Criminalizing Abortions Is Not Christian Behavior, take 2

For Reference: Exodus 21:24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, This is were we get what is called the lex talionis, or law of like for like. You have to understand that In Exodus the Jewish people were receiving their LAWS that would be with them for the rest of their civilization. These laws were not meant to be carried out by the average Joe but instead the authorities. As Adam Clarke writes his commentary of the bible he does some research and finds important incites. The Jews were tacking this law which is supposed to be carried out by the authorities and applying it as the lex talionis principal in their daily lives. As Adam Clarke points out this sows the seeds of "hatred revenge and all uncharitableness." But we cannot believe that Jesus makes the LAW obsolete . In fact in the New Testament apostle of Mathews here's what we see. Matt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them He goes further to say in the following verse. Matt 5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Note that he doesn't say that his preaching' s will never disappear, he says the whole LAW will not disappear the same law this includes without exceptions the law that says "eye for eye " What you refer to as the substitute for the law is found here in Mathews Matt 5:38-39 "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. Jesus is not talking about the law. It wouldn't make sense for him to be talking about the law, a person cannot physically strike the law on the cheek, the law has no body parts. Jesus is talking about you as an individual , this is something to be applied to your personal life. Jesus is fighting against the lex talionis principal that grew from the law, but the law itself he is not fighting. Because as he says in Mathew 5 18 he is not substituting the law, he is fulfilling the law. So when you say Jesus wants something new I believe you are correct in the sense of its personal application of how we interact with each other. But not something new for the law, Jesus is not trying to change the Law, Jesus is upholding it. He is fighting against a principal that was not meant to be applied in a personal scene and substituting it with love and kindness and affection. We can be there support to help these women, we can be there to encourage and not only that we should be , but by the god that we all share in common it is our responsibility as Christian community members to do that. But that is not incompatible with the job that Christian POLITICIANS have to do. The Christian politician has to back up the Christian community member at home. The Christian politician cannot sign a legislation saying that abortion is ok while his counterpart in the community is fighting to try to have a women understand that it is the destruction of a human life. The example in John chapter 8 is not one that should be used to argue against the death penalty. Jesus does not ever address the death penalty in that example. In fact we can conclude that because Jesus supports and stand by the law of the Jews, and the Law of the Jews has within them the death penalty on a variety of counts that Jesus does not wish to replace the death penalty. But because I cannot leave a gap in my argument I will go through the example of first John. John 8:6 "They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him" So we know that this whole thing is set around a trap that some people placed to try to trick Jesus and discredit his ministry. John 8:4-5 and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say? And of course Jesus is god, he is knows everything that has been going on up to this point, he knows the heart of the women, and the minds of all the Pharisee's. The question is , Is Jesus going to allow this women to die to save himself, worse, is Jesus going to allow the evil plot of the Pharisee's to work? And the answer is no, he gives his very classic answer as found in John Chapter 8 verse 7. John 8:7 J When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her And why is that a very good answer? Because the Pharisee's are FULL of sin their plot was busted and they were tainted with it all over, the bible says that everyone in that room left , the oldest people (probably the Pharisee's) left first. So your argument that the women deserved to die is pretty harsh, even by the standards of two thousand years ago, she was tricked by the Pharisee's to trick Jesus. If anything the Pharisee's deserved to die, and Jesus was very candid in letting them now that, and letting them know they were damned. So to your question of would Jesus be the first in line to put a women who commits abortion to death? To that I say this. Jesus would have never been a Judge here on Earth, he would not have been a policemen a, Mayor , Governor, Magistrate, or anything like that. Jesus was born to Earth with a mission to die on the cross so our sins can be forgiven, and in the process fulfilling the prophesies and the Law. . To take Jesus out of his role of being our savior where grace is unending , and throwing him in a situation that he was never destined to be is unfair, and is similar to what the Pharisee's tried to do in John chapter 8, and that is not something that Jesus appreciated then, nor something that Jesus would appreciate now. The truth is that the government believes that their just powers are derived from all of us as citizens for the purpose of protecting our rights. And the rights that the government has sworn to protect --- as said in the constitution are god given. Among those rights, Are LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We have many more rights, but those were the most important ones that were specifically put in the beginning of the beginning of the Just laws that govern this nation. And at the Beginning of the list of rights is the first, the right to Live. And so to protect that right for everybody , that god given right , we must use the law, and this is something that Jesus would be and is in favor , and that is the function of government. I would have wished to finish in those words but I will answer your question regarding the women who cannot afford to have a baby, getting an abortion instead. I would like to condemn that act as a very corrupt act. In my opinion destroying another human being on the basis of finances is just utterly horrible , disgusting and repulsive. Many Democrats including the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi want to spend money on funding abortions. I say instead of spending government money on destroying life we should spend money on preserving life. Our financial situation is something that fluctuates constantly, and we shouldn't decide if an individual has his rights because his family has money, and take away his rights because his family doesn't have money. That is not something this country has stood up for and that is something we have always fought against.