A question on Abortion

[SPF]

First we find your argument strongly fighting in favor of the words of science

Science has a lot of good things to teach. As a “Christian” who olds to evolution, you clearly put a lot of stock in science.

while simultaneously, none of those scientists actually clarify on when ensoulment

I never said they did.

Now we have an argument in favor of the mass slaughter of millions of animals per day, as of less significance than the destruction of an embryo, on the basis of something in which science has 0 involvement.

Correct, we don’t use science to say that it’s immoral to kill human beings but moral to kill animals for food. We use the Bible for that.

There is no objective basis for this response.

The Bible is our objective basis.

It's merely a case of, well mass slaughter of sentient, pain and fear experiencing animals is more acceptable than destroying a non-sentient, non pain experiencing, non-fearful embryo, "because the Bible says so".

Yes, and that’s good enough. Christians accept the Bible as authoritative on what it teaches. You seem to have a problem with that.

I think that, in light of an understanding that we evolved from species much like them that we eat, that we once were of a lower state of consciousness and lower awareness

I wonder, you kept using Adam as an analogy for your point, but if you believe in evolution I don’t see how you can take the creation story literally. You seem to put more stock in science than Scripture

 

[SPF]

”because the Bible says so".

I wonder why you have a problem with this if indeed the Bible does “say so”. With your belief in a 4 billion year old earth and evolution, I think your real problem is probably between you and God as you seem to put more faith in Science than Scripture.

If the Bible does indeed “say so” why is that not good enough for you? Why did you choose to ignore the infallible, inspired Scripture references I posted and blow them off? You should probably work on that issue first.

 

[Job 33:6]

I wonder why you have a problem with this if indeed the Bible does “say so”. With your belief in a 4 billion year old earth and evolution, I think your real problem is probably between you and God as you seem to put more faith in Science than Scripture.

If the Bible does indeed “say so” why is that not good enough for you? Why did you choose to ignore the infallible, inspired Scripture references I posted and blow them off? You should probably work on that issue first.

So you're not going to what I actually said?

It sounds like as a Christian, you're comfortable ignoring science and our history as part of the animal kingdom. And you feel as though scripture gives you justification to do this.

Do you flat out reject the idea that we originated as less intelligent species, much like those we eat? Do you not believe that it might one day be the case that other animals might become as intelligent as we are today? (Assuming we don't slaughter and eat their progeny instead).

If you accepted these ideas, then wouldn't it imply that these same animals are more than mere food to be eaten?

 

[SPF]

So you're not going to what I actually said?

It sounds like as a Christian, you're comfortable ignoring science and our history as part of the animal kingdom. And you feel as though scripture gives you justification to do this.

Do you flat out reject the idea that we originated as less intelligent species, much like those we eat? Do you not believe that it might one day be the case that other animals might become as intelligent as we are today? (Assuming we don't slaughter and eat their progeny instead).

If you accepted these ideas, then wouldn't it imply that these same animals are more than mere food to be eaten?

I don’t know what your deal is, but if you want to believe in evolution and that we are nothing more than evolved animals and are not created in the Image of God, and that all the passages I quoted in Scripture about humans being above and over creation, having the freedom to kill and eat the animals that were not created in the Image of God are somehow either lies or can be ignored... then have fun with that.

For me, I’ll continue to allow Scripture to be my foundation, trusting that it’s passages are inspired by God.

 

[Job 33:6]

I don’t know what your deal is, but if you want to believe in evolution and that we are nothing more than evolved animals and are not created in the Image of God, and that all the passages I quoted in Scripture about humans being above and over creation, having the freedom to kill and eat the animals that were not created in the Image of God are somehow either lies or can be ignored... then have fun with that.

For me, I’ll continue to allow Scripture to be my foundation, trusting that it’s passages are inspired by God.

There are even popular apologists that accept common ancestry and that we've descended from lesser animals. Such as Biochemist Michael Behe and even popular theologian William Lane Craig accepts the logical consistency and compatibility of the theory with Christianity. We now have the biologos Foundation headed by Francis Collins etc.

The bottom line is that you're willing to throw observed scientific evidence out the window, so that you can justify mass slaughter of millions of animals on a daily basis (which are sentient, feel pain, fear and can suffer), while simultaneously fighting tooth and nail over a non-sentient, non pain experiencing, non fear experiencing embryo.

Instead of recognizing the blatant absurdity of it all, the best response you have isn't one based on any observation of anything in physical reality. But rather your response is simply " the Bible says so". It's comparable to Ken Hams embarrassing representation of Christianity in his "debate" with Bill Nye.

 

[SPF]

The bottom line is that you're willing to throw observed scientific evidence out the window, so that you can justify mass slaughter of millions of animals on a daily basis (which are sentient, feel pain, fear and can suffer), while simultaneously fighting tooth and nail over a non-sentient, non pain experiencing, non fear experiencing embryo.

The bottom line is that a Christian, my goal is to align my beliefs about the world we live in, and our purpose in life with Scripture. We all make choices about what we are going to believe and what we are going to rely on as authoritative. I have chosen to place Scripture as the foundation of my worldview. Therefore, I am going to strive to hold a worldview that is first and foremost with Scripture. You, clearly do not feel the same.

Scripture is abundantly clear on a few subjects. One of those is the value of human beings. Our value and moral worth is inherent to us because we are created in the Image of God. Period.

Scripture is also clear that the rest of the animal kingdom is 1)not created in the image of God, and 2)available to us as food. Period.

So if you’re asking why I believe that human beings, at all levels of development have a greater inherent moral worth and value when compared to animals at all level of development, yes, it is only because the Bible says so.

What I find interesting is that you haven’t attempted to refute the Scripture that has been provided that demonstrates this truth. This tells me that what you’re doing is choosing to ignore what Scripture says and instead rely on some self-created belief system that contradicts Scripture. You’re placing yourself as more authoritative than Scripture. Good luck with that.

But rather your response is simply " the Bible says so"

So when the Bible teaches something, do you not think we should believe it?

 

[SPF]

The bottom line is that you're willing to throw observed scientific evidence out the window

This is obviously not true as my argument against abortion relies both upon science and Scripture.

 

[Job 33:6]

This is obviously not true as my argument against abortion relies both upon science and Scripture.

We've already established that neither science nor scripture clarify on the moment in which ensoulment occurs.

 

[SPF]

We've already established that neither science nor scripture clarify on the moment in which ensoulment occurs.

No, Scripture does not give us a specific moment, though it does give us direction.

1. we know it happens before birth permJohn the Baptist.

2. King David confessed (inspired by the Holy Spirit) that he was sinful from conception.

3. Exodus provides capitol punishment for the death of the unborn.

4. There are no examples in Scripture of any living human beings without souls.

5. Scientifically, we know a new, unique human being comes into existence at fertilization.

Basically, we know ensoulment occurs before birth, and I see no reason not to be conservative and believe it happens at the moment our physical life begins, just like it did for Adam.

I for one don’t want to stand before God and tell him that since I wasn’t sure when ensoulment occurred I supported the killing of unborn human beings because I took the chance it happened a few weeks after conception instead of at conception.

Personally, I think all the Biblical evidence we have suggests ensoulment is simultaneous with our physical life coming into existence.

 

[Job 33:6]

The bottom line is that a Christian, my goal is to align my beliefs about the world we live in, and our purpose in life with Scripture. We all make choices about what we are going to believe and what we are going to rely on as authoritative. I have chosen to place Scripture as the foundation of my worldview. Therefore, I am going to strive to hold a worldview that is first and foremost with Scripture. You, clearly do not feel the same.

Scripture is abundantly clear on a few subjects. One of those is the value of human beings. Our value and moral worth is inherent to us because we are created in the Image of God. Period.

Scripture is also clear that the rest of the animal kingdom is 1)not created in the image of God, and 2)available to us as food. Period.

So if you’re asking why I believe that human beings, at all levels of development have a greater inherent moral worth and value when compared to animals at all level of development, yes, it is only because the Bible says so.

What I find interesting is that you haven’t attempted to refute the Scripture that has been provided that demonstrates this truth. This tells me that what you’re doing is choosing to ignore what Scripture says and instead rely on some self-created belief system that contradicts Scripture. You’re placing yourself as more authoritative than Scripture. Good luck with that.

So when the Bible teaches something, do you not think we should believe it?

Simply being Christian doesnt grant someone the freedom to disregard physical reality.

This is Ken Ham logic. The bible says so, therefore dinosaurs on an ark and 6 day creation etc.

We need more than mere interpretation of scripture to justify our faith.

And there is nothing for me to refute if your position is based purely in your imagination.

 

[Job 33:6]

No, Scripture does not give us a specific moment, though it does give us direction.

1. we know it happens before birth permJohn the Baptist.

2. King David confessed (inspired by the Holy Spirit) that he was sinful from conception.

3. Exodus provides capitol punishment for the death of the unborn.

4. There are no examples in Scripture of any living human beings without souls.

5. Scientifically, we know a new, unique human being comes into existence at fertilization.

Basically, we know ensoulment occurs before birth, and I see no reason not to be conservative and believe it happens at the moment our physical life begins, just like it did for Adam.

I for one don’t want to stand before God and tell him that since I wasn’t sure when ensoulment occurred I supported the killing of unborn human beings because I took the chance it happened a few weeks after conception instead of at conception.

Personally, I think all the Biblical evidence we have suggests ensoulment is simultaneous with our physical life coming into existence.

As noted before:
1: isn't disputed and doesn't say when person hood begins.

2. Doesn't say when personhood begins.

3. Again doesn't say when personhood begins.

4. Doesn't say when personhood begins

5. Doesn't say when personhood begins.

The best case you have is number 2 of the psalmist, which still doesn't grant any clarity, but rather is poetry combined with broad terms of being in heat.

None of the above clarify on when ensoulment occurs. And you know this just as well as I. Indeed you even previously admitted this

 

[NBB]

. I already have said that if the atheists are correct then I’ll agree with them . I’ve always known that I have more in common with a secular humanist than with a fundamentalist. Independent life for a fetus starts at around 6 months . No matter how you spin it that doesn’t change . Before then it’s not capable of independent life it’s part of the woman

Sorry but if you abort, you are killing a person, you cut short their future... that is basically killing them should they have soul or not, they are a person in formation, and should not be considered less because it cannot think yet, or defend itself.

Or tell me, if your mother aborted you when you were 1 month, you would have existed? yes abortion in any stage is deleting a person from a life in this earth basically murdering them.

People are evil, and not give human life the value it deserves.

 

[NBB]

As noted before:
1: isn't disputed and doesn't say when person hood begins.

2. Doesn't say when personhood begins.

3. Again doesn't say when personhood begins.

4. Doesn't say when personhood begins

5. Doesn't say when personhood begins.

The best case you have is number 2 of the psalmist, which still doesn't grant any clarity, but rather is poetry combined with broad terms of being in heat.

None of the above clarify on when ensoulment occurs. And you know this just as well as I. Indeed you even previously admitted this

So basically: i believe a fetus has souls, but i don't know if they get it when, SO lets allow killing them... that makes any sense to you? you are in a hurry to allow the killing of humans or something? if you mother aborted you at 1 month, you would have existed? No!, that is basically killing you.

 

[Job 33:6]

So basically: i believe a fetus has souls, but i don't know if they get it when, SO lets allow killing them... that makes any sense to you? you are in a hurry to allow the killing of humans or something? if you mother aborted you at 1 month, you would have existed? No!, that is basically killing you.

What it means is that, every day, millions of animals are slaughtered for our food. Rainforests are annihilated and all wildlife destroyed, megafauna such as giraffes and rhinos are going extinct, the south china sea is being depleted of it's fish and ecosystem, coral reefs are bleeching, california aquifers are being depleted.

Life at large, the planet at large and all wild life on it, is being utterly destroyed. Why? So that we can have a cheeseburger, almost without even a moment of remorse.

There are more chickens on earth than there are people and they're less than a month old, ready to be butchered and eaten. These birds, much like apes of the Amazon, zebras, tigers, and other macro vertebrates feel pain, they experience fear, emotions, etc. They are aware of their suffering.

But we don't even spend two second thinking about all of the above.

And meanwhile here we are acting like a bunch of goofballs fighting tooth and nail over non sentient, non pain feeling, non fear experiencing, non aware embryos, without any evidence, scriptural or scientific, that they are even ensouled persons.

And further, we evolved from the very wild life that we so easily destroy. They one day could be like us. Indeed, they are us. Yet we seem infatuated with embryos none the less.

 

[NBB]

What it means is that, every day, millions of animals are slaughtered for our food. Rainforests are annihilated and all wildlife destroyed, megafauna such as giraffes and rhinos are going extinct, the south china sea is being depleted of it's fish and ecosystem, coral reefs are bleeching, california aquifers are being depleted.

Life at large, the planet at large and all wild life on it, is being utterly destroyed. Why? So that we can have a cheeseburger, almost without even a moment of remorse.

There are more chickens on earth than there are people and they're less than a month old, ready to be butchered and eaten. These birds, much like apes of the Amazon, zebras, tigers, and other macro vertebrates feel pain, they experience fear, emotions, etc. They are aware of their suffering.

But we don't even spend two second thinking about all of the above.

And meanwhile here we are acting like a bunch of goofballs fighting tooth and nail over non sentient, non pain feeling, non fear experiencing, non aware embryos, without any evidence, scriptural or scientific, that they are even ensouled persons.

And further, we evolved from the very wild life that we so easily destroy. They one day could be like us. Indeed, they are us. Yet we seem infatuated with embryos none the less.

Animals are not eternal, and they can't have a relationship with God, also GOd gave permission to hunt them.

 

[thelord's_pearl]

Animals are not eternal, and they can't have a relationship with God, also GOd gave permission to hunt them.

just for offering information, watch "Heaven is For REAL", based on a true story, the boy says that there are animals in heaven

 

[SPF]

What it means is that, every day, millions of animals are slaughtered for our food

Yes, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm confused, you are claiming to be a Christian, so can you please explain to me what these verses teach, if they are not teaching that it's OK for us to eat animals:

Genesis 1:28 God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

Genesis 9:1-3 And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. "The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you


Acts 10:9-16 On the next day, as they were on their way and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour to pray. But he became hungry and was desiring to eat; but while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance; and he *saw the sky opened up, and an object like a great sheet coming down, lowered by four corners to the ground, and there were in it all kinds of four-footed animals and crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the air. A voice came to him, "Get up, Peter, kill and eat!" But Peter said, "By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean." Again a voice came to him a second time, "What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy." This happened three times, and immediately the object was taken up into the sky.

Rainforests are annihilated and all wildlife destroyed,

Fallacy: Red Herring. That's an important discussion, but it has nothing to do with the moral worth and value of an unborn human.

megafauna such as giraffes and rhinos are going extinct,

Fallacy: Red Herring. That's an important discussion, but it has nothing to do with the moral worth and value of an unborn human.

the south china sea is being depleted of it's fish and ecosystem

Fallacy: Red Herring. That's an important discussion, but it has nothing to do with the moral worth and value of an unborn human.

coral reefs are bleeching, california aquifers are being depleted.

Fallacy: Red Herring. That's an important discussion, but it has nothing to do with the moral worth and value of an unborn human.

And meanwhile here we are acting like a bunch of goofballs fighting tooth and nail over non sentient, non pain feeling, non fear experiencing, non aware embryos, without any evidence, scriptural or scientific, that they are even ensouled persons.

Nobody asked you to participate in this conversation. And I'm sorry if you don't think it's valuable talking about abortion, which has resulted in the intentional and purposeful killing of over 1.72 billion unborn babies, worldwide, since 1973. But for many Christians who believe what Scripture teaches regarding the inherent moral value and worth of other human beings, this is an important topic.

And while you continue to attempt to ease your conscience by claiming that abortion should be fine with this argument:

P1: Killing humans without souls is acceptable.
P2: We don't know the precise moment when a human gets a soul.
Conclusion: It's fine to kill human beings when they're early in development.

I mean think about your logic for a minute. It's pretty awful. And while it is true that there is no specific verse in Scripture that flat out states the moment a human being has a soul - there is evidence that it takes place at conception. Good evidence too.

At the very least, based upon Luke 1's account of John the Baptist, we do know that ensoulment takes place before birth.

But we have a lot more in Scripture regarding humans in general which help give us an indication that the most likely time a human being has a soul is the moment they have physical life. For one, that's how it worked with Adam. For two, King David acknowledges he had a sinful nature from conception. For a third, Exodus teaches life for life with the death of an unborn, and finally, there are no examples in Scripture of there ever being a living human being without a soul.

Given the above, the evidence suggests that it is most likely true that all living human beings have souls. And thanks to advancements in science, we know that a new and unique human being, begins their physical life at conception.

Also, your argument rests primarily on the point that if a young human being didn't have a soul that it would be OK to kill them. I disagree with that premise for sure. God created human beings as both physical and spiritual beings, and we are created in God's Image. Even if ensoulment happened at a later point than conception, we would still have been created in God's image the moment we were physically alive. Our moral worth and value wouldn't depend upon ensoulment.

It's a terrible argument all around.

And further, we evolved from the very wild life that we so easily destroy.

Debatable.

Yet we seem infatuated with embryos none the less.

Yes, because it's a valuable and important discussion. The intentional and purposeful killing of the most innocent and vulnerable human beings is a worthy discussion. Kind of sad that you apparently don't think it is.

just for offering information, watch "Heaven is For REAL", based on a true story, the boy says that there are animals in heaven

Not to burst your bubble, but that kid came out and said he lied about the story.

 

[Job 33:6]

Yes, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm confused, you are claiming to be a Christian, so can you please explain to me what these verses teach, if they are not teaching that it's OK for us to eat animals:

Genesis 1:28 God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

Genesis 9:1-3 And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. "The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. "Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you


Acts 10:9-16 On the next day, as they were on their way and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour to pray. But he became hungry and was desiring to eat; but while they were making preparations, he fell into a trance; and he *saw the sky opened up, and an object like a great sheet coming down, lowered by four corners to the ground, and there were in it all kinds of four-footed animals and crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the air. A voice came to him, "Get up, Peter, kill and eat!" But Peter said, "By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything unholy and unclean." Again a voice came to him a second time, "What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy." This happened three times, and immediately the object was taken up into the sky.

Fallacy: Red Herring. That's an important discussion, but it has nothing to do with the moral worth and value of an unborn human.

Fallacy: Red Herring. That's an important discussion, but it has nothing to do with the moral worth and value of an unborn human.

Fallacy: Red Herring. That's an important discussion, but it has nothing to do with the moral worth and value of an unborn human.

Fallacy: Red Herring. That's an important discussion, but it has nothing to do with the moral worth and value of an unborn human.

Nobody asked you to participate in this conversation. And I'm sorry if you don't think it's valuable talking about abortion, which has resulted in the intentional and purposeful killing of over 1.72 billion unborn babies, worldwide, since 1973. But for many Christians who believe what Scripture teaches regarding the inherent moral value and worth of other human beings, this is an important topic.

And while you continue to attempt to ease your conscience by claiming that abortion should be fine with this argument:

P1: Killing humans without souls is acceptable.
P2: We don't know the precise moment when a human gets a soul.
Conclusion: It's fine to kill human beings when they're early in development.

I mean think about your logic for a minute. It's pretty awful. And while it is true that there is no specific verse in Scripture that flat out states the moment a human being has a soul - there is evidence that it takes place at conception. Good evidence too.

At the very least, based upon Luke 1's account of John the Baptist, we do know that ensoulment takes place before birth.

But we have a lot more in Scripture regarding humans in general which help give us an indication that the most likely time a human being has a soul is the moment they have physical life. For one, that's how it worked with Adam. For two, King David acknowledges he had a sinful nature from conception. For a third, Exodus teaches life for life with the death of an unborn, and finally, there are no examples in Scripture of there ever being a living human being without a soul.

Given the above, the evidence suggests that it is most likely true that all living human beings have souls. And thanks to advancements in science, we know that a new and unique human being, begins their physical life at conception.

Also, your argument rests primarily on the point that if a young human being didn't have a soul that it would be OK to kill them. I disagree with that premise for sure. God created human beings as both physical and spiritual beings, and we are created in God's Image. Even if ensoulment happened at a later point than conception, we would still have been created in God's image the moment we were physically alive. Our moral worth and value wouldn't depend upon ensoulment.

It's a terrible argument all around.

Debatable.

Yes, because it's a valuable and important discussion. The intentional and purposeful killing of the most innocent and vulnerable human beings is a worthy discussion. Kind of sad that you apparently don't think it is.

Not to burst your bubble, but that kid came out and said he lied about the story.

None of the above are red herrings, and the topic of evolution is not debatable.

I'm just pointing out the absurd nature of those who oppose abortion while simultaneously being perfectly comfortable with mass annihilation of the worlds wild life, including those that we eat.

These topics have everything to do with the topic of abortion, because we cannot logically be comfortable with utter destruction of the planets life while simultaneously mortified by the idea of a non sentient or non pain experiencing, non fear experiencing blotch of cells being destroyed. It just doesn't add up.

And there's no actual refutation being offered for this. At best all we see is someone saying that our evolutionary history as animals is debatable (which it is not, but they just can't accept or face the reality that we are of the same animal kingdom in which we abuse), and someone quoting a bunch of passages from scripture which don't offer any evidence from objective reality. The counter arguments arent based on any observable experience, but rather just imagination and interpretation of scripture.

This isnt a response. It's an embarrassment.

 

[Job 33:6]

Am I surprised to see that those who are ardent pro-life supporters, simultaneously are uncomfortable with the idea of evolution?

No of course not, I am not surprised at all. Because if people did embrace the facts that we are part of the very animal kingdom that we abuse and annihilate, They might then think twice about how significant the destruction of a human embryo is in comparison to the destruction of millions of our pain feeling, fear experiencing, sentient etc. cousins every-day.

At the end of the day "because the Bible said so" just isn't a viable response to the true utter atrocities committed (and largely ignored yet vastly more destructive) by mankind every day.

 

[SPF]

At the end of the day "because the Bible said so" just isn't a viable response to the true utter atrocities committed (and largely ignored yet vastly more destructive) by mankind every day.

So what’s the right thing to do? To ignore the Scripture verses I posted?

Should I reject what Scripture says about us being unique creations, alone in His Image?

Should I reject the Scripture that says we are free to kill and eat animals and that we are to subdue and rule over creation?

You haven’t provided and actionable alternatives or interpretations of Scripture to go by.

Would you tell us how you interpret the passages I quoted about animals?