Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
For some reason I cannot finish my posts, something is wrong with either the computer that I am using or with the website's LAN.
I'll try again. According to the lat
No I was not a human being at that time.
Apparently you didn't read redleghunter's response, post #4. Click Here to read it.This is not presupposition. "Fetus" is a Greek word if I am correct. It was not used in Biblical times for obvious reason. The other word is "embrio"
Based on the text that I quoted I do not see the fetus as a living thing. Thus I am pro-choice
For some reason I cannot finish my posts, something is wrong with either the computer that I am using or with the website's LAN.
I'll try again. According to the lat
No I was not a human being at that time.
The way i see it "children" are the substitute for the word "fetus". But if you're correct then God is saying that it if a child is killed the punishment is monetary but if an adult woman is killed the punishment is the death. I do not think this is what the passage that i quoted means.I simply do not see that in this passage. "Children" are not human beings?
Apparently you didn't read redleghunter's response, post #4. Click Here to read it.
Have you considered Luke Chapter 1?
Luke 1:41 When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
Luke 1:44 "For behold, when the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy.
John the Baptist, while still in his mother's womb, leaped for joy. I personally don't think that we can say that John the Baptist was not a human being.
And how in the world can you say that you don't consider the fetus a living thing? You don't even need the Bible to know that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization. That is established science, it's not even debated anymore.
“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
An embryology textbook describes how birth is just an event in the development of a baby, not the beginning of his/her life:
“It should always be remembered that many organs are still not completely developed by full-term and birth should be regarded only as an incident in the whole developmental process.” F Beck Human Embryology, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1985 page vi
“It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.” Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30
“Although it is customary to divide human development into prenatal and postnatal periods, it is important to realize that birth is merely a dramatic event during development resulting in a change in environment.” The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology fifth edition, Moore and Persaud, 1993, Saunders Company, page 1
“The zygote and early embryo are living human organisms.” Keith L. Moore & T.V.N. Persaud Before We Are Born – Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects (W.B. Saunders Company, 1998. Fifth edition.) Page 500
“Thus a new cell is formed from the union of a male and a female gamete. [sperm and egg cells] The cell, referred to as the zygote, contains a new combination of genetic material, resulting in an individual different from either parent and from anyone else in the world.” Sally B Olds, et al., Obstetric Nursing (Menlo Park, California: Addison – Wesley publishing, 1980) P 136
“The term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation from which a new living being develops. It is synonymous with the terms fecundation, impregnation, and fertilization … The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.” J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Freidman. Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Publishers. 1974 Pages 17 and 23.
I can quote plenty of scientific articles saying that the life doesn't begin at the conception. It is matter of opinion.
“[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
Based on the text that I quoted I do not see the fetus as a living thing
The way i see it "children" are the substitute for the word "fetus". But if you're correct then God is saying that it if a child is killed the punishment is monetary but if an adult woman is killed the punishment is the death. I do not think this is what the passage that i quoted means.
I never doubted that the mother is a human being !I've always believed a fetus is a human being. When it's asked of the mother, sometimes there's doubt.
Great post above by redleghunter.
As Christians this should actually be one of those topics where we are in universal agreement.
1) All humans are created in the image of God and possess inherent moral worth and value for their entire lives.
2) Human beings begin their existence and 25 year development process at fertilization.
They also didn't have the scientific understanding and knowledge that we have today.The medieval churchmen did not believe this. They seemed to go long with Aristotle and recognize that ones humanity developed slowly during pregnancy, the rational soul being present at the time of quickening.
This is yet another fallacious example of discrimination.A zygote doesn't even resemble what we would recognize as human. Neither does an embryo. In fact during certain stages its very similar to the embryos of other species.
We did, my wife was far enough along... I can name half a dozen people that did as well right off the top of my head. But what's your point? Would the fact that people don't have funerals for miscarriages be a logically valid argument that they therefore have no moral worth and value? Their moral worth and value is not determined by how other people treat them. Do you think your intrinsic moral worth and value is based upon how you're treated? Certainly not.If fetuses are persons, why do most people not have funerals after a miscarriage? In some cases there isn't even biological matter to bury.
I haven't been talking about personhood. The idea that there is a difference between a human being and a human person is a made up notion. You'll find no support for it in Scripture, and you'll find no objective support for it in science. The only people that attempt to argue that there is a difference between a human being and a human person are those that want to perform some action against the human being that would otherwise be considered immoral. If you think otherwise, I welcome you to propose an objective argument that demonstrates otherwise.And I beg to differ that embryonic personhood is a naked fact of science, it isn't. Personhood is a legal concept, and its widely recognized there is no constitutional recognition of embryonic or fetal personhood.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?