Why Abortion Should Be Allowed in the Early Stages

[Ronald]

Look... I am not trying to be an antagonist here. I am sticking with the Bible.

Biological life begins at conception. Human life only begins when God imputes the soul to that biological life.

The body of Adam was lifeless and laying on the ground. Lifeless.

Not until the Lord breathed into the nostrils the human soul and spirit did Adam become the man who he was.

We need to better understand what human life is. We all understand biological life.

Jesus did not save your body. He saved your soul. On the Cross he crucified all our bodies so that our souls could live eternally.

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live,
but Christ lives in me." Gal 2:20a​

We keep getting our physical "I" confused with the essence of who we really are. That being, the soul "I."

"Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts
on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.
Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things.
For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God." Col 3:1-3​

Biological life is not the issue with God. God already sees our physical body as useless and dead. Only by His power of grace can our bodies be made to function in an acceptable way induced by God. Stillborn is God's way of say that the biological life is not what he loves. Its the soul in a body that causes God to love that person. Or, hate that person if that soul desires to be only evil.


God now sees our bodies as being dead.

Its our souls being made alive in the Spirit. Our bodies have been executed/crucified with Christ. Its the SOUL that is precious to God. For that very soul will be given a new type of resurrection body that will enable our soul to experience life so wonderfully as we can not even begin to imagine, nor dream.

In the mean time.. Not until God imputes the soul to the fetus when emerging from the womb (ek koliah) does God see a human being.

We as believers need to get this much right. Then a sound determination can be made. For the simple "life begins at conception" concept holds no power unless its what the Bible teaches. It does not teach that.

God wants us to become wise with His Word. If we do? It will confound and frustrate the evil liberals when we are made free from their stupid taunts because of knowing the Truth.

And, God only blesses truth, not good intentions. Keep in mind. Cain had good intentions when he offered his vegetables.

Ah, so you think the biological life in a human womb is not really human because you don't think it has a soul in its early stages. And so I suppose you think until the baby is out of the womb and breathing it cannot be identified as human? And according to your perception, the breath of life is this independent first breath the baby breathes?
Nonsense. Information contained in the genetic code of the egg and the sperm identifies it as a blueprint for a human. The breath of life given to Adam was not different. HE WAS FULLY GROWN and made him a living soul. The breath of life that is described as a living soul is exactly what the moment of conception occurs as well.It is that spark o LIFE, not some later time when the fetus is fully developed.
We buy seeds to plant specific plants or trees. They are not referred to as just random biological seeds. If it's an apple seed, it will grow an apple tree. It is dormant until that spark of life triggers it's growth ( water, soil, sun). With animals and humans it is not water, soil or the sun, it is God's breath of life.
You are distorting reality, in desperation to find a justifiable reason for abortion.
Life begins at conception. The fetus is human on day 1.

 

[hedrick]

Actually, given the text and context, it makes more sense that we have John, being filled with the Holy Spirit, leaping for HIS joy at the sound of Mary’s voice - because Mary was carrying Jesus. It’s a testimony to Jesus is what it is. The Spirit inside John knew Jesus was in the womb of Mary.

I agree that this is the intent of the passage. Whether it's credible is a different matter.

 

[Shimokita]

I don't agree with you.
But since you have already said that abortion is a sin, why worry about what we call it? Why do you think it a sin if you don't believe that the embryo that is destroyed is alive?
Sin is sin. In God's eyes the sin of murder is just as bad as the sin of manslaughter, or the sin of lying, gossiping, cheating etc. You say that abortion is sin; that is the important bit.

I don't think the OP actually believes that it is sin. I think that he is merely giving lip service to the idea that it is sin, because this is a Christian website and that is the majority view here.

What would someone say to me if I said "I believe that rape and murder are wrong" but the state must not prohibit people from raping and murdering because it restricts their personal freedom"?

He believes that early term abortion is "wrong" but does not want there to be any significant consequence for it, so he is merely giving lip service to it being wrong.

 

[hedrick]

He believes that early term abortion is "wrong" but does not want there to be any significant consequence for it, so he is merely giving lip service to it being wrong.

I doubt your ability to read minds.

 

[Semper-Fi]

That speaks of a baby being delivered prematurely and outside of the womb. It becomes a body and soul at that point. If the baby is then killed? That would be the equivalent of a post birth abortion.

In other words, if there was no injury caused to the infant, the perpetrator had only to pay damages because of whatever inconvenience or hardship might have been imposed on the parents. However, if his actions caused the unborn child to die, then he was sentenced to death!

