Is the Fetus a Human Being?

[Eloy Craft]

"If you are offering, we will transfer the unborn to your body.
Now you have full control. I was not planning for this responsibility
but my husband insisted that evening and I defer to his judgment
as the head of the family. Perhaps he misjudged the outcome?"
npi

Well, that is the results that is naturally attached to sex. Another human life may enter into the world. It's ok for it to have parents that are too inconvenienced to let it live? By the way that responsibility is where a woman's true power over men comes from. remove the responsibility and women become objects of pleasure. I hope that was a hypothetical ? If not I owe you an apology.

 

[JacksBratt]

"If you are offering, we will transfer the unborn to your body.
Now you have full control. I was not planning for this responsibility
but my husband insisted that evening and I defer to his judgment
as the head of the family. Perhaps he misjudged the outcome?"
npi

If you were not planning for this but your husband insisted... then you are being Godly, right? His body is yours, your body is his?

If you are old enough to know what you are doing. Christian enough to know that you defer to your husbands judgement... then.... why would you not embrace the fact that this act has produced a child in full will of God.

Anyone who kills a child, at any age, kills a child.

Two people who conceive a child have full responsibility for the human life they have created.
If they are owner of their body... then they are responsible for what they do with it.
If they create a child... then that new body is deserving of just as much responsibility and respect as the male or the female.

If the woman really wants choice... say "no". If the woman says "yes" then face the results of your decision.
If the man insists... he must face his responsibility when the child is created.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman's husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Exodus 21: 22 - 25

Apparently, in God's eyes the fetus is not a human being. Therefore, the abortion is not the murder.

your reading comprehension skills have to be grossly under-leveled to come to such a conclusion from this passage.

 

[Hillsage]

computer glitch on EDIT of my last post

 

[throughfiierytrial]

I think you are imposing some other idea of creation, like creation is an artifact of the past, sort of like Deism, of God establishing some kind of eternal ordering of the world, a great chain of being, etc. This is not how Lutherans think of creation . Creation and redemption are much more closely linked and are not necessarily completely discrete categories. But nonetheless, redemption is a more central focus in Lutheranism and I believe it is deserved because Christ the Redeemer is the only God we have we can know of (the "Hidden God" in Lutheranism is a terrifying mystery, unlike Calvin who pretends to know God's mind).

God can make children out of stones. He's not dependent on "nature" to make sons and daughters, as the prologue to John makes clear, even though we believe he has chosen specific natural ways, called sacraments, to give us his grace, those are not limitations on his creative or redeeming power. So all talk of "nature" or "natural law" is mostly irrelevant to our ethics.

Forgive me for simply jumping in here without having read all your previous posts, but what is your stance on abortion? What you are saying here will be made more clear to me if you answer this...I am a Lutheran.

 

[ubicaritas]

Forgive me for simply jumping in here without having read all your previous posts, but what is your stance on abortion? What you are saying here will be made more clear to me if you answer this...I am a Lutheran.

I actually am not perfectly "pro-life" or "pro-choice". I broadly agree with my religious denomination's social statement on abortion:

https://abortion.procon.org/sourcef...h-in-america-social-statement-on-abortion.pdf

When I was younger I was much more sympathetic to the pro-life rhetoric and I had more of what was called a "consistent life ethic" of Catholicism or Indian or Dharmic religion. But as I've gotten older I realized I was far too puritanical in my mindset at times and that the American Right's idea of what being pro-life meant did not really match up with my own life ethic. So I have tended towards more of a pro-choice-ish stance as I've become more aware of history, philosophy, and the Christian tradition, especially Lutheranism.

I believe abortion in the US should generally be safe, legal and rare. That's the direction we should be moving in, and I think the majority of Americans, when we get beyond political polarization, actually believe in that too.

 

[Marvin Knox]

I'll go way out on a limb and say what's best for a woman's body is probably not to have it dismembered in the womb and scraped into a pulp. (half of all aborted babies are female)

Right on.

You guys can have your anti-choice religion

I'm pro choice myself.

Let the baby grow to the age of accountability and ask him or her if they would like to have their head crushed and then have their parts sold by Planned Parenthood to the highest bidder. Whatever they choose will be fine by me.

Just sayin!

I'm not an expert in Greek or Aramaic nor do I plan to be. But I depend on those who are to make such things clear. In every one of these passages the baby is called exactly what he is - a baby or an infant - not a "potential" baby or infant. Any disagreement and you can take it up with them.

New International Version
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

New Living Translation
At the sound of Mary's greeting, Elizabeth's child leaped within her, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

English Standard Version
And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit,

Berean Study Bible
When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Berean Literal Bible
And it came to pass, as Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby in her womb leaped. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit,

New American Standard Bible
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

King James Bible
And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

Christian Standard Bible
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped inside her, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Contemporary English Version
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, her baby moved within her. The Holy Spirit came upon Elizabeth.

Good News Translation
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby moved within her. Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit

Holman Christian Standard Bible
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped inside her, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

International Standard Version
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby jumped in her womb. Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit

NET Bible
When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

New Heart English Bible
It happened, when Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, that the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And it was when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Maryam, the baby in her womb leaped and Elizabeth was filled with The Spirit of Holiness,

GOD'S WORD® Translation
When Elizabeth heard the greeting, she felt the baby kick. Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

New American Standard 1977
And it came about that when Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Jubilee Bible 2000
And it came to pass that when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit;

King James 2000 Bible
And it came to pass, that, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit:

American King James Version
And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

American Standard Version
And it came to pass, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit;

Douay-Rheims Bible
And it came to pass, that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

Darby Bible Translation
And it came to pass, as Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with [the] Holy Spirit,

English Revised Version
And it came to pass, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost;

Webster's Bible Translation
And it came to pass, that when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb: and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Weymouth New Testament
and as soon as Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the babe leapt within her. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit,

World English Bible
It happened, when Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, that the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Young's Literal Translation
And it came to pass, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe did leap in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit,

By the way - if you tell me that the uneducated original writers knew of no such word as fetus or embryo and that you, educated as you are, do - it tells me just how far you have been taken into the thinking of the world.

Like the men of old - "professing to be wise" you've become a fool.

 

[throughfiierytrial]

I actually am not perfectly "pro-life" or "pro-choice". I broadly agree with my religious denomination's social statement on abortion:

https://abortion.procon.org/sourcef...h-in-america-social-statement-on-abortion.pdf

When I was younger I was much more sympathetic to the pro-life rhetoric and I had more of what was called a "consistent life ethic" of Catholicism or Indian or Dharmic religion. But as I've gotten older I realized I was far too puritanical in my mindset at times and that the American Right's idea of what being pro-life meant did not really match up with my own life ethic. So I have tended towards more of a pro-choice-ish stance as I've become more aware of history, philosophy, and the Christian tradition, especially Lutheranism.

I believe abortion in the US should generally be safe, legal and rare. That's the direction we should be moving in, and I think the majority of Americans, when we get beyond political polarization, actually believe in that too.

Well, there are some very "liberal" Lutheran denominations, of that I am aware, but I espouse a more Bible founded Lutheranism.
In your explanation of you how you derive your beliefs I find it interesting that you do not cite the Bible or certain Bible passages. In my view this is very short sighted and not only that but you are found to be the author of your own religion of sorts.

 

[ubicaritas]

Well, there are some very "liberal" Lutheran denominations, of that I am aware, but I espouse a more Bible founded Lutheranism.
In your explanation of you how you derive your beliefs I find it interesting that you do not cite the Bible or certain Bible passages. In my view this is very short sighted and not only that but you are found to be the author of your own religion of sorts.

Biblical imagery is interspersed here and there. Its true I don't engage in proof-texting but even an LCMS Lutheran would tell you that biblicism is not a Lutheran hermeneutic, it's not how we do theology.

I draw alot from Pr. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's thought about secularism and the post-WWII traditions of theology that came out of that. Given that is a pivot from Lutheran scholasticism, it might make it hard to understand where I am coming from, I suppose, as a Lutheran.

 

[Phil 1:21]

Biblical imagery is interspersed here and there. Its true I don't engage in proof-texting but even an LCMS Lutheran would tell you that biblicism is not a Lutheran hermeneutic, it's not how we do theology.

I draw alot from Pr. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's thought about secularism and the post-WWII traditions of theology that came out of that. Given that is a pivot from Lutheran scholasticism, it might make it hard to understand where I am coming from, I suppose, as a Lutheran.

Hence the danger of putting the word of man above the word of God.

 

[redleghunter]

Maybe there is no "Christian" basis at all either way? Why can't we rely upon the moral deliberation of humanity to answer this question pragmatically? Why infuse dead religion into an area it no longer belongs?

The New Testament is not 'dead religion.' All of the apostolic epistles call us to live pure lives.

 

[ubicaritas]

Hence the danger of putting the word of man above the word of God.

That really amounts to empty rhetoric, because the word of God was predominantly spoken through men.

 

[redleghunter]

I don't think the place to start talking about the ethics of abortion is the incarnation. The incarnation should fuel our desire to engage with these questions, not force a conclusion.

Obviously because if we do point to the Incarnation we will conclude the sanctity of human life begins at conception.

 

[ubicaritas]

Obviously because if we do point to the Incarnation we will conclude the sanctity of human life begins at conception.

The primary consideration in my denomination's ethical approach to abortion is focused on the woman's moral agency, not on the illusion of moral purity.

 

[ubicaritas]

The New Testament is not 'dead religion.' All of the apostolic epistles call us to live pure lives.

More Law that always condemns and accuses.

 

[redleghunter]

That's not what my perspective rests on, or the overall of my church towards the ethics of abortion. We don't necessarily claim an embryo has no value, or that life is not a gift from God, but the value of the woman's autonomy and her moral agency is the primary consideration.

Personal autonomy trumps sanctity of life. Yes that is our post-modern societal construct.

Now on personal autonomy...Have you recently read Luther's "De Servo Arbitrio?"

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/luther/bondage.v.html

 

[redleghunter]

The primary consideration in my denomination's ethical approach to abortion is focused on the woman's moral agency, not on the illusion of moral purity.

That's an invalid comparison.

What the comparison your church seeks is:

focused on the woman's moral agency over the moral agency of the human being developing in the womb.

In effect, your ethical approach allows for sub categories of human life (i.e. sub-humans)

 

[Phil 1:21]

Biblical imagery is interspersed here and there. Its true I don't engage in proof-texting but even an LCMS Lutheran would tell you that biblicism is not a Lutheran hermeneutic, it's not how we do theology.

I draw alot from Pr. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's thought about secularism and the post-WWII traditions of theology that came out of that. Given that is a pivot from Lutheran scholasticism, it might make it hard to understand where I am coming from, I suppose, as a Lutheran.

Hence the danger of putting the word of man above the word of God.

That really amounts to empty rhetoric, because the word of God was predominantly spoken through men.

And you think Dietrich Bonhoeffer transmits the word of God better than the authors of the bible?

 

[ubicaritas]

Personal autonomy trumps sanctity of life. Yes that is our post-modern societal construct.

Now on personal autonomy...Have you recently read Luther's "De Servo Arbitrio?"

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/luther/bondage.v.html

De Servo Arbitrio is not status confessionis in our religion, and it is frequently misused by the Reformed. I don't see how its relevant to what we are discussing. It pertains to matters of salvation, not ethics.

 

[ubicaritas]

That's an invalid comparison.

What the comparison your church seeks is:

focused on the woman's moral agency over the moral agency of the human being developing in the womb.

In effect, your ethical approach allows for sub categories of human life (i.e. sub-humans)

Give me a break. The fetus has no meaningful moral agency, it's a fetus and exists in a womb. A woman, on the other hand, has thousands of potential choices in her life.