Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
What does His Word say about a bad tree? What is it fit for ?
Thus also false knowledge, as YHWH calls it, as well as devious motives, when they occur
So nothing about human beings, like whether they have bodies, huh?

Kind of looks like you're just casting aspersions.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Yes, so long as you have your "science has demonstrated," then you have your conclusion. Ready to hand.
Simply repeat that unsubstantiated conclusion, and your argument is complete - right?
im sorry champ, but it’s not unsubstantiated that at fertilization a new, unique individual is created. I’ve quoted dozens upon dozens of biology textbooks fornyou on this. A sperm on its own will never grow into anything other than a sperm with 23 chromosomes. An unfertilizer egg will never grow into anything other than an unfertilized egg with 23 chromosomes. New life is created at conception. It’s a scientific fact.

Surprised me a little that you did not try to legitimately construct a definition of "human being body," from your "body" definitions. Not with a mere slight of hand like you did try, not with obscuring the difference between "body" and "human being body."
What apparently is continuing to sail right over your head is that the definitions (multiple) of body I provided can be applied to human beings.

shows another problem - a human being body is only complete if it includes the external organs (not within the torso) of head, arms, and legs.
Whereas you want there to be human beings WITHOUT EVER HAVING THESE THINGS, which is a foolhardy quest going way beyond reality.
Again, you’re wrong, but at this point we will just have to agree to disagree. The human body is the physical part. It’s wrong to discriminate against humans based upon age, development, etc... An 80 year old body is just as much a body as a 25 year old body as a 7 year old body, as is a 2 week old body in the womb. All bodies, just at different stages of development.

Also, you’ve never addressed that even under your position how a fetus which meets your definition would still not be a human being. Good luck with that.

btw, on your "fully prosthetic body," do you mean a completely artificial robot? Having no organs that were formed in a womb to be a human being? I think that is pretty silly, and a totally unrealistic concept.
We already have prosthetic limbs. It’s not a stretch to think we are eventually going to have prosthetic bodies from the neck down. Especially when considering that the first head transplant has already been conducted in China.
 
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
What apparently is continuing to sail right over your head is that the definitions (multiple) of body I provided can be applied to human beings.

Like I tried to point out, they could be applied if you did the work the encyclopedia people did. Come up with a true definition of "animal," since THEY DO NOT GET BEYOND THAT TO HUMAN BEING. Then some of them would "work," but you could NOT have a true definition that was not in full agreement with the encyclopedia definitions.
 
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
The human body is the physical part. It’s wrong to discriminate against humans based upon age, development, etc... An 80 year old body is just as much a body as a 25 year old body as a 7 year old body, as is a 2 week old body in the womb. All bodies, just at different stages of development.

Mere physicality doe not a "human being body" make. A stone and a bug have a "body" in the sense you speak of - it has to be shown HOW IT IS A HUMAN BEING BODY, and not some other physicality.
AND, if it has human DNA, that too does not mean "whatever" physicality you are pointing to is not cancer cells. MERE PHYSICALITY, "something there," tells us virtually nothing. Certainly not that it is one of the many bodily things that are actually the epitome of human creation, God's masterpiece.

Just being "a body" is not enough to tell us anything, such a definition is very incomplete.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I. Introduction

The question as to when the physical material dimension of a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and fundamentally should be answered by human embryologists�not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists. The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question. Current discussions on abortion, human embryo research (including cloning, stem cell research, and the formation of mixed-species chimeras), and the use of abortifacients involve specific claims as to when the life of every human being begins. If the "science" used to ground these various discussions is incorrect, then any conclusions will be rendered groundless and invalid. The purpose of this article is to focus primarily on a sampling of the "scientific" myths, and on the objective scientific facts that ought to ground these discussions. At least it will clarify what the actual international consensus of human embryologists is with regard to this relatively simple scientific question. In the final section, I will also address some "scientific" myths that have caused much confusion within the philosophical discussions on "personhood."

II. When does a human being begin?

Getting a handle on just a few basic human embryological terms accurately can considerably clarify the drastic difference between the "scientific" myths that are currently circulating, and the actual objective scientific facts. This would include such basic terms as: "gametogenesis," "oogenesis," "spermatogenesis," "fertilization," "zygote," "embryo," and "blastocyst." Only brief scientific descriptions will be given here for these terms. Further, more complicated, details can be obtained by investigating any well-established human embryology textbook in the library, such as some of those referenced below. Please note that the scientific facts presented here are not simply a matter of my own opinion. They are direct quotes and references from some of the most highly respected human embryology textbooks, and represent a consensus of human embryologists internationally.

A. Basic human embryological facts

To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization�the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte�usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.

To understand this, it should be remembered that each kind of living organism has a specific number and quality of chromosomes that are characteristic for each member of a species. (The number can vary only slightly if the organism is to survive.) For example, the characteristic number of chromosomes for a member of the human species is 46 (plus or minus, e.g., in human beings with Down�s or Turner�s syndromes). Every somatic (or, body) cell in a human being has this characteristic number of chromosomes. Even the early germ cells contain 46 chromosomes; it is only their mature forms - the sex gametes, or sperms and oocytes - which will later contain only 23 chromosomes each..1 Sperms and oocytes are derived from primitive germ cells in the developing fetus by means of the process known as "gametogenesis." Because each germ cell normally has 46 chromosomes, the process of "fertilization" can not take place until the total number of chromosomes in each germ cell are cut in half. This is necessary so that after their fusion at fertilization the characteristic number of chromosomes in a single individual member of the human species (46) can be maintained�otherwise we would end up with a monster of some sort.

To accurately see why a sperm or an oocyte are considered as only possessing human life, and not as living human beings themselves, one needs to look at the basic scientific facts involved in the processes of gametogenesis and of fertilization. It may help to keep in mind that the products of gametogenesis and fertilization are very different. The products of gametogenesis are mature sex gametes with only 23 instead of 46 chromosomes. The product of fertilization is a living human being with 46 chromosomes. Gametogenesis refers to the maturation of germ cells, resulting in gametes. Fertilization refers to the initiation of a new human being.

1) Gametogenesis

As the human embryologist Larsen2 states it, gametogenesis is the process that converts primordial germ cells (primitive sex cells) into mature sex gametes�in the male (spermatozoa, or sperms), and in the female (definitive oocytes). The timing of gametogenesis is different in males and in females. The later stages of spermatogenesis in males occur at puberty, and continue throughout adult life. The process involves the production of spermatogonia from the primitive germ cells, which in turn become primary spermatocytes, and finally spermatids�or mature spermatozoa (sperms). These mature sperms will have only half of the number of their original chromosomes�i.e., the number of chromosomes has been cut from 46 to 23, and therefore they are ready to take part in fertilization.3

Oogenesis begins in the female during fetal life. The total number of primary oocytes�about 7 million�is produced in the female fetus� ovaries by 5 months of gestation in the mother�s uterus. By birth, only about 700,000 - 2 million remain. By puberty, only about 400,000 remain. The process includes several stages of maturation�the production of oogonia from primitive germ cells, which in turn become primary oocytes, which become definitive oocytes only at puberty. This definitive oocyte is what is released each month during the female�s menstrual period, but it still has 46 chromosomes. In fact, it does not reduce its number of chromosomes until and unless it is fertilized by the sperm, during which process the definitive oocyte becomes a secondary oocyte with only 23 chromosomes.4

This halving of the number of chromosomes in the oocytes takes place by the process known as meiosis. Many people confuse meiosis with a different process known as mitosis, but there is an important difference. Mitosis refers to the normal division of a somatic or of a germ cell in order to increase the number of those cells during growth and development. The resulting cells contain the same number of chromosomes as the previous cells�in human beings, 46. Meiosis refers to the halving of the number of chromosomes that are normally present in a germ cell - the precursor of a sperm or a definitive oocyte - in order for fertilization to take place. The resulting gamete cells have only half of the number of chromosomes as the previous cells�in human beings, 23.

One of the best and most technically accurate explanations for this critical process of gametogenesis is by Ronan O�Rahilly,5 the human embryologist who developed the classic Carnegie stages of human embryological development. He also sits on the international board of Nomina Embryologica (which determines the correct terminology to be used in human embryology textbooks internationally):

"Gametogenesis is the production of [gametes], i.e., spermatozoa and oocytes. These cells are produced in the gonads, i.e., the testes and ovaries respectively. ... During the differentiation of gametes, diploid cells (those with a double set of chromosomes, as found in somatic cells [46 chromosomes]) are termed primary, and haploid cells (those with a single set of chromosomes [23 chromosomes]) are called secondary. The reduction of chromosomal number ... from 46 (the diploid number or 2n) to 23 (the haploid number or n) is accomplished by a cellular division termed meiosis. ... Spermatogenesis, the production of spermatozoa, continues from immediately after puberty until old age. It takes place in the testis, which is also an endocrine gland, the interstitial cells of which secrete testosterone. Previous to puberty, spermatogonia in the simiferous tubules of the testis remain relatively inactive. After puberty, under stimulation from the interstitial cells, spermatogonia proliferate ... and some become primary spermatocytes. When these undergo their first maturation division (meiosis 1), they become secondary spermatocytes. The second maturation division (meiosis 2) results in spermatids, which become converted into spermatozoa."6

"Oogenesis is the production and maturation of oocytes, i.e.; the female gametes derived from oogonia. Oogonia (derived from primordial germ cells) multiply by mitosis and become primary oocytes. The number of oogonia increases to nearly seven million by the middle of prenatal life, after which it diminishes to about two million at birth. From these, several thousand oocytes are derived, several hundred of which mature and are liberated (ovulated) during a reproductive period of some thirty years. Prophase of meiosis 1 begins during fetal life but ceases at the diplotene state, which persists during childhood. ... After puberty, meiosis 1 is resumed and a secondary oocyte ... is formed, together with polar body 1, which can be regarded as an oocyte having a reduced share of cytoplasm. The secondary oocyte is a female gamete in which the first meiotic division is completed and the second has begun. From oogonium to secondary oocyte takes from about 12 to 50 years to be completed. Meiosis 2 is terminated after rupture of the follicle (ovulation) but only if a spermatozoon penetrates. ... The term �ovum� implies that polar body 2 has been given off, which event is usually delayed until the oocyte has been penetrated by a spermatozoon (i.e., has been fertilized). Hence a human ovum does not [really] exist. Moreover the term has been used for such disparate structures as an oocyte and a three-week embryo, and therefore should be discarded, as a fortiori should �egg�."7 (Emphasis added.)

Thus, for fertilization to be accomplished, a mature sperm and a mature human oocyte are needed. Before fertilization,8 each has only 23 chromosomes. They each possess "human life," since they are parts of a living human being; but they are not each whole living human beings themselves. They each have only 23 chromosomes, not 46 chromosomes�the number of chromosomes necessary and characteristic for a single individual member of the human species. Furthermore, a sperm can produce only "sperm" proteins and enzymes; an oocyte can produce only "oocyte" proteins and enzymes; neither alone is or can produce a human being with 46 chromosomes.

Also, note O�Rahilly�s statement that the use of terms such as "ovum" and "egg"�which would include the term "fertilized egg"�is scientifically incorrect, has no objective correlate in reality, and is therefore very misleading�especially in these present discussions. Thus these terms themselves would qualify as "scientific" myths. The commonly used term, "fertilized egg," is especially very misleading, since there is really no longer an egg (or oocyte) once fertilization has begun. What is being called a "fertilized egg" is not an egg of any sort; it is a human being.

2) Fertilization

Now that we have looked at the formation of the mature haploid sex gametes, the next important process to consider is fertilization. O�Rahilly defines fertilization as:

"... the procession of events that begins when a spermatozoon makes contact with a secondary oocyte or its investments, and ends with the intermingling of maternal and paternal chromosomes at metaphase of the first mitotic division of the zygote. The zygote is characteristic of the last phase of fertilization and is identified by the first cleavage spindle. It is a unicellular embryo."9 (Emphasis added.)

The fusion of the sperm (with 23 chromosomes) and the oocyte (with 23 chromosomes) at fertilization results in a live human being, a single-cell human zygote, with 46 chromosomes�the number of chromosomes characteristic of an individual member of the human species. Quoting Moore:

"Zygote: This cell results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo). The expression fertilized ovum refers to a secondary oocyte that is impregnated by a sperm; when fertilization is complete, the oocyte becomes a zygote."10 (Emphasis added.)

This new single-cell human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes11 (not carrot or frog enzymes and proteins), and genetically directs his/her own growth and development. (In fact, this genetic growth and development has been proven not to be directed by the mother.)12 Finally, this new human being�the single-cell human zygote�is biologically an individual, a living organism�an individual member of the human species. Quoting Larsen:

"... [W]e begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentiation of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual."13 (Emphasis added.)

In sum, a mature human sperm and a mature human oocyte are products of gametogenesis�each has only 23 chromosomes. They each have only half of the required number of chromosomes for a human being. They cannot singly develop further into human beings. They produce only "gamete" proteins and enzymes. They do not direct their own growth and development. And they are not individuals, i.e., members of the human species. They are only parts�each one a part of a human being. On the other hand, a human being is the immediate product of fertilization. As such he/she is a single-cell embryonic zygote, an organism with 46 chromosomes, the number required of a member of the human species. This human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes, directs his/her own further growth and development as human, and is a new, genetically unique, newly existing, live human individual.

After fertilization the single-cell human embryo doesn�t become another kind of thing. It simply divides and grows bigger and bigger, developing through several stages as an embryo over an 8-week period. Several of these developmental stages of the growing embryo are given special names, e.g., a morula (about 4 days), a blastocyst (5-7 days), a bilaminar (two layer) embryo (during the second week), and a trilaminar (3-layer) embryo (during the third week).14

Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.
 
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
it’s not unsubstantiated that at fertilization a new, unique individual is created. I’ve quoted dozens upon dozens of biology textbooks fornyou on this. A sperm on its own will never grow into anything other than a sperm with 23 chromosomes. An unfertilizer egg will never grow into anything other than an unfertilized egg with 23 chromosomes. New life is created at conception. It’s a scientific fact.

It's certainly unsubstantiated that what you call a "unique individual" is a human being. At most your quoted textbook material is a repetition of such a claim, such a conclusion, without any defense thereof. Sure, the chromosomes show it is unique, and a little beyond just any piece of dirt that is also an individual" physicality. But that it has a "body" just like any other piece of anything has a body, and even that the chromosomes show it is not some other "body," these do not show it rises to the level of being a human being.
What you call "new life" is NOT "a life" in the sense of being a human being; it is alive and has a certain newness of DNA, that is all. That is all.
It is what it is. And its "body" is not in accord with what a human being body is, having the TISSUES ORGANS AND SYSTEMS that a "body" must have to be a human being body. (To refresh your memory of what the encyclopedias say.)

The fact that a zygote is not a sperm is not the issue. No one doubts that.

Your "scientific fact" of "new life" is just a false, unjustified characterization of what actually happens. Nothing becomes less a falsity just because you say it is "a scientific fact."
You may think it's a quibble for one NOT to accept your wording of "new life," but it is the sort of thing that seems to make your argument work, when it can not work. And makes it easy to show the falsity when such carelessness is evident such as speaking of "new life" at conception.
THERE IS NO NEW LIFE AT CONCEPTION - the only life there is what comes from the sperm and egg, what they had prior to their union. They are both alive and their uniting has that same "life."

What you take your self and your textbook quotes to be saying, and what you want to be saying, is that it is a "new human being," that is what you are trying to say with "new life," without actually saying it. Because if you actually claimed that, it would appear more blatantly false. And easily dismissed. This is not quite totally true - there is some claim that it is a new human being, but the emphasis is to misidentify what actually happens with "new life," and well, there is life there and there is a certain newness, so it must be true. But nothing like a new human being is already then created.

A new combination of chromosomes is "created," that is what is new. That is not life - chromosomes are not life, they are some blueprint for life, some grand design in the cell(s). And they of course do not inject life, only a blueprint for the continuing life of the cell(s), IF it does continue.
But "new life" gives a nice aura, the impression that the uniqueness of that invisible physical "body" is something so much more than every other uniqueness of every other "body" or mere physical speck.
It IS no more than it is, a virtual nothing, certainly not a human being, and will not be any real animal for quite some time, if ever.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
What you take your self and your textbook quotes to be saying, and what you want to be saying, is that it is a "new human being," that is what you are trying to say with "new life," without actually saying it.
Apparently you haven't actually been reading anything I've been saying or the quoted material I've been presenting you with, because that is precisely what I've been saying from the beginning.

A new human being comes into existence at conception. This new human being possesses its own unique DNA. Its developmental process has begun, and will continue for about 25 years. Your life, my life, and all other human beings lives began at conception.
 
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
Apparently you haven't actually been reading anything I've been saying or the quoted material I've been presenting you with, because that is precisely what I've been saying from the beginning.

A new human being comes into existence at conception. This new human being possesses its own unique DNA. Its developmental process has begun, and will continue for about 25 years. Your life, my life, and all other human beings lives began at conception.
Sure a broken record.

You do NOT actually respond to my points.

And the one place you seem to have responded, what you say is false. What I say is NOT precisely what you've "been saying from the beginning." You have never said you are "saying it is a new human being" when you say it is "new life." That's what you sometimes say, that it is "new life." What you do NOT say at the same time is that you really mean it is a new life, you do not right in the same sentence conflate "new life," like in "there is new life," with "a" new life. That is not clearly said - THE ROLE OF "NEW LIFE" IS TO GIVE THE AURA THAT IT IS "A NEW LIFE," WITHOUT ACTUALLY SAYING IT.
For while it might be one, it is certainly not the other.
It might be "new life," meaning the speck of dust, what is no more than a speck of dust, that has different DNA and is "new" in that sense. THERE IS CERTAINLY NO NEW "life," life being the quality of being alive. Aliveness merely continues from the sperm and egg.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Again Douglas, the scientific community is unanimous when it comes to understanding when a new human being comes into existence. I can spend all day, as I have in the past, providing reference after reference, textbook after textbook that explains to you in factual scientific terms that a new human being comes into existence at conception. It's scientific fact at this point. It's time you pulled your fingers out of your ears, opened your eyes, and updated your position.

I. Introduction

The question as to when the physical material dimension of a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and fundamentally should be answered by human embryologists�not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists. The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question. Current discussions on abortion, human embryo research (including cloning, stem cell research, and the formation of mixed-species chimeras), and the use of abortifacients involve specific claims as to when the life of every human being begins. If the "science" used to ground these various discussions is incorrect, then any conclusions will be rendered groundless and invalid. The purpose of this article is to focus primarily on a sampling of the "scientific" myths, and on the objective scientific facts that ought to ground these discussions. At least it will clarify what the actual international consensus of human embryologists is with regard to this relatively simple scientific question. In the final section, I will also address some "scientific" myths that have caused much confusion within the philosophical discussions on "personhood."

II. When does a human being begin?

Getting a handle on just a few basic human embryological terms accurately can considerably clarify the drastic difference between the "scientific" myths that are currently circulating, and the actual objective scientific facts. This would include such basic terms as: "gametogenesis," "oogenesis," "spermatogenesis," "fertilization," "zygote," "embryo," and "blastocyst." Only brief scientific descriptions will be given here for these terms. Further, more complicated, details can be obtained by investigating any well-established human embryology textbook in the library, such as some of those referenced below. Please note that the scientific facts presented here are not simply a matter of my own opinion. They are direct quotes and references from some of the most highly respected human embryology textbooks, and represent a consensus of human embryologists internationally.

A. Basic human embryological facts

To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization�the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte�usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.

To understand this, it should be remembered that each kind of living organism has a specific number and quality of chromosomes that are characteristic for each member of a species. (The number can vary only slightly if the organism is to survive.) For example, the characteristic number of chromosomes for a member of the human species is 46 (plus or minus, e.g., in human beings with Down�s or Turner�s syndromes). Every somatic (or, body) cell in a human being has this characteristic number of chromosomes. Even the early germ cells contain 46 chromosomes; it is only their mature forms - the sex gametes, or sperms and oocytes - which will later contain only 23 chromosomes each..1 Sperms and oocytes are derived from primitive germ cells in the developing fetus by means of the process known as "gametogenesis." Because each germ cell normally has 46 chromosomes, the process of "fertilization" can not take place until the total number of chromosomes in each germ cell are cut in half. This is necessary so that after their fusion at fertilization the characteristic number of chromosomes in a single individual member of the human species (46) can be maintained�otherwise we would end up with a monster of some sort.

To accurately see why a sperm or an oocyte are considered as only possessing human life, and not as living human beings themselves, one needs to look at the basic scientific facts involved in the processes of gametogenesis and of fertilization. It may help to keep in mind that the products of gametogenesis and fertilization are very different. The products of gametogenesis are mature sex gametes with only 23 instead of 46 chromosomes. The product of fertilization is a living human being with 46 chromosomes. Gametogenesis refers to the maturation of germ cells, resulting in gametes. Fertilization refers to the initiation of a new human being.

1) Gametogenesis

As the human embryologist Larsen2 states it, gametogenesis is the process that converts primordial germ cells (primitive sex cells) into mature sex gametes�in the male (spermatozoa, or sperms), and in the female (definitive oocytes). The timing of gametogenesis is different in males and in females. The later stages of spermatogenesis in males occur at puberty, and continue throughout adult life. The process involves the production of spermatogonia from the primitive germ cells, which in turn become primary spermatocytes, and finally spermatids�or mature spermatozoa (sperms). These mature sperms will have only half of the number of their original chromosomes�i.e., the number of chromosomes has been cut from 46 to 23, and therefore they are ready to take part in fertilization.3

Oogenesis begins in the female during fetal life. The total number of primary oocytes�about 7 million�is produced in the female fetus� ovaries by 5 months of gestation in the mother�s uterus. By birth, only about 700,000 - 2 million remain. By puberty, only about 400,000 remain. The process includes several stages of maturation�the production of oogonia from primitive germ cells, which in turn become primary oocytes, which become definitive oocytes only at puberty. This definitive oocyte is what is released each month during the female�s menstrual period, but it still has 46 chromosomes. In fact, it does not reduce its number of chromosomes until and unless it is fertilized by the sperm, during which process the definitive oocyte becomes a secondary oocyte with only 23 chromosomes.4

This halving of the number of chromosomes in the oocytes takes place by the process known as meiosis. Many people confuse meiosis with a different process known as mitosis, but there is an important difference. Mitosis refers to the normal division of a somatic or of a germ cell in order to increase the number of those cells during growth and development. The resulting cells contain the same number of chromosomes as the previous cells�in human beings, 46. Meiosis refers to the halving of the number of chromosomes that are normally present in a germ cell - the precursor of a sperm or a definitive oocyte - in order for fertilization to take place. The resulting gamete cells have only half of the number of chromosomes as the previous cells�in human beings, 23.

One of the best and most technically accurate explanations for this critical process of gametogenesis is by Ronan O�Rahilly,5 the human embryologist who developed the classic Carnegie stages of human embryological development. He also sits on the international board of Nomina Embryologica (which determines the correct terminology to be used in human embryology textbooks internationally):

"Gametogenesis is the production of [gametes], i.e., spermatozoa and oocytes. These cells are produced in the gonads, i.e., the testes and ovaries respectively. ... During the differentiation of gametes, diploid cells (those with a double set of chromosomes, as found in somatic cells [46 chromosomes]) are termed primary, and haploid cells (those with a single set of chromosomes [23 chromosomes]) are called secondary. The reduction of chromosomal number ... from 46 (the diploid number or 2n) to 23 (the haploid number or n) is accomplished by a cellular division termed meiosis. ... Spermatogenesis, the production of spermatozoa, continues from immediately after puberty until old age. It takes place in the testis, which is also an endocrine gland, the interstitial cells of which secrete testosterone. Previous to puberty, spermatogonia in the simiferous tubules of the testis remain relatively inactive. After puberty, under stimulation from the interstitial cells, spermatogonia proliferate ... and some become primary spermatocytes. When these undergo their first maturation division (meiosis 1), they become secondary spermatocytes. The second maturation division (meiosis 2) results in spermatids, which become converted into spermatozoa."6

"Oogenesis is the production and maturation of oocytes, i.e.; the female gametes derived from oogonia. Oogonia (derived from primordial germ cells) multiply by mitosis and become primary oocytes. The number of oogonia increases to nearly seven million by the middle of prenatal life, after which it diminishes to about two million at birth. From these, several thousand oocytes are derived, several hundred of which mature and are liberated (ovulated) during a reproductive period of some thirty years. Prophase of meiosis 1 begins during fetal life but ceases at the diplotene state, which persists during childhood. ... After puberty, meiosis 1 is resumed and a secondary oocyte ... is formed, together with polar body 1, which can be regarded as an oocyte having a reduced share of cytoplasm. The secondary oocyte is a female gamete in which the first meiotic division is completed and the second has begun. From oogonium to secondary oocyte takes from about 12 to 50 years to be completed. Meiosis 2 is terminated after rupture of the follicle (ovulation) but only if a spermatozoon penetrates. ... The term �ovum� implies that polar body 2 has been given off, which event is usually delayed until the oocyte has been penetrated by a spermatozoon (i.e., has been fertilized). Hence a human ovum does not [really] exist. Moreover the term has been used for such disparate structures as an oocyte and a three-week embryo, and therefore should be discarded, as a fortiori should �egg�."7 (Emphasis added.)

Thus, for fertilization to be accomplished, a mature sperm and a mature human oocyte are needed. Before fertilization,8 each has only 23 chromosomes. They each possess "human life," since they are parts of a living human being; but they are not each whole living human beings themselves. They each have only 23 chromosomes, not 46 chromosomes�the number of chromosomes necessary and characteristic for a single individual member of the human species. Furthermore, a sperm can produce only "sperm" proteins and enzymes; an oocyte can produce only "oocyte" proteins and enzymes; neither alone is or can produce a human being with 46 chromosomes.

Also, note O�Rahilly�s statement that the use of terms such as "ovum" and "egg"�which would include the term "fertilized egg"�is scientifically incorrect, has no objective correlate in reality, and is therefore very misleading�especially in these present discussions. Thus these terms themselves would qualify as "scientific" myths. The commonly used term, "fertilized egg," is especially very misleading, since there is really no longer an egg (or oocyte) once fertilization has begun. What is being called a "fertilized egg" is not an egg of any sort; it is a human being.

2) Fertilization

Now that we have looked at the formation of the mature haploid sex gametes, the next important process to consider is fertilization. O�Rahilly defines fertilization as:

"... the procession of events that begins when a spermatozoon makes contact with a secondary oocyte or its investments, and ends with the intermingling of maternal and paternal chromosomes at metaphase of the first mitotic division of the zygote. The zygote is characteristic of the last phase of fertilization and is identified by the first cleavage spindle. It is a unicellular embryo."9 (Emphasis added.)

The fusion of the sperm (with 23 chromosomes) and the oocyte (with 23 chromosomes) at fertilization results in a live human being, a single-cell human zygote, with 46 chromosomes�the number of chromosomes characteristic of an individual member of the human species. Quoting Moore:

"Zygote: This cell results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo). The expression fertilized ovum refers to a secondary oocyte that is impregnated by a sperm; when fertilization is complete, the oocyte becomes a zygote."10 (Emphasis added.)

This new single-cell human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes11 (not carrot or frog enzymes and proteins), and genetically directs his/her own growth and development. (In fact, this genetic growth and development has been proven not to be directed by the mother.)12 Finally, this new human being�the single-cell human zygote�is biologically an individual, a living organism�an individual member of the human species. Quoting Larsen:

"... [W]e begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentiation of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual."13 (Emphasis added.)

In sum, a mature human sperm and a mature human oocyte are products of gametogenesis�each has only 23 chromosomes. They each have only half of the required number of chromosomes for a human being. They cannot singly develop further into human beings. They produce only "gamete" proteins and enzymes. They do not direct their own growth and development. And they are not individuals, i.e., members of the human species. They are only parts�each one a part of a human being. On the other hand, a human being is the immediate product of fertilization. As such he/she is a single-cell embryonic zygote, an organism with 46 chromosomes, the number required of a member of the human species. This human being immediately produces specifically human proteins and enzymes, directs his/her own further growth and development as human, and is a new, genetically unique, newly existing, live human individual.

After fertilization the single-cell human embryo doesn�t become another kind of thing. It simply divides and grows bigger and bigger, developing through several stages as an embryo over an 8-week period. Several of these developmental stages of the growing embryo are given special names, e.g., a morula (about 4 days), a blastocyst (5-7 days), a bilaminar (two layer) embryo (during the second week), and a trilaminar (3-layer) embryo (during the third week).14

Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Douglas: "The simple virtue of abortion is that it never can be wrong, that any claim it is the killing of a human being is simply false. Like other types of birth control, womb cleansing itself is morally neutral yet can have positive consequences both for individual freedom and avoiding social burdens."

I personally can only wonder how someone who proclaims Christ actually believes this stuff. I'm going to actually give Christ the benefit of the doubt here and believe that you aren't a Christian and that you actually have just said that you are to gain access to this forum. Your pro-abortion position is the most extreme view I have ever seen, and I truly hope that you are never able to convince anyone of your position. Thankfully your position is not based in reality, but relies upon ignoring science and fabricating your own set of definitions and terminology, so the people you convince should hopefully be few and far between.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
The question as to when the physical material dimension of a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and fundamentally should be answered by human embryologists�not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists.

The claim that "This is science and nobody else is allowed to say anything about it," is ridiculous.

When in point of fact the question requires a philosopher, or perhaps logician and linguist, to help one be aware of what is being asked and what is being answered.
Consider:
"the physical material dimension of a human being begins..."
This phrasing puts "human being" at when there is the very very beginning of the construction of the human being. Like "house" might be used in the sentence, "The physical material dimension of a house begins when the basement is dug, when the foundation is laid." Does not mean the house then already exists. What it does mean and can only mean is that the first step of building the house is "there," the building of it has begun. We never correctly claim the building is then built, that it already at that point is indeed a building. Even though all along we may make reference to "the house."
And even though every step of the way is in accord with the original plan of the
house, the DNA as it were.
Similarly in the case of building the human body, the first step is fertilization, so we say "the physical material dimension of a human being begins there, and then.
DOES NOT MEAN AND CANNOT MEAN the building of the human being is then completed, that there is then a human being).

This is "what science knows," what anybody in theory could figure out:
1. The womb is the place wherein a human being is produced, is constructed. Is "created."
2. The beginning of that creation, that building, is fertilization.
3. The beginning of that production is not when the product exists - that is only after the production is done, when the producing (gestating) is completed.

The strictly expressed and strictly legitimate question is, When does the physical material building of what will become a human being start?
And the answer to that is of course your, "at fertilization." That is scientific, yes, but it is NOT scientific to misrepresent it, to claim that the human being already exists when it is only begun to be built.

Our faintest origins are that beginning - our existence as human beings begins at birth. "Our faintest origins," even that is possibly misleading - any element suggesting we might exist before we exist, before birth, since "our" substance is partly there then, is misleading and WE MUST BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT AND NOT MISLED BY THAT.
Note, it is only the physical material that might become a human being, in reality. (Though if we are talking of a process already completed, then of course it was the material that did become a human being and, at that time, would become a human being.)

