How Can Abortion Be Biblically Defended?

[SPF]

I’m not supporting it, just pointing out the dilemma, of being consistent it.

Is this how you operate on the forums? You haven’t answered a single question I’ve asked.

 

[cow451]

Remember, the OP specifically request that a Christian biblically defends abortion. Do you have any scriptural justification for abortion. I provided a few verses against it in the OP. Unless you can biblically support abortion, I can only conclude that pro-abortion is an unbiblical position that a Christian ought not have. The floor is yours.

Medical procedures should be seen as such. It is folly to try addressing specific medical and political agendas by justifying them “scripturally”.
God granted in the OT sanction for all manner of murder and mayhem including slaughter of children and pregnant women.

I don’t support abortion for birth control but I don’t see Biblical justification to criminalize first term abortions.

And tell me how one Biblically allows support of criminalizing saving a pregnant Mother’s life and incest perpetrators and rapists rights to reproduce.

I support vaccination for measles but I don’t need scriptural gymnastics to justify it.

And the Almighty and I are on very good terms, in case you had any doubts.

 

[cow451]

Is this how you operate on the forums? You haven’t answered a single question I’ve asked.

Such as?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

God granted

Exactly! GOD GRANTED, not woman decided.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

The Old Testament Law says that whatever harm you cause to an unborn child, you will receive the same fate. Hence, the Old Testament Law prescribed the death penalty for someone who caused the death of a baby in the womb in the same way as someone committing murder would have been put to death. Clearly indicating that the life of an unborn child is just as valuable as any other human life.

“If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise." (Exodus 21:22-25)

I don’t support abortion for birth control but I don’t see Biblical justification to criminalize first term abortions.

This passage clearly shows that the punishment for killing an unborn child is death ("life for life") and that the life of the unborn child is just as precious as any other human life. Furthermore, this passage demonstrates that the unborn child has rights that are deserving of justice in the event that its health is threatened. Now, to be clear, I am not calling for the execution of women because "let he who is without sin cast the first stone." However, this is clearly seen as a sinful act that a Christian ought not support.

 

[SPF]

Such as?

Here are a number of questions you’ve either dodged or outright ignored.

Can you clarify what you mean? Are you saying that killing an innocent person created in the image of God is the lesser evil?

But surely as a Christian you believe that all humans are created in the image of God and possess inherent moral worth and value, right?

There are two victims in a rape where a woman becomes pregnant. The mother and the unwanted child. Do you think killing the unborn child is an appropriate and morally sound response?

Is there an alternative position that you can support other than “life begins at conception”?

I don’t support abortion for birth control but I don’t see Biblical justification to criminalize first term abortions.

Why do you draw the line at first trimester? A human is a human regardless of their level of development, why do you discriminate against a human like this?

 

[cow451]

Exactly! GOD GRANTED, not woman decided.

God granted you the right to pass a death sentence on a Mother having pregnancy complications? Nice that God has given you such authority.

 

[cow451]

Why do you draw the line at first trimester? A human is a human regardless of their level of development, why do you discriminate against a human like this?

We don’t agree on the human is a human thing. The law requires a definition. That’s mine based on fetal viability. When God terminates pregnancy it’s mostly in the first trimester.

Next?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

God granted you the right to pass a death sentence on a Mother having pregnancy complications? Nice that God has given you such authority.

Nice Strawman. Point the post in which I said "God granted me or anyone the right to pass a death sentence on a Mother having pregnancy complications." Killing is simply taking life. Murder is taking life without cause or authority. God is the only being who creates life. Thus, God is the only being who can take life or give that authority to others. We see this authority being given in times of War, self defense, or as a result of capital punishment by those in authority to administer such punishments. God gave no authority to anyone to kill an innocent human life in the womb because the woman chose not to be a mother. Thus, abortion is murder. In cases in which the life of the mother is at risk and a C Section is unable to mitigate that risk (which hardly ever happens), God has already decided that either the mother or child will die. Thus, it wouldn't be murder to have a abortion in such cases because the baby has already received a death sentence from God. Not the mother.

 

[cow451]

Nice Strawman. Killing is simply taking life. Murder is taking life without cause or authority. God is the only being who creates life. Thus, God is the only being who can take life or give that authority to others. We see this authority being given in times of War, self defense, or as a result of capital punishment by those in authority to administer such punishments. God gave no authority to anyone to kill an innocent human life in the womb because the woman chose not to be a mother. Thus, abortion is murder.

I missed the part in the Bible where God authorized the invasion of Iraq.

 

[mark kennedy]

I first wanted to clarify upfront that I am in absolutely no way challenging that someone who is pro-choice isn't a Christian. My question is more centered around their logic and justification in supporting abortion. With so much scripture that condemns abortion, how can a Christian hold true to the Word of God and support abortion at the same time? It seems as though you would have to throw the word of God out the window to justify it. Please explain to me why I am wrong for having this point of view? I also want to clarify that I want to keep this discussion centered around the biblical justification. This is not a discussion about women's rights (unless you can show me in the Bible where woman have the right to an abortion). I also don't want to hear emotional responses or assertions without any biblical support or justification. I want to keep this centered around biblical truths in order to explain to me why pro-choice Christians are not disregarding the Word of God. Here are some examples of blatantly pro-life (anti-abortion) scripture.

God knew us before He formed us in the womb.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations. (Jeremiah 1:5)

God was an active role in our creation and formation in the womb.

For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb.
14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.
15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place,
when I was woven together in the depths of the earth.
16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;
all the days ordained for me were written in your book
before one of them came to be.
17 How precious to me are your thoughts, God!
How vast is the sum of them!
18 Were I to count them,
they would outnumber the grains of sand—
when I awake, I am still with you. (Psalm 139:13-16)

The Old Testament Law says that whatever harm you cause to an unborn child, you will receive the same fate. Hence, the Old Testament Law prescribed the death penalty for someone who caused the death of a baby in the womb in the same way as someone committing murder would have been put to death. Clearly indicating that the life of an unborn child is just as valuable as any other human life.

“If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise." (Exodus 21:22-25)

They had abortions in the Old Testament, (Num. 5:21,22)

 

[SPF]

We don’t agree on the human is a human thing. The law requires a definition. That’s mine based on fetal viability. When God terminates pregnancy it’s mostly in the first trimester.

Next?

Biologically we know that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization and begins about a 25 year developmental period. Yet at no point in their development are they not a human being.

On what scientific foundation are you arguing for the notion that before viability there is not a human being in the womb? It’s certainly not science or Scripture. Can you explain yourself?

 

[cow451]

They had abortions in the Old Testament, (Num. 5:21,22)

They had lots of stuff in the OT you don’t hear in Sunday School.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

They had abortions in the Old Testament, (Num. 5:21,22)

That wasn't an abortion. That was a jealousy offering. Some propose that Numbers 5:11-31 refers to God causing an abortion. The 2011 edition of the NIV mistakenly states that the drink will cause miscarriage in Numbers 5:21-22, 27. However, this is not what the passage is talking about. Pregnancy is nowhere mentioned, or even hinted at, in the text. The only thing that even sounds like pregnancy is the guilty wife’s stomach becoming bloated, but even in that instance, it has nothing to do with pregnancy. Further, the passage does not say that drinking the concoction would cause an abortion/miscarriage. While drinking a poisonous mixture of ingredients could very well cause a miscarriage, that is not what this text is speaking of.

If a wife was found guilty, the punishment was death (Leviticus 20:10). If the wife was found innocent, she would be “cleared of guilt” and “able to have children” (Numbers 11:28). So, again, Numbers 5:11-31 does not refer to abortion in any sense. Rather, it is describing a method that God allowed to be used to determine if a wife had committed adultery against her husband.

 

[cow451]

Biologically we know that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization and begins about a 25 year developmental period. Yet at no point in their development are they not a human being.

On what scientific foundation are you arguing for the notion that before viability there is not a human being in the womb? It’s certainly not science or Scripture. Can you explain yourself?

An embryo is not a human being. Even with our advanced technology, a fetus is not viable at thirteen weeks. Sorry to give you that bad news.

We all know that a pregnancy can develop complications for the Mother that can be fatal. Can you explain why you believe her life is expendable?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

They had lots of stuff in the OT you don’t hear in Sunday School.

Numbers 5 wasn't taking about abortions. If a man became jealous and suspected his wife of having an affair, this ceremony was performed so that the man wouldn't continue in his jealousy. Of course, if the woman was found guilty, a bloated belly is the last of her concerns because she would be stoned to death.

 

[cow451]

Numbers 5 wasn't taking about abortions. If a man became jealous and suspected his wife of having an affair, this ceremony was performed so that the man wouldn't continue in his jealousy. Of course, if the woman was found guilty, a bloated belly is the last of her concerns because she would be stoned to death.

WWJD?

 

[mark kennedy]

They had lots of stuff in the OT you don’t hear in Sunday School.

Like the conquest of Canaan, they were ordered to kill every man, woman and xhild.

 

[SPF]

An embryo is not a human being. Even with our advanced technology, a fetus is not viable at thirteen weeks. Sorry to give you that bad news

What is it if not a human being? What is the basis for this assertion ? It’s certainly not the mainstream scientific position.

I’m not sure how educated you are in this subject, I would assume (no offense) not very as you’re really just parroting the typical pro-choice propaganda.

Can you provide any supporting references that would suggest a new human being does not exist at fertilization?

“[All] organisms, however large and complex they might be as full grown, begin life as a single cell. This is true for the human being, for instance, who begins life as a fertilized ovum.”Dr. Morris Krieger “The Human Reproductive System” p 88 (1969) Sterling Pub. Co

“The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.” Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010)

“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

“Fertilization – the fusion of gametes to produce a new organism – is the culmination of a multitude of intricately regulated cellular processes.” Marcello et al., Fertilization, ADV. EXP. BIOL. 757:321 (2013)

“Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).” Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.” Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974

 

[cow451]

What is it if not a human being? What is the basis for this assertion ? It’s certainly not the mainstream scientific position.

A fertilized egg is a human being? Learn that in Sunday school science?
When Do Human Beings Begin?
I’m educated enough to know you are misrepresenting your own citations by a mashup definition.
Nice try.