Saturday, August 26, 2006

Psalms 58 [+/-] show/hide
Psa 58:1 To the chief Musician, Al-taschith, Michtam of David. Do ye indeed speak righteousness, O congregation? do ye judge uprightly, O ye sons of men? 2 Yea, in heart ye work wickedness; ye weigh the violence of your hands in the earth. 3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. 4 Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear; 5 Which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming never so wisely. 6 Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O LORD. 7 Let them melt away as waters which run continually: when he bendeth his bow to shoot his arrows, let them be as cut in pieces. 8 As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun. 9 Before your pots can feel the thorns, he shall take them away as with a whirlwind, both living, and in his wrath. 10 The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.

There are a couple ways to take this context. First, that it is talking about the wicked that work wickedness. Second, that its talking about babies and human nature. People use verse 3 to support their doctrine. I would beg them to look at the context and see if their conscience couldbear them witness.

Verse two he talks about these sons of men with their heart working wickedness and with their hands doing violence. Verse three says they were estranged from the womb and go astray from their birth. Notice they were not sinners from the womb, but estranged. It's not a statement of nature, but of relationship. It seems that it would be a figure of speech to say they speak lies as soon as they were born. Much like if one was to say, you've do that all the time, you were doing that from the day you were born. But even if it was not, it doesn't show their nature, but rather just how early people begin willfully sinning.

Now David is praying about these wicked and asks God to break out their teeth. Ever seen a baby born with teeth? He prays that they melt away as a snail. Ever pour salt on a snail? It melts away. What baby are you going to pray that for? He says that God has bent his bow and will cut them in pieces with his arrows.

The righteous will see the vengence of the Lord and rejoice. Do you know anyone that would rejoice seeing these things happen to a week old? The righteous will wash their feet in their blood. If this context is talking about the nature of people from the womb it sounds much like abortionism to me.

Given the context, I'm come to find that this verse can't be use as a verse about babies, but rather about the wicked who work wickedness and violence.
[+/-] show/hide

3 Comments:

Blogger Unknown said...

"Given the context, I'm come to find that this verse can't be use as a verse about babies, but rather about the wicked who work wickedness and violence.

First, that it is talking about the wicked that work wickedness. Second, that its talking about babies and human nature."

I think that you are misstating the position. Anyone will acknowledge that the chapter is speaking of the wicked; however the whole chapter doesn’t have to be a discourse on any given subject in order to make a statement relevant to it. For example the context of Isaiah 7 is Ahaz’s worry about an alliance that has been formed aganst him. God tells him not to worry about it. “…And Jehovah spoke again to Ahaz, saying,
Ask a sign of Jehovah your God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.
But Ahaz said, I will not ask, nor will I tempt Jehovah.
And He said, Hear now, O house of David; is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will you weary my God also?
So, the Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold, the virgin will conceive and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Immanuel.”
The immediate contsxt has nothing to do with the coming Messiah, but v. 13 is obiously still relevant to the birth of Jesus.
So I assert that it is a chapter on the wickedness of the wicked with a statement that is relevant to the state of wicked man at and before birth.

Second, even if I took this chapter in to be about babies and human nature (which I don’t) I would still have to say that I disagree the assumed answer with the rhetorical question. Would I pray any of these things on a child? No, personally, I wouldn't. The Psalmist, however, was not so scrupulous. In Psalms 137 he said in regard to the Babylonians “happy is he that seizes thy little ones and dashes them against the stones” Not very gracious, if you ask me. And that is not the only rather harsh statement against children in the Bible.
Num 31:17 And now kill every male among the little ones,
Deu 2:34 And we took all his cities at that time and completely destroyed the men and the women and the little ones of every city. We left none to remain.
Zec 13:7 Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, and against the Man who is My companion, says Jehovah of Hosts; strike the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. And I will turn My hand on the little ones.
Now allow me to say that I don’t think that this is the whole council of God on the matter of children. “let all the little children come to me” and “and said, ‘Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of Heaven.’ ” come immediately to mind, as well as many others. The whole issue I see as something of a paradox, but I think that it is well to acknowledge both sides or the issue.

Sun Aug 27, 02:35:00 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Sun Aug 27, 04:04:00 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

To which I would like to add for clarification: The statement about the wicked being estranged form the womb fits into the context, because he is using it to emphasize just how wicked these people really are. They’re so wicked they where born in wickedness. I wasn’t saying that it did not fit into the context, but that it did not define the context.

Sun Aug 27, 04:08:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Hide comments