• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Interesting point of view ...

exarch

Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
exarch
Joined
Jul 4, 2003
Messages
7,184
sent to me by a friend, who copied it from an article:

Is abortion good for the "Soul" ??

So that raises a question: should babies be killed to ensure the salvation of their souls? Remember, almost 3 out of 4 babies that are born will lose their souls. Yet we can ensure this does not happen, by ending their lives before they reach the age of accountability. It is a choice between preserving a life and probably losing a soul, or sacrificing a life and saving the soul. According to Jesus, saving the soul would be the more important thing.

What about the commandment "Thou shalt not kill?" Well aside from the fact that this commandment is routinely disregarded in instances such as war, and saving a soul is certainly more important than determining where the boundaries of your property are drawn, Christian doctrine itself lands heavily on the side of killing these infants, despite the 6th commandment. Remember, what matters most to God, according to Christians, is what you believe, not what you do. Christians can violate the other 9 commandments, without fear of losing their souls. And violating this one really doesn't get you in trouble either, so long as you believe in Jesus (my pastor used to say that Christians who broke commandments didn't lose their salvation, but might be "punished" with a smaller mansion in heaven).
Besides, all you had to do was ask for forgiveness, and God would erase that sin from your heart.

The issue then, becomes this: even though Christians shouldn't kill babies, so long as they believe in Jesus, they will still remain saved if they do, and if they confess their sin, God will forgive this transgression. And, the result of killing this baby is the guaranteed salvation of its soul, which Jesus said was more important than its life anyway. What's one more forgivable sin, when the result is the eternal salvation of a soul? But, what about the 1 in 4 babies that would have gotten saved anyway? Weren't they cheated out of life? Well, yes, but they still have an eternity of bliss awaiting them in heaven. And since heaven is so much more wonderful than earth, what's wrong with getting there a little early?
Click to expand...
 
The writer hasn't got all their oars in the water.

Nuff said.
 
Notice to all Atheists:

The Christians are beginning to think like us, its time to switch our moral beliefs that way we can continue to engage in bickering.

Looks like we are all staunch pro-lifers now... Sorry for the inconvenience.
 
This reminds me of the question that kids used to (probably still do) raise--If Heaven's so wonderful, why not kill ourselves now so we can get there sooner?
 
This is just satire in the venerable tradition of Swift's "A Modest Proposal", of course, but it's not as cleverly thought out. At least half of the Christians don't subscribe to the doctrine into salvation through faith alone. And plenty of them don't believe that an infant (at least an unbaptised infant) would necessarily arrive in heaven.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom