Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Bible: Life Begins at Breath, Not Conception

  1. #1
    Frozen Chosen A.J.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    8,050
    Thanked: 6091

    Bible: Life Begins at Breath, Not Conception

    I posted this link in another thread but I would like to hear your thoughts on it. First, and it may be nitpicking, but the author of the blog never capitalizes the name of God, except where he has copied and pasted right out of the word... I don't know if that's significant in his reverence of God, but it bothers me.

    And I found this on Wikipedia about Daily Kos.

    "Daily Kos (/koʊs/ KOHSS)[2] is a group blog and internet forum focused on the Democratic Party and liberal American politics. The site features a participatory political encyclopedia ("DKosopedia"), glossaries, and other content. It is sometimes considered an example of "netroots" activism.
    It was founded in 2002 by Markos Moulitsas and takes the name Kos from the last syllable of his first name, his nickname whilst in the military."

    So I guess that explains a lot about the blog
    Also, in one of the comments, I saw something about appreciating a Methodist point of view....

    I now it's long..... and probably drivel but people are using it to support their POV on abortion not being murder because the baby has not taken its first breath.

    I'd appreciate some insight from some of you who study at a far deeper level than I.
    Most of you can probably just skim it and get the gist ....





    Mar 19, 2014 2:34pm MDT by OllieGarkey

    So I made the mistake of thinking that everybody knows what the bible has to say about when life begins and when life ends. Because it's pretty clear. It's so clear that we have thousands of years of poetry from christian communities reinforcing the point of view. It's part of funeral liturgy. It's part of song, and story, and even pop culture. It's laid out just as clear as anything could be.

    But no, apparently it is not widely known that the bible does not ever state that life begins at conception. In fact, it states that life enters and leaves the body through the breath. In with your very first breath, out with your very last.

    I thought everyone knew that fundamentalists were not just wrong about science, but also about the bible and theology, as well. But apparently, this isn't common knowledge. So here it is, a full breakdown on how the bible very clearly states that life begins at breath, not at conception.

    Okay, first off, this is so important a theological question to an ancient society (When does life enter the body?) that it's laid out right there in Genesis:

    And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

    Gen 2:7

    So breath is life, and when life is breathed into the earthen vessel that is a human body, it comes alive. "A living soul" as the King James Version gives it. Talking about souls here can be problematic, so lets just talk about life.

    There's a lot of earthen vessel allusions in the bible, calling god the potter, that forms clay vessels (our bodies) into which god places our souls. This was always meant to be a metaphor. Indeed, this is rather problematic if you take it literally, because it means that god is a shoddy potter. How many people are born with defects or serious medical conditions? And what about the transgender person? If you take this stuff literally, it means that god intentionally formed a female body, and put a male soul into that body, or vice versa. This is yet another reason why God itself says in the bible (see below) that you shouldn't take scripture literally. But back to more scripture about how everything fundamentalists believe is theologically wrong.

    By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, And by the breath of His mouth all their host. Psalms 33:6

    Gods breath makes everything live, because life is by definition the breath of god within living things.

    9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army...

    13 And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves, 14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and performed it, saith the Lord. Ezekiel 37 9-10, 13-14

    Once again, the breath of god is life itself, and in this vision from Ezekiel, life is placed back into bodies which were dead, and they come back to life. It's all some kind of vision though, the bible doesn't actually claim that Ezekiel brought an army back from the dead. But it does lay out that life is breath.

    If he should set his heart to it and gather to himself his spirit and his breath, all flesh would perish together, and man would return to dust. Job 34: 14-15

    Once again, breath is life, and without breath, human bodies would "return to dust."

    And then, as an aside because "Everybody Knows" that breath is life, Ezekiel introduces the words of god by saying:

    Thus says God, the Lord, who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and what comes from it, who gives breath to the people on it and spirit to those who walk in it:

    Breath IS life. That first breath is when the soul enters the body, when an earthen vessel becomes alive.

    So we know, pretty clearly, that life is breath. From dust ye came, to dust ye shall return, as it is breath and the presence of spirit of god within breath that makes us live.

    And something that most people don't know is that the bible contains an abortion ritual.

