If I was aborted, would I have gone to heaven?

[Buy Bologna]

Cuz rite now i see no reason to convert back to christianity. Im a father of a 10 month old, and will raise her agnostic. would it have been better to abort her?

Or are we all born atheist, do aborted fetuses go to hell.

You think a zygote/embryo is a person? Yes?....No?

If i was a sincere christian i would say "yes for abortion!" ...It's a no brainer. Why have the baby when it has the possibility of being corrupted. Just play it safe and abort the baby instead of taking the chance that it may be tortured for 10s of trillions of eons of times trillions.

I would like your logic explained in this regard. thanks

 

[Upisoft]

Cuz rite now i see no reason to convert back to christianity. Im a father of a 10 month old, and will raise her agnostic. would it have been better to abort her?

Or are we all born atheist, do aborted fetuses go to hell.

We are all born atheist. If we were not there is no need that parents teach religion to their kids, they would already know it. Our brain is incapable of abstract ideas long after we are born. At 3 they even can't imagine that another person cannot know what they know. Even at five children have no proper moral knowledge.

If I leave my bag say on a conveyor belt and turn around. Then the conveyor belt starts and moves away my bag, and stops. Someone leaves a bag that looks just like mine there. I turn around. 3 years old will say that I'll go to my own bag and get it. They can't imagine me not knowing what happened with the bags when they know it. 5 years old will correctly say that I'll take the bag that is not mine. But 5 years old will think I'm guilty doing so. He can't accept that something that is wrong when I know that the bag is not mine is not wrong when I don't know that.

Clearly our children are atheists and have to be taught religion to become theists.

You think a zygote/embryo is a person? Yes?....No?

I think.. "No". While it need specific person to survive it is part of that person. (Of course, many people tend to disagree with me)

If i was a sincere christian i would say "yes for abortion!" ...It's a no brainer. Why have the baby when it has the possibility of being corrupted. Just play it safe and abort the baby instead of taking the chance that it may be tortured for 10s of trillions of eons of times trillions.

I would like your logic explained in this regard. thanks

Sincere Christian would think that abortion = murder. And since murder is a sin they will be against it. Although sincere Christian would do many other sins, be ashamed for doing so, but sincerely believing he/she is forgiven.

 

[Resha Caner]

If i was a sincere christian i would say "yes for abortion!" ...It's a no brainer. Why have the baby when it has the possibility of being corrupted. Just play it safe and abort the baby instead of taking the chance that it may be tortured for 10s of trillions of eons of times trillions.

If that is your attitude, play it even safer and never conceive at all.

The question doesn't have a general yes/no answer, and is a bit nonsensical. First of all it is based in the mistaken notion that salvation is our choice and based in our intellect.

But even moreso, it could be generalized to say: What will happen to someone in hypothetical situation X when I don't know the conditions of hypothetical situation X?

 

[Paradoxum]

Or are we all born atheist, do aborted fetuses go to hell.

You think a zygote/embryo is a person? Yes?....No?

If i was a sincere christian i would say "yes for abortion!" ...It's a no brainer. Why have the baby when it has the possibility of being corrupted. Just play it safe and abort the baby instead of taking the chance that it may be tortured for 10s of trillions of eons of times trillions.

I would like your logic explained in this regard. thanks

I'm going to take the theist point of view this time... cos I'm nice like that

I don't think that is how conservative theists evaluate moral problems. From my experience they think about moral decisions in terms of duty (means) rather than consequence (ends). How they act in practise may be slightly different though. This means that if abortion is wrong/sinful then it shouldn't be done. Plain and simple. Their system is different from yours and so the systems clash. The fate of the child is given up to the providence of God.

We are all born atheist. If we were not there is no need that parents teach religion to their kids, they would already know it. Our brain is incapable of abstract ideas long after we are born. At 3 they even can't imagine that another person cannot know what they know. Even at five children have no proper moral knowledge.

If I leave my bag say on a conveyor belt and turn around. Then the conveyor belt starts and moves away my bag, and stops. Someone leaves a bag that looks just like mine there. I turn around. 3 years old will say that I'll go to my own bag and get it. They can't imagine me not knowing what happened with the bags when they know it. 5 years old will correctly say that I'll take the bag that is not mine. But 5 years old will think I'm guilty doing so. He can't accept that something that is wrong when I know that the bag is not mine is not wrong when I don't know that.

Clearly our children are atheists and have to be taught religion to become theists.

I don't think that naturally follows from the evidence presented. Children naturally gain logical and moral skills so perhaps too children come to a knowledge of God. I'm not saying I actually think this though.

 

[Resha Caner]

The fate of the child is given up to the providence of God.

Nicely phrased. Probably better than the way I said it.

 

[Paradoxum]

Nicely phrased. Probably better than the way I said it.

Thanks

I'm not saying I agree with you though

 

[Resha Caner]

I'm not saying I agree with you though

Understanding is a good beginning. I've met relatively few who can disagree with me and yet express my view so well. So, would you say the view you espoused is consistent with the Bible or am I reading too much into it?

 

[Buy Bologna]

We are all born atheist. If we were not there is no need that parents teach religion to their kids, they would already know it. Our brain is incapable of abstract ideas long after we are born. At 3 they even can't imagine that another person cannot know what they know. Even at five children have no proper moral knowledge.

so if my baby dies she goes to hell?

Or is this a situation where an atheist makes it to heaven?

Im not saying im for abortion, im def. not for it when it's late term.

But this is not about me, forget me, say im totally OK with going to hell but i want whats best for my daughter and to live eternally into happiness FOR SURE.

 

[Buy Bologna]

Im not trying to make any statements really.

But this is a philosophical thread and just throwing this idea around for some food for thought.

 

[bricklayer]

Human life does not begin with conception or birth.
Human life began with creation and is continued through conceptions and births.
God created one human flesh in Adam; all human bodies are composed of human flesh.
God created one human spirit in Adam; all human souls are composed of human spirit.
Human spirit died before anyone was ever conceived much less born.
All human beings are born with dead souls.
Killing a human being after it is conceived and before it is born cannot resurrect it spiritually.

 

[Resha Caner]

Human life began with creation and is continued through conceptions and births.

That's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how it would tie to the issue of abortion.

 

[bricklayer]

That's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure how it would tie to the issue of abortion.

The OP essentially asks whether or not killing a human being between conception and birth can spiritually resurrect that person. I contend that it cannot. We are conceived in sin/death; killing the body before birth does not change that.

 

[Buy Bologna]

The OP essentially asks whether or not killing a human being between conception and birth can spiritually resurrect that person. I contend that it cannot. We are conceived in sin/death; killing the body before birth does not change that.

So i guess the question for you is.

When does the baby considered a person? After birth?

I personally think that when aborted it just breaks down back into the atoms and molecules just the same as when a person of old age dies. And without consciencness.

But i still think late term is wrong, im cmon, for real it's a person. You can have an emergency at 6 months and have to get the baby out and the baby can live a happy healty life.

 

[Upisoft]

I don't think that naturally follows from the evidence presented. Children naturally gain logical and moral skills so perhaps too children come to a knowledge of God. I'm not saying I actually think this though.

I probably should have added that this shows that children learn. And point as example all the religions in the world, to show that they can learn and believe in anything. This certainly does not point out there is one source of the truth... but instead there are many sources. Neither of which being probably the truth.

 

[Paradoxum]

Understanding is a good beginning. I've met relatively few who can disagree with me and yet express my view so well. So, would you say the view you espoused is consistent with the Bible or am I reading too much into it?

Thanks for the complement again.

I think it is consistent with the Bible in some ways and not consistent in other ways. The Bible obviously gives laws that should be followed and so it makes sense to act out of duty and accepting that God knows best. But I think some bits of the New Testament go beyond this. Jesus (and the apostles) also give laws, but also gives us principles by which we can figure out the laws. Love others, do unto others as you would have done to yourself, the law is death but the spirit is life.

From this I would say that for some people it is best that they follow the moral law, but some others are able to follow the principles and discover the law on their own based on the principles. This isn't to say that some people are better than others, but that people are at different places in life. A good part of the NT is about freedom, liberation and grace in regards to the law and I think that promotes thinking for oneself about what is right and wrong.

I hope you don't find me as trying to preach or whatever.

I probably should have added that this shows that children learn. And point as example all the religions in the world, to show that they can learn and believe in anything. This certainly does not point out there is one source of the truth... but instead there are many sources. Neither of which being probably the truth.

Ah, ok

 

[Resha Caner]

The OP essentially asks whether or not killing a human being between conception and birth can spiritually resurrect that person. I contend that it cannot. We are conceived in sin/death; killing the body before birth does not change that.

OK. I didn't get that from what you said before. I was afraid you might be going for some "humanity is one organism" type of thing.

After clarification, though, I'll note that it's a good point.

When does the baby considered a person?

At conception.

 

[Resha Caner]

I hope you don't find me as trying to preach or whatever.

Not at all. You're one of those people who is so polite I would have to work at it to be offended. It's something I strive for, but rarely achieve ([edit] clarification: I strive to be polite, not to manufacture a reason to be offended). I tell myself it's because I'm willing to confront people with the flaws in their thinking, and they don't like that so they respond negatively. But, I know I cross the line from time to time. I'm still a work in progress.

I think it is consistent with the Bible in some ways and not consistent in other ways... A good part of the NT is about freedom, liberation and grace in regards to the law and I think that promotes thinking for oneself about what is right and wrong.

Yes and no. It seems we have a different view of what freedom means. For me, freedom means the freedom to do what I was created to do. Your freedom sounds as if it borders on relativism, and I don't think that was what the NT was promoting.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Define person.

 

[Upisoft]

freedom means the freedom to do what I was created to do.

That's just one option. Where is the freedom?

 

[Resha Caner]

That's just one option. Where is the freedom?

I'll try to use eating as an analogy. God could have created us without a need for food. We could complain that we have no freedom because we have to eat, but that is a misunderstanding of what the Bible means by freedom.

Being "bound by sin" would be analogous to being bound so that we cannot eat. The result is starvation and death. Being set "free" means being released from those bonds so we can fulfill our bodys' need to eat. As we perform that task, we have the further freedom to eat according to taste. One person may prefer carrots, another peas. Again, we could complain to God that we don't have the freedom to eat iron bars (at least not if we want to survive), but that's absurd. We should just be thankful that we've been set free to fulfill what we were created to do - eat.