. But Republicans are not noted for being politically astute. They like being losers.
My first mate and I discuss this frequently. She is rabidly anti-abortion. She also doesn’t want government taking an interest in her parts. Part of that comes from her experience of being thrown in jail and strip searched for an unpaid parking ticket. How much worse will it be when every miscarriage requires a murder investigation? You want your woman subject to fingering by the government even more than now? Kinky. It is not a kink I favor.
You imagine utopia if things go right. I imagine hell if things go the way they usually do with government.
Women will effectively become wards of the state during pregnancy under your plan. That should be a very effective method of birth control.
How much is this going to cost our already bankrupt State and Federal Governments?
I prefer the Jesus method – persuasion. You prefer to solve the problem with law and force. That is why you are a Christian and I am not. I AM amused.
At least there is some dialogue now as a few states consider heartbeat,12,20 and 24 week laws. Maybe in another 40 years we can reach a real agreement. I favor a 12 week heartbeat law myself with an extension to 20 weeks for rape, incest, and some birth defects as well as complete exemptions for the physical health of the mother and lethal abnormalities in the fetus. Violations should not be considered murder unless a doctor has a pattern of knowingly performing restricted abortions beyond 20 weeks. I would be open to debate up to 24 weeks or down to 8, but then I’m not a legislator. I am just a crazy old hermit with two grown adopted children, and I seriously doubt most who are legislators want a real debate. They just want political points.
Will,
I think that is workable. But it should be state law.
And you still have the problem of investigating miscarriages for poisoning.
And I would allow the mental health of the mother.
I knew a woman back in the day who was “asleep” and had 3 abortions. Once she “woke up” she started having children. When she was “asleep” she was in no way ready to carry to term, she was in a very bad way in those “sleeping” days.
I still think the best way is to work to awaken the sleeping. Persuasion.
Moral at the point of a gun is not the same as moral by choice. We need way more moral by choice people in society. Laws are counterproductive in that sense.
I hate the idea of government intrusion into bodily functions.
I agree that it really should be by state even though that probably means another two or three decades of heated fighting over state line jumping. The mental health exemption seems to have been quite abused in the past but I could be argued into accepting it if doctors would look for and try to diagnose it early. I hope and pray I am being like Christ who made no attempt to overthrow slavery and other culturally condoned injustices and yet through his teachings and example laid seeds that would grow to help crack and destroy their very foundations.
“Well pass a Constitutional Amendment. That should solve the problem.”
Sure. Love to. You on board? I think the reason we can’t is because there is too much public opposition because we as a country really like killing our offspring.
“What woman is going to want to be poked and prodded by the government medical establishment for every miscarriage? Or just to check to see if she is pregnant?”
None. No one is suggesting that we do that, so that’s just a straw man argument. Prior to 1973, no one suggested that we do that. Abortion is still illegal in all but the rarest cases in Ireland and no one is being poked or prodded by the government. There is no Irish vagina police and no murder investigation is carried out for every miscarriage. We don’t have a murder investigation for every car accident either. That doesn’t mean that we don’t have laws against vehicular homicide. If must resort to straw man arguments, I guess your side has already lost.
“I’d like to be a member of the vagina police. Should be lots of opportunity there.”
I bet you would but don’t get your hopes up. There is no vagina police and never will be. Just more of the same straw man.
“And BTW when a sperm-egg combination becomes a human is a viability question. Viable outside the mother’s body = human.”
You’re really pretty ignorant of biology. Viable outside the womb means capable of surviving outside the womb. Prior to viability, children are removed from the womb very much alive but die shortly thereafter. Children before viability are no less human and no less alive. The fact that they die proves that they were alive. The act of removing them from the womb kills them.
“But Republicans are not noted for being politically astute. They like being losers.”
As opposed to Libertarians who win nothing year in and year out but congratulate themselves for standing on principle. Republicans currently control the House of Representatives. Thirty of the fifty states have Republican governors. There are forty-five Republican senators. Mitt Romney won 47.2% of the popular vote. Libertarians control nothing and never will. Gary Johnson won .99% of the popular vote. Who likes being a loser?
“Part of that comes from her experience of being thrown in jail and strip searched for an unpaid parking ticket.”
I doubt this person exists, I really doubt the strip search story, and I don’t believe that she’s “rabidly anti-abortion.” Sounds like you’re just making crap up.
“You want your woman subject to fingering by the government even more than now? Kinky.”
How many times do we have yo go over this? NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT VAGINA INSPECTIONS!
“I prefer the Jesus method – persuasion. You prefer to solve the problem with law and force. That is why you are a Christian and I am not. I AM amused.”
Jesus didn’t say “Persuade people not to kill their children.” Do you want to persuade people not to kill their newborns? How about their teenagers? How on earth would you persuade them when you don’t even think that they’re doing anything wrong?
I guess you’re not a Christian because, in your estimation, you follow Christ’s example and I don’t?
You make it sound as if the Republican Party is gung-ho about the life issue. It isn’t. It talks a big game and never does anything about it.
“Moral at the point of a gun is not the same as moral by choice.”
As if anyone’s pointing a gun at anyone. Hey, why don’t you apply that standard to Kermitt Gosnell? You should persuade him to stop killing babies. If he doesn’t want to, he can keep doing it.
Anyway, I answered your silly question. Jesus was against killing. Abortion is killing.
I asked you to provide me chapter and verse of the passages you mentioned about miscarriage (not abortion) being comparable to breaking someone’s arm and you didn’t.
Will,
The problem with mental health is that it is subjective. Only the woman involved can know. And that leaves you with – the State should stay out of it.
A woman who doesn’t want a baby is going to “poison” that baby with chemicals her body makes.
In addition – the problem solves itself genetically over time. Women who want babies will give birth to women who want babies.
In my own case I didn’t start a family until I was 38 and my first mate was 34. i.e. we waited until we were ready. In fact I had a “voice” tell me “NOW”. And fifteen minutes later the First Mate was pregnant. We both felt the spark. It WAS a miracle. One of the best decisions I ever made was to listen to that voice.
I am the great grandson of a man who had his last family (he outlived wives) in his 60s. My mother tells me that Simon males are known for strong sex dives well into old age. I can see it in my sons.
Genetics will solve the problem over time – if we let it. Especially when you consider that it is mostly lefties having abortions and politics tends to follow family.
I’d really like to see more faith in God and less in power politics. Which is why I’m not a Christian. Ironic eh?
Because the Left and the Right have believed in power politics we now have a state that is on the verge of killing us all. Neither side has been interested in trimming it back. The Left may have been against a power grab of the Right but when they got in power they wanted to use it. And vice versa.
My hope is that in time we will get more Rand Pauls and fewer Mitt Romneys. i.e. the Republicans will revert to their 1900 roots. The youth are looking good in that regard. My belief is that is the result of 40 years of drug war. It has inculcated a fear of the state in the youth. That will be with them for life.
Simon, you’re not a Christian. You’ve admitted as much and I could tell even before you said so. You don’t care about what Jesus said or what the Old Testament says. So let’s stop pretending that you do.
As a libertarian you should at least care about acts of violence. My rights end where my fist reaches someone else’s nose. Right?
Abortion is violence. Ask this abortion doctor. He’s an ordained Baptist minister turned Unitarian who will kill your child and then pray for you. He’s a sicko, but he’s also very honest.
“Am I killing? Yes. I am. I know that.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfWB7tcAdhw
It doesn’t get much clearer than that.
“My hope is that in time we will get more Rand Pauls and fewer Mitt Romneys. i.e. the Republicans will revert to their 1900 roots.”
Rand Paul has a strong pro-life track record. Mitt Romney was a staunch pro-abortion pol when he ran for Senate in 1994 and governor in 2002. He later had a change of heart which I found less than convincing.
So yes, we need more Rand Pauls and fewer Mitt Romneys.
Simon, I cannot agree on the mental health issue if it is open to misuse. There are plenty of homes that wish they could have infant children. My wife and I would gladly have adopted 6 or 8 if it had been at all possible. My Mother-in-law raised two of her own, one adopted, and half a dozen foster kids. My parents raised nine, plus one who came to visit when he was 10 and stayed well into college. My daughters would be happy to adopt, and they know well some of the problems with raising children whose body chemistry is very different from the parents. I just hope the debate continues to a resolution that does not include casual third trimester abortions.
If you look at the life of Jesus it is pretty obvious he was not a more power to the State guy. And yet vast numbers of his followers are.
As I am won’t to say in such cases: “It is a MIRACLE! Praise Jesus.”
“If you look at the life of Jesus it is pretty obvious he was not a more power to the State guy.”
Ergo…killing babies is okay?
Hey, I was wondering. Rand Paul is a strong pro-lifer. As far as I know, he always has been, unlike Romney who actually tried to argue in the 2002 gubernatorial debates that he was more bloodthirsty than his Democratic opponent, Shannon O’Brien. Rand Paul is pro-life and always has been. I receive form letters from Rand Paul from time to time, always concerning pro-life politics. They’re usually fundraising letters, and I give what I can when I can.
Does Rand Paul want the vagina police? Or is that just a nonsensical straw man argument that no one has actually proposed, that you like making fur the purpose of being inflammatory?
Your arguments are so weak, it’s laughable.
“Simon, I cannot agree on the mental health issue if it is open to misuse. There are plenty of homes that wish they could have infant children. My wife and I would gladly have adopted 6 or 8 if it had been at all possible.”