    Yes, you read that right. The bible contains an ancient ritual designed to cause abortion. It's in Numbers 5:11-31, and it involves forcing a woman accused of adultery to drink "bitter water" designed to cause a miscarriage. Her belly will swell, and her "thigh" will rot. Thigh of course being a priestly euphemism for ones reproductive organs. It's known as the ordeal of the bitter water or the trial of jealousy, so named because it is initiated not by the woman, but by her jealous husband.

    Furthermore, the bible lays out a clear punishment for those who cause an abortion outside of this ritual:

    Exodus 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

    23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

    24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

    25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

    The fine for causing an abortion is a fine of property damage, to be paid to the woman's husband. Why property damage? Because a fetus isn't alive until it has breathed, according to the bible. But if the woman is injured, or dies in the process, then the guy who hit her will be injured or killed in equal measure, an eye for an eye, according to the ancient law.

    It can be said with absolute certainty that ancient scripture does not consider a zygote or a fetus even to be alive, because it has not yet drawn breath.


    The counterargument is very, very weak, in comparison. It's all semantics. They cannot lay out a consistent theme within the bible on this topic. Instead, they pick a bunch of random verses, throw them together, and hope that no one notices that none of them really make sense in their context. But here, as I have laid out, there is a consistent theme that breath is life. A thing without breath is not alive. A fetus does not have breath, therefor it is not life according to the bible.

    On a final note, I know this community well enough to know that someone must be asking "So do you really believe that it's acceptable for the intentional or accidental death of a fetus to be considered property damage and a fine paid to the FATHER?"

    No, I absolutely do not think that's acceptable. I find the idea that a woman could have been made to drink poison because her husband was jealous absolutely repulsive. Nor do I think we should try to impose rules for a 5000 year old theocracy on modern people. The only reason to study this scripture is to understand the context of the ancient Jewish people whose religion inspired and laid the foundation for ours. Further than that, I am of the opinion that Christians should be in communication with Rabbinical Judaism, because there are centuries of writings kept by that community that could enrich our understanding of ancient scripture.

    That being said: I do not believe that scripture is holy. I don't believe that it is perfect. I do not believe that it is free from errors. I believe, in the words of the founder of my particular sect of Christianity, John Wesley, that scripture is "Sufficient."

    The bible is sufficient.

    According to scripture, even GOD HIMSELF points out that "You can't take this stuff literally."

    Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.-Matt. 13:13

    Add that to the quotes from Job about how it's really difficult to understand all this stuff. The bible repeatedly implies in the old and new testaments that it is a metaphorical and esoteric work, and then the voice of God outright says so in the new testament.

    As far as scripture's go, the bible suffices. It's pretty okay. It has some pretty major problems if you take it literally, because it describes a code of laws designed to hold a society together in absolutely barbaric conditions, but if we're being honest here, my proto-celtic ancestors probably weren't any better 5000 years ago. As far as the rest of the stuff in the book, it's got some problems here in there with internal errors and inconsistencies, where it disagrees with itself, especially about women, but overall, it suffices.

    It's very, very important to note that the bible is not meant to be the center of the Christian faith. Jesus, and his teachings, are meant to be the center of the Christian faith. So if you run into one of these fundamentalsts who talk about how the bible is the foundation for their faith (rather than Christ) you're dealing with someone that ancient Christians would have considered an idolatrous heretic (read: dangerous moron.)

    The bible is a very difficult book to understand and to use because it is not internally consistent, it does not claim to be perfect, and it is mistranslated. So we Methodists have a Method (that's how we got our name) for understanding the world:

    1. Scripture
    2. Tradition
    3. Reason
    4. Experience

    So lets use that, what we call the Weslyan Quadrilateral, to think about, oh, the Age of Planet Earth, shall we?

    Reason and Experience (through TESTABLE BLEEPING MEASUREMENTS) tell us that the world was not made in seven days, and is in fact, billions of years old.

    Tradition tells me that for hundreds of years, human society has been developing wonderful and terrible new technologies using the same methods we use to examine the age of the earth. Tradition tells me that those methods work. The tradition of my denomination of Christianity has been to build schools, to value knowledge, and to support science, to the degree that a Methodist named George Washington Rappalyea was so incensed by a law against the teaching of evolution, that he encouraged his friend John Scopes to challenge the law in that whole monkey trial.

    And finally, on the age of the earth, scripture tells me, simply, "I TEACH IN METAPHOR, DUMMY. I'm USEFUL, not PERFECT OR LITERAL."

    So on the question of the Age of the Earth, the Weslyan Quadrilateral lays out pretty clearly and pretty easily that A) Science is real and does not teach in esoteric metaphor, and B) the Age of the Earth is whatever science tells us it is, because there can be no logical conflict between a book of esoteric metaphor, and a treatise of testable fact. I mean that. It is mathematically impossible for esoteric metaphor to conflict with testable fact. It's like adding matter and antimatter together. You'll just make a great big damn mess.

    A literal reading of the bible is logically inconsistent, both because God says "I teach in metaphor," and because the strongest claim that scripture makes about itself is that it is A) God Breathed, and B) Useful.

    And the thing is, if you were paying attention to the first verse we quoted, ADAM was also god-breathed. And look at what happened to him.

    Anyone who thinks that the bible is anything more than "useful" needs to go reexamine their life, their beliefs, and the very scriptures they read (which by the way do not even claim to be inerrant, much less perfect.)

    To teach creationism in schools therefor is not only a debasement of science, but a violation of MY faith. But fundies find modern mainline Christians to be extremely inconvenient for precisely this reason (we read.)

    And we can follow that logical quadrilateral method for theological understanding of nearly any issue. It tells us that women should be treated equally as men in law, in church teachings and hierarchy, and in society. It tells us that LGBT folks should have exactly the same rights as the rest of humanity. It tells us that nuclear weapons are abhorrent, even though there is no mention of nuclear weapons in the bible. It tells us that torture is wrong, even though the bible documents great evils being done to civilians captured in warfare. It tells us that human sexuality is not sinful unless it violates consent. And it tells us that scripture is neither perfect, nor literal.

    And while there are people who might dispute my methods and my beliefs within Christianity, and even within Methodism, I'll remind you that the Methodist church is (albiet in the most wishy-washy way possible) committed to guaranteeing that abortions are safe and legal. That's why two official arms of the Methodist church, the GBCS, and the United Methodist Women, are members of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. Also the Methodist Federation for Social Action, which is an unofficial group within the Methodist church that does awesome work.

    So that's the scriptural evidence on abortion, and how fundamentalists are wrong from a theological perspective.




    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...Not-Conception





    For context, I'm including here, the Numbers and Exodus scriptures from the NIV:



    The Test for an Unfaithful Wife
    Numbers 5:11 Then the Lord said to Moses, 12 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest. He must also take an offering of a tenth of an ephah[c] of barley flour on her behalf. He must not pour olive oil on it or put incense on it, because it is a grain offering for jealousy, a reminder-offering to draw attention to wrongdoing.

    16 “‘The priest shall bring her and have her stand before the Lord. 17 Then he shall take some holy water in a clay jar and put some dust from the tabernacle floor into the water. 18 After the priest has had the woman stand before the Lord, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder-offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse. 19 Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[d] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell. 22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”

    “‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”

    23 “‘The priest is to write these curses on a scroll and then wash them off into the bitter water. 24 He shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. 25 The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. 26 The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[e] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.

    29 “‘This, then, is the law of jealousy when a woman goes astray and makes herself impure while married to her husband, 30 or when feelings of jealousy come over a man because he suspects his wife. The priest is to have her stand before the Lord and is to apply this entire law to her. 31 The husband will be innocent of any wrongdoing, but the woman will bear the consequences of her sin.’”


    Exodus 21:22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely[e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

    26 “An owner who hits a male or female slave in the eye and destroys it must let the slave go free to compensate for the eye. 27 And an owner who knocks out the tooth of a male or female slave must let the slave go free to compensate for the tooth.

  2. #2
    Frozen Chosen A.J.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    8,050
    Thanked: 6091
    Actually, I'm thinking that the person who wrote the blog isn't even a Christian...

    That being said: I do not believe that scripture is holy. I don't believe that it is perfect. I do not believe that it is free from errors. I believe, in the words of the founder of my particular sect of Christianity, John Wesley, that scripture is "Sufficient."

    The bible is sufficient.

    According to scripture, even GOD HIMSELF points out that "You can't take this stuff literally."

    Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.-Matt. 13:13
    At first I was a little overwhelmed by his argument, but as I read and as I looked up the scriptures in other translations, I could see that he's way of in his interpretation.

    The drink he interprets as "poison" is not poison at all. It's a spiritual test and if the woman was unfaithful, by drinking the drink, SPIRITUALLY, she would never be able to carry a child again. It brought on her a spiritual curse, not an abortion...

    Yeah.... As I ponder, God is imparting His truth.

    God is good.



  3. The Following User Says Thank You to A.J. For This Useful Post:

    Ezekiel 33 (06-28-2019)

  4. #3
    Senior Member Smitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Everett, Washington
    Posts
    1,629
    Thanked: 1786
    Blog Entries
    1
    It never ceases to amaze me how people "twist" the Scriptures, or leave out portions, or entire passages in order to present some [false] truth as Bible truth.
    This is exactly what Ollie Garkey has done. Mr. Garkey doesn't have a (spiritual) leg to stand on. He's already admitted in the article that he doesn't believe Scripture is divinely inspired and free of error. He's even stated that he adheres to what the founder of his sect says instead of what the Bible says. Ollie Garkey would never accept God's word as the final authority on any subject because he has already decided in his heart to reject God's word period.

    I wholeheartedly disagree with his reasoning that a baby becomes a person when they take their first breath. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't waste my time reading anything this man writes.
    Breath is not the beginning of humanness. The verses on breath speak not of the beginning of human life but simply of the initial coming-out event. Birth is a human debut into the world. These passages speak about the beginning of observable human life, not the beginning of an actual human life. Think about it, even in Bible times people knew that the baby was alive in the womb. The mother could feel the unborn baby move, at times even jump (Lk 1:44). Birth was not seen as the beginning of human life but simply as the beginning or emergence of life in the naturally visible world---as the human debut.

    Adam was a unique case. He was never conceived and born like other humans; he was directly created by God. The fact that Adam was not human until he began to breath no more proves when individual human life begins today than does the fact that he was created as an adult prove that individual human life does not begin until we are adults. Breath in Genesis 2:7 means "life" as noted in Job 33:4. So this means that life began when God gave human life to Adam, not simply because he began breathing. Human life was later given to Eve at fertilization or conception (Gen 4:1).

    In conclusion, the Scriptures speak of human life in the womb long before breathing begins, even from the point of conception.
    Here are several:
    The unborn are called "babies" while still in the womb (Lk 1:44).
    The unborn are formed by God (Ps 139:13), just as God formed Adam and Eve in His image (Gen 1:27, 2:7).
    The life of the unborn are protected by the same punishment for injury or death (Ex 21:22-24) as that of an adult (Gen 2:9).
    Christ was human (God-man) from the point that He was conceived in Mary's womb (Mt 1:20-21, Lk 1:26-27,31).
    It is a scientific fact male and female (sex) is determined at the moment of conception.
    Unborn children possess personal characteristics, such as sin (Ps 51:5).
    The unborn are said to be known intimately and personally by God as He would know any other person (Ps 139:15-16, Jer 1:15).
    The unborn are even called by God before birth (Gen 25:22-23, Judges 13:2-7, Isa 49:1,5; Gal 1:15).
    If you put God First, you have Him at Last.

  5. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Smitty For This Useful Post:

    A.J. (04-18-2019), curly sue (06-29-2019), Ezekiel 33 (06-28-2019), Highly Favoured (04-19-2019)

  6. #4
    Administrator fuego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    16,274
    Thanked: 14131
    Blog Entries
    1
    Just from the title without reading it, it sounds like somebody trying to justify abortion.

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to fuego For This Useful Post:

    curly sue (04-19-2019), Ezekiel 33 (06-28-2019), Valiant Woman (07-01-2019)

  8. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by A.J. View Post
    The drink he interprets as "poison" is not poison at all. It's a spiritual test and if the woman was unfaithful, by drinking the drink, SPIRITUALLY, she would never be able to carry a child again. It brought on her a spiritual curse, not an abortion...
    Right, it has nothing to do with abortion...here's another interpretation:


    Is Numbers 5:11-31 referring to God causing an abortion?

    https://www.gotquestions.org/Numbers-abortion.html

  9. #6
    Frozen Chosen A.J.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    8,050
    Thanked: 6091
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty View Post
    It never ceases to amaze me how people "twist" the Scriptures, or leave out portions, or entire passages in order to present some [false] truth as Bible truth.
    This is exactly what Ollie Garkey has done. Mr. Garkey doesn't have a (spiritual) leg to stand on. He's already admitted in the article that he doesn't believe Scripture is divinely inspired and free of error. He's even stated that he adheres to what the founder of his sect says instead of what the Bible says. Ollie Garkey would never accept God's word as the final authority on any subject because he has already decided in his heart to reject God's word period.