"Hey, this is me. I'm a body." (A talking body.)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
First, you're again using the false analogy of the house. Not only is it a false analogy, even worse, you're not even using it consistently. Human beings take 25 years to develop. So if you're going to even attempt to use a house analogy, then to be consistent, you wouldn't be able to call a human a human being until they were fully developed.

Second, you still haven't responded to the fact that your preferred definition of human being would include a fetus that has not yet been born, while at the same time you are insisting that a human being does not exist until it exits the womb.

Finally, the fact that you've actually written a book titled, The Virtue of Abortion reveals you for what you are. A troll on this forum pushing a belief, not looking for open discussion and learning.

The fact that you would actually call abortion virtuous is abhorrent. Please do everyone you meet a favor and don't tell them you're a Christian.

Douglas: "The simple virtue of abortion is that it never can be wrong, that any claim it is the killing of a human being is simply false. Like other types of birth control, womb cleansing itself is morally neutral yet can have positive consequences both for individual freedom and avoiding social burdens."
 
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
First, you're again using the false analogy of the house. Not only is it a false analogy, even worse, you're not even using it consistently. Human beings take 25 years to develop. So if you're going to even attempt to use a house analogy, then to be consistent, you wouldn't be able to call a human a human being until they were fully developed.

So you don't know what the womb is for? That that is where the human being is constructed?
(Of course you don't want that true idea to be even thought!)

Are you saying it is more a human being at age 25? Of course not, you would not say that. So at least those 25 years are not part of the creation of a human being, the bringing into being of a human being. You want to say it's a human being way before that, so that period of time is not relevant to the discussion. Not relevant to you and not relevant to me.

The changes of the body over the first twenty-five years OF A PERSON'S LIFE are pretty much only of size; you want to say that is true of changes in the womb too, but of course that is false!
THERE ARE MANY MORE OTHER KINDS OF CHANGES IN THE WOMB, OTHER THAN MERE CHANGES OF SIZE.

Thing is, the human bodily being is mainly constructed, certainly its basic form and functions are "created," in the womb. Even you can't deny that, and certainly no sane regular individual would deny it.

On the supposed "false analogy" of the house, you do not show how it is such or that it is such.
At the beginning of the building of either, both in the case of the building of the house, and in the case of the building of the person, the human being, there is only the most minimal amount of physical substance. CAN YOU DENY THAT? Of course not. That is the analogy.
BOTH NEED TO BE BUILT, BOTH THE BODY THAT IS A HUMAN BEING, AND THE BODY THAT IS A HOUSE, BOTH NEED TO BE BUILT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE BUILDING PROCESS, AND DO NOT EXIST UNTIL THEY ARE BUILT.

And we talk of them in similar ways, the "house" we call it. Before it is a house. That does NOT mean it is a house just because it is called a "house." QUITE PARALLEL. QUITE A GOOD ANALOGY.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
So you don't know what the womb is for? That that is where the human being is constructed?
(Of course you don't want that true idea to be even thought!)
The womb is where a recently created human being has its first home.

Are you saying it is more a human being at age 25? Of course not, you would not say that. So at least those 25 years are not part of the creation of a human being, the bringing into being of a human being. You want to say it's a human being way before that, so that period of time is not relevant to the discussion. Not relevant to you and not relevant to me.
You are correct, I would not say there are degrees of human beingness. That's kind of the point that makes abortion immoral. Human beings are created at conception, and no matter their level of development, physical size, gender, race, or handicap - they are all equally created in the image of God, possessing equal inherent moral worth and value.

The problem for you, and what makes the point about human development lasting 25 years relevant is that you continue to mark birth as the end of development. This isn't true. Obviously isn't true. Human development takes about 25 years. So if you insist on using your house analogy, then you are forced into the unfortunate position of not calling a human a human being until they are 25 years old. I personally would stop using the house analogy as I don't think it's very good at all. But if you want to change your position so that it's consistent with the house analogy and start arguing that there is no human being until 25 years then feel free.

The changes of the body over the first twenty-five years OF A PERSON'S LIFE are pretty much only of size;
Once again, your ignorance is demonstrated with clarity. Clearly, you do not have children and have never been involved in the raising of children.

Finally, the fact that you've actually written a book titled, The Virtue of Abortion, reveals you for what you are. A troll on this forum pushing a belief, not looking for open discussion and learning.

The fact that you would actually call abortion virtuous is abhorrent. It's one thing to be pro-choice, but you go beyond that. You actually believe abortion to be a virtuous action on behalf of women. Do you know what virtuous even means? Please do everyone you meet a favor and don't tell them you're a Christian.

Douglas: "The simple virtue of abortion is that it never can be wrong, that any claim it is the killing of a human being is simply false. Like other types of birth control, womb cleansing itself is morally neutral yet can have positive consequences both for individual freedom and avoiding social burdens."
 
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
The problem for you, and what makes the point about human development lasting 25 years relevant is that you continue to mark birth as the end of development. This isn't true. Obviously isn't true. Human development takes about 25 years. So if you insist on using your house analogy, then you are forced into the unfortunate position of not calling a human a human being until they are 25 years old. I personally would stop using the house analogy as I don't think it's very good at all. But if you want to change your position so that it's consistent with the house analogy and start arguing that there is no human being until 25 years then feel free.

I certainly don't say there is no development of the human being after birth. That is what is untrue, your saying that I deny such development. YOU ARE GROSSLY AND MANIFESTLY UNTRUE, to say that I "mark birth as the end of development" (of a human being).
It is a matter of waxing and waning. One grows in size and ability and in favor with God and man (hopefully); and then later one's capacities become more diminished. Point is, through the entire life of a person (measured from birth by sane people of the earth),* there is, he/she is, an actual biological being, an animal, a member of the species.

The time when there is actually a house, AFTER IT IS BUILT, it too will wax and wane. That is, it may be some time before it is completely finished, especially inside. And "furnished." And then changes of furnishing and even outer parts like shingles, and gradually it will be finished in the sense of being so old and dilapidated that it will be abandoned.
It is true that the size of the house remains relatively constant throughout it's life, unless it is added on to, and at that point the analogy somewhat breaks down. Yet one can see where it applies - there is no house if there is no body of a house. If just a basement or hole in the ground remains, for instance, there is no house.

*Note I do not say you are insane or that you do not mark peoples life beginning from birth - I know you want to pretend a human being exists before birth and convince others of that falsity, but I suspect you actually do not always add about nine months when you calculate someones age. (Which would be based on the time after birth.)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I’m glad you acknowledge that human development continues after birth, and again, that’s why your house analogy fails. But regardless, it’s an analogy, and only an analogy, a sloppy one for sure. The analogy doesn’t prove anything.

I would love a response to this:

Finally, the fact that you've actually written a book titled, The Virtue of Abortion, reveals you for what you are. A troll on this forum pushing a belief, not looking for open discussion and learning.

The fact that you would actually call abortion virtuous is abhorrent. It's one thing to be pro-choice, but you go beyond that. You actually believe abortion to be a virtuous action on behalf of women. Do you know what virtuous even means? Please do everyone you meet a favor and don't tell them you're a Christian.

Douglas: "The simple virtue of abortion is that it never can be wrong, that any claim it is the killing of a human being is simply false. Like other types of birth control, womb cleansing itself is morally neutral yet can have positive consequences both for individual freedom and avoiding social burdens."
 
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
Douglas: "The simple virtue of abortion is that it never can be wrong, that any claim it is the killing of a human being is simply false. Like other types of birth control, womb cleansing itself is morally neutral yet can have positive consequences both for individual freedom and avoiding social burdens."

Quite some time ago I thought this was true - I no longer consider it to be faithful to reality in every respect.
You might have asked if I still believe this, before continually posting it as though it actually represents my (present) views.
I have pointed out to you more than once that (I have realized) there are other possible reasons for opposing abortion, other than that it is the supposed killing of a human being. Though I am still pretty sure it is the case that there is no murder involved in abortion.

Womb cleansing can be a very good thing - yet it is not always the best course for people to take.
At least it would seem some things like a very good family situation can mitigate the dire results of there being yet another member of the human race. Another real human being on the face of an almost totally overrun earth.

(HOPE YOU LOVE IT LIKE YOU SAID YOU WOULD!)
 
Upvote 0

Denadii

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2017
710
300
75
Western
✟31,027.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
My Lady came home with a puppy a short while ago. No lie. It was no bigger than my fist. Now it is the size of a small horse...Well.....
My point is...It grew...A newly concieved human....a single cell....That's his/her body...Now sit back and watch him/her grow. Soon that baby will look like a baby that looks just like you did when you were born. The mother is human, the father is human...and that baby, when it is conceived is human.
Truly For intelligent HUMANS, this is a really stupid converstation. A total waste of time....A small amount of thought would tell you that that one cell is human...Its not canine, simian, avian or nephilim. Its human.
 
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
The womb is where a recently created human being has its first home.

You can say this nonsense- doth not make it true.

A fine "house" you find for your supposed person. Lots of heat but no light. Absolutely nothing to do, in fact where nothing can be done. Unless you count something on the order of sleep and perhaps an occasional twitching of limbs to be something worth noticing.
TOTAL FLOOD CONDITIONS. Fine home indeed.

Of course you would only begin to think this is a fine home for a human being because you mistakenly think there is one in a gestating womb. At least I hope you recognize your "home" is far worse than any prison any real human being was ever incarcerated in. The fetus, far from being a "recently created human being," is IMPRISONED, TOTALLY IMPRISONED there. Nothing of human action possible.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
My Lady came home with a puppy a short while ago. No lie. It was no bigger than my fist. Now it is the size of a small horse...Well.....
My point is...It grew...A newly concieved human....a single cell....That's his/her body...Now sit back and watch him/her grow. Soon that baby will look like a baby that looks just like you did when you were born. The mother is human, the father is human...and that baby, when it is conceived is human.
Truly For intelligent HUMANS, this is a really stupid converstation. A total waste of time....A small amount of thought would tell you that that one cell is human...Its not canine, simian, avian or nephilim. Its human.

Yes a baby will look like a baby, but your supposedly "newly conceived human" never looks like a human being whatsoever. That should be a clue that it is NOT a human being.

A small amount of thought could tell you that that one-cell is NOT a human being. There are one-celled animals, but they are the farthest from being a human being there could possibly be. (Protozoa and the like.)
Yes, it is "human," it is a human cell. Yet like I seem to always have to point out, so too is a cancer cell - in other words, being "human" and not canine or simian or avian does NOT make it a human being. No, I'm afraid the single cell, whether of either a cancer or a (prospective) fetus, is never a human being, though certainly human.
Got it?

Holy Bless!
 
Upvote 0