 |
 |
My observations and with no disrespect just some observations. The Bible is taken literally by many. The translations, as you pointed out, were done by man. Done by "man" is a good observation. Translations tend to be placed in the context of the times. If you note the context of your quote indicates "men have a fight". It does distinguish between men and women but only notes when men have a fight. What happens if women have a fight? The other notations reflect the times. The woman was obviously considered property of a marriage at that time in history and in the geography where it was written. It was left to the man not the woman to determine the value of the unborn. Now I hope no one goes off on me. I don't consider women property nor do I consider men superior to women. We are obviously different though. The point is the Bible is written in the context of the times and geography and in the language known to us at that time. "Embryo" was not in the language at that time, "unborn" was. Neither was stem cell research. A clinical definition of life and death could not be defined at that time. Through the ages men continued to translate the bible but have always been influenced by the previous interpretations that were made by men not women. There was very little influence of women on the translations. Thusly you still have "mans" translation with the influence of the middle east geography of the times. I find it very hard to use the Bible as a literal guide on this subject. I think you need to look at the, spirit and wisdom that is provided by the Bible with the knowledge that the words are translations of what man felt were revelations at the time. Man then put these revelations into the best possible context available at the time. Unfortunately that context is influenced by a "mans" point of view as he lived in the middle east, with the local customs influencing "him." Another person pointed out that in Islam, and I am not familiar in any way, that life began in the fourth month. What is interesting about that was that man was more advanced when that passage was written and there was a greater knowledge of the length of gestation in humans etc. The culture at that time ( when Islam began ) I believed placed a higher value on children. So the translations of the revelations were able to be placed in the more precise language and in line with local values that were available at the time. All that having been said, and please no fire and brimstone, if there is a God there is and answer to this. I just don't think you will find it in the literal translation of any religious revelations. If there is not a God then that is a whole other story. Perhaps the answer is in the collective conscious of man and not in revelations. Man tends to be collectively good (as defined by most today) with a bit of a tendency toward evil ( as defined by most today ). I think you will find the answer in your conscious not the Bible. I for one don't know the answer and I am still searching. Now just for me and no one else, I would try to error on the side of my conscious. I would also not impose my conscious on anyone else. This is a difficult subject and should be treated with respect for all peoples opinions. They should all be valued and then perhaps we will find the answer in the collective consciousness of man. As influenced by God of course or whomever or whatever you believe guides mans quest for truth. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: "Wendy Siegel" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 12:20 AM Subject: Re: Full Human at fourth month... > I see the potential for the abuse of embryos for stem cell research, yet > if they are being destroyed anyway, why not use them to benefit others? > The only thing that causes me concern is the potential that people will > start "mining" embryos for money. The thought of that happening is > repugnant. > > I fall into the category of people who believe life begins at > conception. However, at least one passage from the bible does not > support that conclusion. While I have not come across any passage that > stipulates a time for the soul to enter the body (although one may be > there) I was surprised to read the following last night: > > "When men have a fight and hurt a pregnant woman, so that she suffers a > miscarriage, but no further injury, the guilty one shall be fined as > much as the woman's husband demands of him, and he shall pay in the > presence of the judges. But if injury ensues, you shall give life for > life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn > for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." > > The content of this passage (Exodus 21:22-25) seems to indicate that > embryonic life is not as valued as independently functioning human life. > I found this fascinating, and I wonder if anyone wants to comment on > this (without getting angry), outside of the excellent point that I am > quoting someone's interpretation of the original language of the bible. > > I want to make clear that I intend no disrespect of any religion by > quoting the bible. I just think it is an interesting counter-point to > some arguments against embryonic stem-cell research. > > Wendy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of FrankandTeri > > A respectful an thoughtful answer Faisal. I'm not a biblical scholar so > I > could not quote the passage or point out where in the bible Christians > believe this happens. ... > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn