Theological Considerations of Personhood

[FireDragon76]

Is it possible the Exodus law considers the crime to be manslaughter? Negligently causing death without malice (and therefore satisfaction is made through payment rather than death).

 

[Philip_B]

As I opined up a couple of posts, I agree. I know one gentleman a ThD who worked on the 1995 version of the NASB. He worked closely with Dr. John Piper on this very passage. They could find no valid option to translate "yeled" as miscarriage, as there was a different Hebrew word for such in chapter 23.

YUP!. I am no Hebrew giant. That is why I rely on what is said to be a good English Translation, and they all have there deficits, so I will bow on this occaision.

 

[St_Worm2]

As I opined up a couple of posts, I agree. I know one gentleman a ThD who worked on the 1995 version of the NASB. He worked closely with Dr. John Piper on this very passage. They could find no valid option to translate "yeled" as miscarriage, as there was a different Hebrew word for such in chapter 23.

Always nice to know the facts Thanks RLH

 

[Hank77]

Good point. I had in mind for the OP the soul which departs this body after our mortal corruptable flesh stops functioning. Absent from the body present with the Lord. The souls of the martyrs under the altar.

Please let me know if I clarified the intent of the OP.

Thank you.

The immortal soul. Yes, that does clear that up.

The abortion debate for Christians sometimes hinges on the term 'personhood.' We acknowledge the biology of a human life beginning at conception, however, is this human life a 'person' in the sense of having a soul?

I would say that a person is not a person without a soul and a spirit.

1Th 5:23 and the God of the peace Himself sanctify you wholly, and may your whole spirit, and soul, and body, be preserved unblameably in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ;

 

[Your Alli]

Title: Theological considerations of personhood

The abortion debate for Christians sometimes hinges on the term 'personhood.' We acknowledge the biology of a human life beginning at conception, however, is this human life a 'person' in the sense of having a soul?

If your view is 'yes we are human beings, a person, at conception with a soul' then please provide your Biblical, Church, and/or historic Christian positions for such.

If your view is 'no a human life is not a person with a soul at conception, then please provide your Biblical, Church, and/or historic Christian positions when this does occur.

OP parameters: Opinions are welcome of course as this is a forum discussion. I do ask if a claim is made to please substantiate the claim (provide either the historic, church, Biblical evidence).

Again, this is a thread to address the theological aspects of the pro-life and abortion debate.

Finally, as a Christian only area of the forum, I ask we all apply Christian charity and not personally attack a poster and not attack a particular Church or Denomination. We are all above this, or should be. Let's be respectful please.

I state this ...
Mark 10:18
Luke 18:19

"Why do you call me good?" Christ answered. "No one is good--except God alone."

How do you interpret "alone"
How do you interpret "God"

Lastly,
How do you interpret "no one"

If I choose not to bring my child in this world it's for there own good.

What's the opposite of "good"

No one is good except God, so all are "not good" ...i have a different word in mind.

And we debate why someone didn't bring that child in the world.

I end ...

“Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.”

Matthew 24:35
Mark 13:31
‭‭Luke‬ ‭21:33‬

I use the words of Christ in this debate because of the above mentioned scriptures ...



Your Alli

 

[redleghunter]

Hi Philip, I can certainly see how it can be read that way as well, and I also admit that my "clarity" in understanding this passage the other way comes in part from other verses/passages in the Bible, such as Exodus 20:13.

This argument always seems to find its way back to the "personhood", or the lack thereof, of the unborn child!

Yours in Christ,
David
edit: now that I've read what RLH just said in post #36, I think my understanding of Exodus 21:22-25 has only strengthened

An expanded discussion on the Exodus 21 passage:

Abortion and Exodus 21
by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Abortion and Exodus 21

The above is copyrighted material, so if there are any specific quotes you want to use please be mindful of such.

 

[redleghunter]

Is it possible the Exodus law considers the crime to be manslaughter? Negligently causing death without malice (and therefore satisfaction is made through payment rather than death).

If no further harm.

I am reminded the manslaughter laws allowed sanctuary in Levite cities.

However as we see in Exodus 21 passage men are striving. As opposed to a man swinging an axe and accidentally killing another man.

 

[redleghunter]

I state this ...
Mark 10:18
Luke 18:19

"Why do you call me good?" Christ answered. "No one is good--except God alone."

How do you interpret "alone"
How do you interpret "God"

Lastly,
How do you interpret "no one"

If I choose not to bring my child in this world it's for there own good.

What's the opposite of "good"

No one is good except God, so all are "not good" ...i have a different word in mind.

And we debate why someone didn't bring that child in the world.

I end ...

“Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.”

Matthew 24:35
Mark 13:31
‭‭Luke‬ ‭21:33‬

I use the words of Christ in this debate because of the above mentioned scriptures ...



Your Alli

Greetings Alli. Frankly I do not understand your point.

Is your point you are to judge who lives or dies before birth? That is how your post is coming across.

 

[Your Alli]

Greetings Alli. Frankly I do not understand your point.

Is your point you are to judge who lives or dies before birth? That is how your post is coming across.

Everything is pro-life...

Even abortion.


Your Alli

 

[redleghunter]

Everything is pro-life...

Even abortion.


Your Alli

That is a contradiction in fact.

Abortion by definition is the termination of a pregnancy.

The ending of a human life.

This OP is a bit more involved in the theological aspects of personhood.

 

[St_Worm2]

Everything is pro-life...

Even abortion

Hi Alli, I've heard that a beach is pro-life. You know, "life's a beach"

But the murder of an unborn child ............

 

[Your Alli]

Hi Alli, I've head that a beach is pro-life. You know, "life's a beach"

But the murder of an unborn child ............

I state this ...
Mark 10:18
Luke 18:19

"Why do you call me good?" Christ answered. "No one is good--except God alone."

How do you interpret "alone"
How do you interpret "God"

Lastly,
How do you interpret "no one"

If I choose not to bring my child in this world it's for there own good.

What's the opposite of "good"

No one is good except God, so all are "not good" ...i have a different word in mind.

And we debate why someone didn't bring that child in the world.

I end ...

“Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.”

Matthew 24:35
Mark 13:31
‭‭Luke‬ ‭21:33‬

I use the words of Christ in this debate because of the above mentioned scripture, & scriptures will remain, after you to whom I'm replying has departed.


Your Alli

 

[Your Alli]

That is a contradiction in fact.

Abortion by definition is the termination of a pregnancy.

The ending of a human life.

This OP is a bit more involved in the theological aspects of personhood.

I state this ...
Mark 10:18
Luke 18:19

"Why do you call me good?" Christ answered. "No one is good--except God alone."

How do you interpret "alone"
How do you interpret "God"

Lastly,
How do you interpret "no one"

If I choose not to bring my child in this world it's for there own good.

What's the opposite of "good"

No one is good except God, so all are "not good" ...i have a different word in mind.

And we debate why someone didn't bring that child in the world.

I end ...

“Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.”

Matthew 24:35
Mark 13:31
‭‭Luke‬ ‭21:33‬

I use the words of Christ in this debate because of the above mentioned scripture, & scriptures will remain, after you to whom I'm replying has departed.


Your Alli

 

[shadowhunter]

Title: Theological considerations of personhood

The abortion debate for Christians sometimes hinges on the term 'personhood.' We acknowledge the biology of a human life beginning at conception, however, is this human life a 'person' in the sense of having a soul?

The secularist cannot justify abortion based on any concept of when the soul enters or doesn't enter the body. The only criteria has been:

Is it alive? The scientific answer is, yes, at the moment of conception.

Is it unique human life, or part of the mother's body? This is answered scientifically, it is unique.

Does it have rights? This is the debate.

Do we care? This is the personal moral issue. Is it your business if your neighbor kills her children?

The issue of the soul has nothing to do with the debate, and is merely a salve to the consciences of religious people who do not care.

 

[toLiJC]

Title: Theological considerations of personhood

The abortion debate for Christians sometimes hinges on the term 'personhood.' We acknowledge the biology of a human life beginning at conception, however, is this human life a 'person' in the sense of having a soul?

If your view is 'yes we are human beings, a person, at conception with a soul' then please provide your Biblical, Church, and/or historic Christian positions for such.

If your view is 'no a human life is not a person with a soul at conception, then please provide your Biblical, Church, and/or historic Christian positions when this does occur.

OP parameters: Opinions are welcome of course as this is a forum discussion. I do ask if a claim is made to please substantiate the claim (provide either the historic, church, Biblical evidence).

Again, this is a thread to address the theological aspects of the pro-life and abortion debate.

Finally, as a Christian only area of the forum, I ask we all apply Christian charity and not personally attack a poster and not attack a particular Church or Denomination. We are all above this, or should be. Let's be respectful please.

unfortunately, abortion was many times the only way for parents to prevent their unborn child from suffering in this world, and from this perspective abortion is not considered more sinful than the causation/infliction of harm/suffering to/on a human that was born in this world

Ecclesiastes 6:3-5 "If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good, and also that he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he. For he cometh in with vanity, and departeth in darkness, and his name shall be covered with darkness. Moreover he hath not seen the sun, nor known any thing: this hath more rest than the other.",

Luke 23:29 "behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck."

Blessings

 

[SPF]

P1: Human life begins at conception.
P2: Human life is morally valuable.
Conclusion: Human life from its conception is morally valuable.

The above is logically valid. The challenge to the argument that comes in from the pro-choice side is in regards to P2. What proponents of abortion attempt to do is create a distinction between a human being and human. The underlying foundation for the pro-choice position is that human life is not intrinsically morally valuable, only human persons are intrinsically morally valuable.

One of the many problems with this line of reasoning is that there is no objective way to distinguish between a human being and a human person. All arguments for when personhood arises are subjective and arbitrary. We can see this in that there is no consensus on the Pro-Choice side for this. For example, some will argue that abortions are acceptable up until the end of the first, second, or third trimester. Some are even in support of partial-birth abortions. The arguments for each of these differing times in which a human being becomes a human person are necessarily subjective and completely arbitrary.

At the end of the day, the only reason there exists the desire for a distinction to be made between a human being and a human person would be so that someone could do something to a human being that would otherwise be considered immoral. There is no good reason otherwise to create a distinction between a human being and a human person.

Biblically speaking, we all agree that humans are alone in God's creation as being created in His Image. We are all intrinsically valuable on a moral level. I have never come across a passage in Scripture that would lend credit to the idea that we should create a distinction between a human being and a human person. There are however, a plethora of passages that acknowledge our humanity from before birth.

King David, while repenting of his sin acknowledged in Psalm 51:5 that he was sinful from the moment of his conception:

Behold, I was shapen in iniquity - "The object of this important verse is to express the deep sense which David had of his depravity. That sense was derived from the fact that this was not a sudden thought, or a mere outward act, or an offence committed under the influence of strong temptation, but that it was the result of an entire corruption of his nature - of a deep depravity of heart, running back to the very commencement of his being. The idea is, that he could not have committed this offence unless he had been thoroughly corrupt, and always corrupt. The sin was as heinous and aggravated “as if” in his very conception and birth there had been nothing but depravity. He looked at his, sin, and he looked back to his own origin, and he inferred that the one demonstrated that in the other there was no good thing, no tendency to goodness, no germ of goodness, but that there was evil, and only evil; as when one looks at a tree, and sees that it bears sour or poisonous fruit, he infers that it is in the very nature of the tree, and that there is nothing else in the tree, from its origin, but a tendency to produce just such fruit.

Of course, the idea here is not to cast reflections on the character of his mother, or to refer to her feelings in regard to his conception and birth, but the design is to express his deep sense of his own depravity; a depravity so deep as to demonstrate that it must have had its origin in the very beginning of his existence." - Albert Barnes

In Luke 1:41 we see that John, while still inside Elisabeth's womb expressed joy!

I don't see anything in Scripture that indicates a separation between a human being and a human person.

 

[redleghunter]

The secularist cannot justify abortion based on any concept of when the soul enters or doesn't enter the body. The only criteria has been:

Is it alive? The scientific answer is, yes, at the moment of conception.

Is it unique human life, or part of the mother's body? This is answered scientifically, it is unique.

Does it have rights? This is the debate.

Do we care? This is the personal moral issue. Is it your business if your neighbor kills her children?

The issue of the soul has nothing to do with the debate, and is merely a salve to the consciences of religious people who do not care.

You cover the entire issue quite well. This OP is not about seculars or atheists. This is a Christian only thread to discuss the theological aspects of the Pro-Life/abortion issue. We had a thread on the scientific aspects of conception already:

The science of abortion: When does life begin?

As you will see in that thread (now closed at my request) many started addressing the theological aspects of the beginning of human life. Thus, the reason for this thread. For Christians to post/debate/discuss their theological approach to abortion and provide support for it.

If you have not noticed, there are Christians who defend abortions from the earliest stages to later in term. Or who are personally against abortion but supportive of others obtaining one. This thread is not only an opportunity for Pro-Life Christians to expound on their view that we are full persons at conception, but for those who disagree with this historic position and tell us why.

 

[jimbohank]

Title: Theological considerations of personhood

The abortion debate for Christians sometimes hinges on the term 'personhood.' We acknowledge the biology of a human life beginning at conception, however, is this human life a 'person' in the sense of having a soul?

If your view is 'yes we are human beings, a person, at conception with a soul' then please provide your Biblical, Church, and/or historic Christian positions for such.

If your view is 'no a human life is not a person with a soul at conception, then please provide your Biblical, Church, and/or historic Christian positions when this does occur.

OP parameters: Opinions are welcome of course as this is a forum discussion. I do ask if a claim is made to please substantiate the claim (provide either the historic, church, Biblical evidence).

Again, this is a thread to address the theological aspects of the pro-life and abortion debate.

Finally, as a Christian only area of the forum, I ask we all apply Christian charity and not personally attack a poster and not attack a particular Church or Denomination. We are all above this, or should be. Let's be respectful please.

I guess we could look at the conception of Jesus as an example. Did Jesus have a soul at conception when he was conceived from God's Spirit in Mary? It also begs to ask, since physical DNA is passed from parent to child, does that mean spiritual DNA is also passed from parent to child?

 

[redleghunter]

It would be a major waste of time to quote scripture to ANY one that would ask such satan-led, silly questions. For if you do not already KNOW beyond a shadow of doubt about when life begins; there is NO scripture on earth that would convince you. For truth does NOT necessarily come from scripture. Jesus NEVER said, that "scripture was the way, the truth and the life"; He said He was all of these. So you are looking in the wrong place. Truth comes only AFTER one has been born again. THEN read scripture AFTER you have become one of His. Then and only then will any person ever know the truth.

Thus; truth comes to a person through Jesus' Holy Spirit. But it will ONLY come IF said person first seeks Him and His Kingdom; AND His righteousness AKAL "Believing IN Him".

No one needs scripture to find truth, when It is free by praying about it; AFTER one has become a true Christian. You will NOT understand that. It is my prayer that one day you will KNOW this truth absolute; AFTER you have surrendered your heart, mind and soul unto the ONLY true God who is Jesus who said He was the truth. Oh indeed yes!

Praise His holy name.

Thank you for your response. What exactly is your position on the personhood of a human life? It begins at conception or some time later and if later then what is your defense of this position?

As I mentioned to a poster above:

If you have not noticed, there are Christians who defend abortions from the earliest stages to later in term. Or who are personally against abortion but supportive of others obtaining one. This thread is not only an opportunity for Pro-Life Christians to expound on their view that we are full persons at conception, but for those who disagree with this historic position and tell us why.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Title: Theological considerations of personhood

The abortion debate for Christians sometimes hinges on the term 'personhood.' We acknowledge the biology of a human life beginning at conception, however, is this human life a 'person' in the sense of having a soul?

If your view is 'yes we are human beings, a person, at conception with a soul' then please provide your Biblical, Church, and/or historic Christian positions for such.

If your view is 'no a human life is not a person with a soul at conception, then please provide your Biblical, Church, and/or historic Christian positions when this does occur.

OP parameters: Opinions are welcome of course as this is a forum discussion. I do ask if a claim is made to please substantiate the claim (provide either the historic, church, Biblical evidence).

Again, this is a thread to address the theological aspects of the pro-life and abortion debate.

Finally, as a Christian only area of the forum, I ask we all apply Christian charity and not personally attack a poster and not attack a particular Church or Denomination. We are all above this, or should be. Let's be respectful please.

'Soul' seems important here and several comments have been made that point to verses with the word soul. Some reduce the question of abortion to a question of when they believe that the soul is present.

This is problematic because "life" and "human being" are being equated with "soul".

Soul as separate from the body is a Greek idea, not a biblical one. My understanding is that the Jews had a non-dualistic view of body and spirit. I don't know what Paul meant by "absent from the body", but as a Pharisee he wouldn't have held to Greek ideas of dualism. Jesus said to not fear him who could only destroy the body (not the soul)--but this could reflect either rhetoric utilizing a new prevailing dualism or might simply mean that man cannot truly destroy what God has made. "Soul" in the KJV can mean spirit or simply a "living being". This second usage was prevalent into the early 20th century (100 souls perished at sea--certainly this did not mean that 100 spirits were destroyed).

Another issue has also not been mentioned. As mentioned the Didache speaks clearly against abortion. But, the practice of abortion in the 1st/2nd century was to examine the child at birth and if not pleasing to kill it.

Late pregnancy and miscarriage are known in the Biblical text, but as has been pointed out, reproductive biology was not understood in the same detail as today. The late medieval/reformation era view that life was in the sperm wrongly believed that a microscopic human was present in the seed (homoculus).

I take that John leapt in Elizabeth's womb as good support for a life being present in late pregnancy. But, despite the seemingly clear meaning of yeled
in OT law, I'm unaware of any modern (as opposed to ancient) law that views injury or death to an unborn fetus as homicide.

I have no way to know when life truly begins. I believe that no life that God creates can be taken away by Man. From a Biblical perspective, the question of abortion seems to require reduction to a question of whether a murder or wrongful death occurred. Certainly life outside the womb is life for the question of murder from the verses mentioned.

I don't see that any of what's been said provides a clear resolution to the modern questions surrounding abortion.