    I wholeheartedly disagree with his reasoning that a baby becomes a person when they take their first breath. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't waste my time reading anything this man writes.
    Breath is not the beginning of humanness. The verses on breath speak not of the beginning of human life but simply of the initial coming-out event. Birth is a human debut into the world. These passages speak about the beginning of observable human life, not the beginning of an actual human life. Think about it, even in Bible times people knew that the baby was alive in the womb. The mother could feel the unborn baby move, at times even jump (Lk 1:44). Birth was not seen as the beginning of human life but simply as the beginning or emergence of life in the naturally visible world---as the human debut.

    Adam was a unique case. He was never conceived and born like other humans; he was directly created by God. The fact that Adam was not human until he began to breath no more proves when individual human life begins today than does the fact that he was created as an adult prove that individual human life does not begin until we are adults. Breath in Genesis 2:7 means "life" as noted in Job 33:4. So this means that life began when God gave human life to Adam, not simply because he began breathing. Human life was later given to Eve at fertilization or conception (Gen 4:1).

    In conclusion, the Scriptures speak of human life in the womb long before breathing begins, even from the point of conception.
    Here are several:
    The unborn are called "babies" while still in the womb (Lk 1:44).
    The unborn are formed by God (Ps 139:13), just as God formed Adam and Eve in His image (Gen 1:27, 2:7).
    The life of the unborn are protected by the same punishment for injury or death (Ex 21:22-24) as that of an adult (Gen 2:9).
    Christ was human (God-man) from the point that He was conceived in Mary's womb (Mt 1:20-21, Lk 1:26-27,31).
    It is a scientific fact male and female (sex) is determined at the moment of conception.
    Unborn children possess personal characteristics, such as sin (Ps 51:5).
    The unborn are said to be known intimately and personally by God as He would know any other person (Ps 139:15-16, Jer 1:15).
    The unborn are even called by God before birth (Gen 25:22-23, Judges 13:2-7, Isa 49:1,5; Gal 1:15).
    Exactly, Smitty. Thank you for putting words to some of my scrambled thoughts.

  10. #7
    Frozen Chosen A.J.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    8,050
    Thanked: 6091
    Quote Originally Posted by fuego View Post
    Just from the title without reading it, it sounds like somebody trying to justify abortion.
    That's exactly what it is. I had to read the scriptures he used in a modern version to get understanding. He is really clueless.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to A.J. For This Useful Post:

    curly sue (04-19-2019), Valiant Woman (07-01-2019)

  12. #8


    I disagree with the article and his attitude in general. He is obviously a product of today's Methodist church. Today's UMC hasn't much in common with the original Wesleyan holiness movement. My family was raised in it.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to curly sue For This Useful Post:

    A.J. (04-19-2019), Valiant Woman (07-01-2019)

  14. #9
    Senior Member Ezekiel 33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Northern Lower Michigan
    Posts
    3,970
    Thanked: 2924
    Exodus 21:22-23 (NKJV)

    22 “If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ezekiel 33 For This Useful Post:

    A.J. (04-19-2019), Valiant Woman (07-01-2019)

  16. #10
    Senior Member Ezekiel 33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Northern Lower Michigan
    Posts
    3,970
    Thanked: 2924
    Luke 1:39-45 New King James Version (NKJV)
    Mary Visits Elizabeth

    39 Now Mary arose in those days and went into the hill country with haste, to a city of Judah, 40 and entered the house of Zacharias and greeted Elizabeth. 41 And it happened, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42 Then she spoke out with a loud voice and said, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! 43 But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44 For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy. 45 Blessed is she who believed, for there will be a fulfillment of those things which were told her from the Lord.”



    How could a dead baby leap in the womb?

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Ezekiel 33 For This Useful Post:

    Valiant Woman (07-01-2019)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Has your Kia Optima warranty expired? Get a fast online quote from CarWarrantyUS today. Enjoy the open road and leave the repairs to us.