Of course. But the misuse is on an individual basis. With the State it is organized – rigid – and mindlessly applied until the laws can be changed. With individual decisions you can get immediate change.
But I am odd that way. I trust God’s plan for each individual. I have made bad decisions. Horrible decisions. Morally despicable decisions. And yet those bad decisions made me a better person because I will never make them again and I will work to teach others how to avoid them. How much simpler if the State had said “This is illegal”. I might have avoided those bad choices. But I certainly wouldn’t be teaching others what I have learned because I would have learned nothing. Instead you would be getting from me: “follow the law if you have to”. Hardly a message of morality from the heart.
I do believe Free Will is God’s greatest gift to us. And an effort to circumscribe it in others to get the right outcomes prevents God from teaching us the lessons we need to learn.
The trouble is not many have as much faith in God (what ever you want to call it) as I do. So they make idols of the State and worship it. Well, you know where that leads.
If you are against abortion work on the individuals who are having them. It is the more Godly way than empowering the State.
The point in all this to keep firmly in mind: The State is the tool of the Devil and trying to use the State for Good puts you in league with the Devil.
Do we need some State? Yes. Sometimes you have to pit Devil against Devil. Roads are easier to get done if you have a state that can steal property for them. But you should always question that impulse. And check it. Almost all te time.
This is the State:
11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots.
12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots.
13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers.
14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants.
15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants.
16 Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use.
17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves.
18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.”
And you want to put THAT in charge of the wombs of your women?
God help you.
[…] And you want to put THAT in charge of the wombs of your women? […]
You couldn’t find an actual Jesus quote so you resorted to an unrelated Old Testament reference that simply talks about a tyrannical king.
I am not putting anyone in charge of the wombs of any women.
Do you ever answer any questions. I have asked you myriad. Answer them from time to time, you coward.
“If you are against abortion work on the individuals who are having them. It is the more Godly way than empowering the State.”
It’s murder the same as any other. We “empower the state” to stop people who kill infants, toddler, teenagers, and full grown adults. You have no problem with this. And yet when it comes to children in the womb, you think we should just talk with them.
And what should we say? Everything we could possibly say would be construed as guilt-tripping them.
Finally, let’s not pretend that you care at all about Mosaic law or the words of Jesus. You care about neither.
I also believe Free Will is God’s greatest gift to us, and though cause and effect are part of his immutable physical laws, his plan provides each of us individually with ample opportunities to make choices that can strengthen or weaken our souls. I also believe it is necessary for our humanity to have such a law as soon as we as a society can agree on it; even if some choose to circumvent it. To stop forever a human heart and mind without imminent danger or due process and good cause is just wrong and damages us all.
I try my best to answer your questions. Maybe you should answer a few of mine. Here are some that you have left unanswered.
1. Your understanding of classical values includes violence against the unborn?
2. Jesus said nothing about rape, so Christians should condone it. Is that the conclusion I should draw?
3. You’re going to have to show me the Biblical references for the other facts you mentioned.
4. Hey, aren’t you a Constitutuionalist? How did we get here if not by federal interference in what should be a tenth amendment issue?
5. As if anyone’s pointing a gun at anyone. Hey, why don’t you apply that standard to Kermitt Gosnell? You should persuade him to stop killing babies.
6. As a libertarian you should at least care about acts of violence. My rights end where my fist reaches someone else’s nose. Right?
7. “If you look at the life of Jesus it is pretty obvious he was not a more power to the State guy.” Ergo…killing babies is okay?
8. Does Rand Paul want the vagina police? Or is that just a nonsensical straw man argument that no one has actually proposed, that you like making fur the purpose of being inflammatory?
9. Do you want to persuade people not to kill their newborns? How about their teenagers?
10. How on earth would you persuade them when you don’t even think that they’re doing anything wrong?
11. I guess you’re not a Christian because, in your estimation, you follow Christ’s example and I don’t?
I await your answers.
Another unanswered question.
12. Who likes being a loser?
There’s a simple way to find out if marijuana makes people stupid. If marijuana users are particularly likely to favor laws against “hard” drugs (there is some anecdotal evidence in favor of this conclusion), then it makes them stupid.
As for the abortion question, I regard Biblical silence on abortion as an argument against Biblical literalism.
Joseph,
Agreed on “hard” drugs.
Re abortion. The Talmud is not silent. There is considerable discussion. And Talmudic law dates from the time of Jesus.
I does cover all the details we look at today. Conception, heart beat, and late term. It includes the mental health of the mother. The conclusions reached roughly approximate the law the Supreme court has handed down.
I’m wary of making women wards of the state which is what a life begins at conception law would do. The State already owns enough of us IMO.
And you find that although the country is anti-abortion it is difficult to get laws passed. Evidently the “wards of the state” argument carries some water. In any case persuasion seems to be working. The abortion rate is on the decline.