 

[topher694]

Against my better judgment I just would like to add:

"Viable, viable, viable..."

Saying the same thing over and over does not strengthen an argument or make it true.

Part (only part) of what makes this argument so ridiculous is that it is limiting God to the technology and ability of man.

So a baby is "viable" in the third trimester because it can survive on its own. What about in 3rd world countries where they don't have access to the same technology as in the US and babies may not survive even in the third trimester? I guess God waits to put the spirit (not soul) into babies much later in those countries. What about 20 years ago, 40, 100? I guess God just had to wait for technology to catch up.

How about we consider about what is viable to God? Easy answer... With God all things are possible.

So, God only knew Jeremiah before the womb? So when you and I were born God was all like, "where did you come from? I didn't know you were gonna be here!"

This whole thing is nothing but an attempt to limit God to fit the social and political agenda of man.

 

[hedrick]

In other words, if there was no injury caused to the infant, the perpetrator had only to pay damages because of whatever inconvenience or hardship might have been imposed on the parents. However, if his actions caused the unborn child to die, then he was sentenced to death!

The problem with this and a couple of other passages is that they can be interpreted in at least two ways. I don't think this is the most likely

 

[Semper-Fi]

For a baby is born without teeth. No tooth for a tooth applies.

As it turns out, babies can be born with teeth.

 

[GenemZ]

.
Wrong. Jesus was Jesus in Mary's womb because, as the eternal Son of God, Second Person of the Trinity, He is eternal, with no beginning or end. As He said to the Father in John 17:4-5, "I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

Wrong. It says that Jesus (his humanity) was like us in every way, except with no sin nature.

How could he be born like us?

He has two natures. Humanity and Deity.

Keep in mind. God is "spirit." God is not "soul."

"Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers
will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the
kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.” Jn 4:23-24​

That being so? The pre-incarnate Jesus presented Himself to the Jews as the Lord Jehovah. Being not the Father (God), but their Lord God he was different from the Father whom was Deity only. No two natures with the Father!

The pre-incarnate Jesus existed eternally with two natures. As both Deity and Soul! Two natures even before the Incarnation!

Leviticus 26:10-12

'You will eat the old supply and clear out the old because of the new.
Moreover, I will make My dwelling among you, and My soul will not
reject you.'I will also walk among you and be your God, and you shall be My people."​

Judges 10:16

And they began to remove the foreign gods from their midst
and to serve Jehovah, so that his soul became impatient
because of the trouble of Israel.​

Psalm 11:5

Jehovah himself examines the righteous one as well as the wicked
one, and anyone loving violence his soul certainly hates.


Those passages we read that the Lord God was not only God. But also possessed a soul, making him the prototype for all men to be based upon in our design. We have been created in His Image in that sense!

It was with His eternal soul that the Lord God emptied Himself of His full right to be as God. (Philipns 2:6-8) And, with His eternal soul of Jehovah not being empowered by God? That soul entered the body born of Mary as he was out from the womb, like all people are born! He "made himself as a man." But, the sinless perfect man.

There is a lot to place on the plate if one keeps an open mind and wants to know God's ways better.

 

[hedrick]

Against my better judgment I just would like to add:

"Viable, viable, viable..."

I just read the original Roe v Wade decision. I expected to find that it set the cutoff as viability. It doesn't. It considers the end of the first trimester as the point where the mortality rate for childbirth is the same as abortion. I haven't found exactly comparable data for the date of the decision and now, but it appears that mortality due to abortion has gone down and mortality from childbirth has gone up. The increase may be due to changes in reporting, but it still doesn't suggest that there's anything that would invalidate the court's original decision.

They talked about viability, but it was just one of several things they looked at.

 

[GenemZ]

As it turns out, babies can be born with teeth.

I don't think that was the point being made there. Some babies are born with only one arm, as well.

 

[Semper-Fi]

It also speaks of the mother's health. For a baby is born without teeth. No tooth for a tooth applies.

You implied the mother would lose a tooth?

If the unborn child lost a tooth, then .......

 

[Sketcher]

I'm an evangelical Christian who believes that although abortion is sinful, it isn't murder, at least in the early trimesters before fetal viability, and that it should be permitted until the unborn child can survive on its own, as the mother is a living human being with her own rights and autonomy over her body.

I consider it to be murder post-viability in the third trimester, and would oppose it except for the life health of the mother.

