canpakes...I read the entire chapter and as I said it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter which translation you use. It doesn't matter if that IS a recipe for abortion.
What I attempted to show you there is two-fold...1). That if you yourself were to try to use Jealousie Law as a defense for abortion rights as a protected human right under the U.S. Constitution, your argument would fall flat on it's face because my strategy would be to turn that back on you by shoving every bit of Levitical Law in your face, put you on the spot to make you accept any number of things under Levitical Law including a condemnation for same sex marriage and undo your argument in a NY minute because if you are going to support one Law, I would see to it that you will support ALL of the Law or be found a raging hypocrite for cherry picking one single aspect of the Law to make me accept abortion as a human right because hey folks it's in the Bible
, while ignoring all the rest, 2). and further...I would tell you that Christian's are not under the Law because Christ fulfilled the Law with all of it's prescribed offerings and sacrifices so you can take your recipe for abortion and stuff it.
THAT is why when attempting to engage a Christian on whatever it is that your relatives are forwarding, you go directly to the NT and use that as the basis for any counter argument you would like to make. You go to the NT and you go to Jesus. Do not pass go and stay out of the OT.
Example, the Israelites being held (did I spell that right? Autocorrect picked it up and now my head is spinning) Jealousie Law as the price of suspected adultery in the OT....is then replaced with the story of the woman who was caught in the act of adultery, dragged out by a crowd to be stoned until Christ intervenes and instructs the crowd let he who is without sin cast the first stone and when they disperse (because ALL have sinned) he tells the woman to go and sin no more.
You use that same type of technique
when you want to engage a Christian making political claims that are NOT in keeping with the NT and the example of Christ in the NT, only you are not toggling back and forth between OT/NT, you are pitching your tent in the NT and you're not breaking camp.
Is the mud muddier now? Because if their political claims do not match what is presented in the NT, they will be forced to abandoned the pretense that God is on their side of the argument...because if it's not in the NT, then it's not on their side.
Simply put: In the case of a self proclaimed Christian...go to the NT and Jesus, and stay there
. YOU USE THE APPROPRIATE FOUNDATIONAL TEXT WHICH IS THE NT.
And if you can't engage with respect, don't even try it.
If you can share a sample claim they are making (besides God is on our side!) I can try to show you that right here on the screen but only if I can counter it with the NT.
I'm freaking tired. Why are you doing this to me?