Murder can best be defined as the unjustified killing of a living human being.

And contrary to what many people say, the Bible does not say that life begins at conception, but at ensoulment.

Genesis 2:7 - And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

Adam didn't become a living being until he was fully formed, until God created and infused a soul in him, not when he was still a collection of dust that God placed in the garden.

Obviously, this was a special case though, every human being alive now spent nine months as a fetus in their mother's womb, but the question is when was the fetus ensouled?

St. Augustine said that "
The law does not provide that the act abortion pertains to homicide,
for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation."

Thomas Aquinas said that "the intellective soul [true person] is created by God
at the completion of man's coming into being."

Jacques Martin said that to "admit that the human fetus receives the intellectual soul from the moment of its conception,when matter is in no way ready for it, sounds to me like a philosophical absurdity. It is as absurd as to call a fertilized ovum a baby."

Indeed. Just like it is absurd to call a planted acorn a tree.

You see, while Augustine felt abortion at any stage was sinful, he did not believe that early abortion —the first three months—was murder because the fetus had not been animated by a God-given soul yet. Likewise, Thomas Aquinas, and Popes Innocent III and Gregory XIV also believed that early abortion was not murder, while later ones were, after quickening, when the fetus starts moving and kicking.

As such, terminating a fetus in the early trimesters does not kill a living human being. Therefore, it is not murder. I agree with that principle.

Imagine if a woman, in a fit of jealously, rammed her car into her cheating boyfriend, grievously injuring him and irreparably damaging one of his vital organs. As a result, if he doesn't get an organ transplant he will likely die or be dead in two yearsfrom complications.

His girlfriend happens to be a perfect match; can the state force her to donate her organ to save her? No, they can't, and neither should they be able to, for she has bodily autonomy over her person, and no state can take that away from her.

The state can and should charge her with aggravated assault and, if he dies, vehicular manslaughter. But they should not be able to forcibly strap her to a medical exam room and extract a kidney from her, relegating her from womanhood to being a simple incubator.

The same logic applies with abortion, women are allowed to get abortions before viability because she has bodily autonomy, and she can't be forced to live as a human incubator.

When does ensoulment happen?

Jews have a tradition that states it is 40 days after conception. Why is it three months instead?

 

[Semper-Fi]

The labor was induced by the blow received.

This is called a miscarriage, that even a blow to the stomach will cause. That person is held responsible for any injury of the fetus , up to and including death.

It does not matter if the unborn was 2 months,
or 9 months old, a being was killed.

My mother even had a miscarriage in the toilet once.
That would have been a fellow family member.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Micarriages are not the mother's fault. If a woman wants to end her pregnancy, she gets an abortion.

 

[topher694]

I just read the original Roe v Wade decision. I expected to find that it set the cutoff as viability. It doesn't. It considers the end of the first trimester as the point where the mortality rate for childbirth is the same as abortion. I haven't found exactly comparable data for the date of the decision and now, but it appears that mortality due to abortion has gone down and mortality from childbirth has gone up. The increase may be due to changes in reporting, but it still doesn't suggest that there's anything that would invalidate the court's original decision.

They talked about viability, but it was just one of several things they looked at.

That may be, but I was more referring to the OP's constant use, yet inconsistent application of the term.

 

[GenemZ]

You implied the mother would lose a tooth?

If the unborn child lost a tooth, then .......

The judges would know that the baby will grow another tooth eventually.

On the other hand.. if the mother had a tooth knocked out? It could not be replaced in their day. A tooth for a tooth was the law.

That law was there to make people not want to fight...

 

[Semper-Fi]

Micarriages are not the mother's fault. If a woman wants to end her pregnancy, she gets an abortion.

What if A man hits a woman, and causes a miscarriage.
The man would be at fault, what punishment he merit ?

(Exodus 21:22-23)

 

[GenemZ]

That may be, but I was more referring to the OP's constant use, yet inconsistent application of the term.

Viability means that the fetus if born prematurely up to a certain point where God would impute a human soul. If a one month fetus miscarries or is aborted? No way would God have given that a human soul. That is where the viability matter comes in. Viability may be described the point of development where once out side the womb the child can live.

 

[GenemZ]

What if A man hits a woman, and causes a miscarriage.
The man would be at fault, what punishment he merit ?

In those days children were seen as an asset. They were often times helpers on the farm, etc. Also, if it were his first and only son, a man would have no one to pass on his inheritance.