Does the Bible say that the unborn are human?

[AgnosticBoy]

I believe most definitions of murder involve an unjustifiable killing of human being. I want to know if the Bible defines a fetus as a human, and if not, how or why is terminating a fetus wrong.

For Debate:
Does the Bible say that the unborn are considered human?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

For Debate:
Does the Bible say that the unborn are considered human?

Well, at least Exodus 21:22-23 considers an unborn baby to be a "life", and one that is still valued or treated the same as any other human life. Here are the passages below:

22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely[e] 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.

Here's a good article that goes through the Christian thinking on abortion:

The Catholic Church and Abortion

Church Has Always Condemned Abortion By Fr. William Saunders

www.catholicnewsagency.com

It seems that a fetus is not valued as a life just in terms of its biology, but also in terms of its future potential (to develop into a human, have purpose later on, etc).

From the above link:

Likewise, the prophet Jeremiah recalled, "The word of the Lord came to me thus: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I dedicated you, a prophet to the nations I appointed you" (Jer 1:4-5).

 

[medusa53]

I agree with the reply above from Exodus and I don't think that God would have told Adam and Ever to go forth and multiply if He did not consider a fetus as a living being. On a different note ; if a pregnant woman is killed and the baby also dies...no matter how far along she is, why is it called a double homicide?

 

[Bill]

The anti-abortion brigade, typically but not exclusively white conservative males, claim it is murder to kill and unborn child. And it is hard to argue against such logic. But the point is, that in the first trimester the development of the fetus is not close to being an entity that meets the definition of a child.

If the criteria here is that we have something that will grow into a child, it would seem to me that menstruation could be classed as the killing of an unborn child.

I think that there should be a time limit on when women are permitted to save their own lives at the expense of the ability of a fetus to continue to term, and that limit is the end of the first trimester.

 

[medusa53]

An abortion is a choice, a menstruation cycle is not. Looking at the statistics, you will see that abortions performed because the womans life is at stake; hardly registers on the scale; as well as rape or incest. I am answering my opinion according to The Bible. I think your mind was pretty much made up before you asked the question. We just have different views.

 

[Bill]

According to the bible? Perhaps we should campaign to turn the USA into a theocracy: that would tell those non-believers where to get off.

If a fetus is to be protected purely because it may turn into a child, then one would think the "prolife" brigade would also campaign for the preservation of all human ova, not just those that have been fertilized.

Please do remind me: what question did I ask when my mind was pretty much made up?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

If the criteria here is that we have something that will grow into a child, it would seem to me that menstruation could be classed as the killing of an unborn child.

Ah, that's a good point to consider. Why or where the Christian draws the line with just "potential" might be arbitrary. But if we're going by what the Bible says, then medusa has a point. It draws the line at the point of conception. Why it does that or whether it is reasonable is a whole other topic.

 

[medusa53]

Please excuse me; I didn't mean the question you asked. I meant when you decided who this or that " brigade" consisted of. Just sounded kind of harsh. And, did you know that only 1.14% of all abortions one in the USA are because the mothers life is at risk? 96.50% of all abortions are choice. I just don't see why a person wouldn't choose to take a pill and avoid all of the trouble and expense to taxpayers.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

On a different note ; if a pregnant woman is killed and the baby also dies...no matter how far along she is, why is it called a double homicide?

It's because the unborn child or fetus is considered a life.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

If the criteria here is that we have something that will grow into a child, it would seem to me that menstruation could be classed as the killing of an unborn child.

Ah, that's a good point to consider. Why or where the Christian draws the line with just "potential" might be arbitrary. But if we're going by what the Bible says, then medusa has a point. It draws the line at the point of conception. Why it does that or whether it is reasonable is a whole other topic.

On second thought, some might say that God's actions towards Onan might validate your point, Bill. It's not just menstruation but even masturbation...

Genesis 38:8-10
8 And Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and marry her, and raise up an heir to your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the heir would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in to his brother’s wife, that he emitted on the ground, lest he should give an heir to his brother. 10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD; therefore He killed him also.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Continuing from my last post... Here's a good summary on how the story of Onan factors into the biblical position on life...

God slew Onan because the man contemptuously refused to fulfill his familial responsibility under the Old Covenant. This particular practice is called levirate marriage, in which a dead man's closest unmarried male relation (usually a younger brother, as in this case) married the widow to produce an heir for the dead man. This duty is spelled out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10 to preserve tribal inheritance rights (verse 6). Another, happier circumstance of levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth, an event that eventually produced Israel's greatest king, David (Ruth 4:17).

Catholic doctrine uses Onan's story to prohibit the use of birth control. However, this is specious reasoning, based on an ancient and flawed notion that sexual relations between a man and his wife are only for the purpose of producing children. God's anger against Onan had everything to do with his failure to fulfill his covenantal obligation, and nothing to do with his method of birth control. Scripture does not directly contemplate the use of birth control, and thus, aside from abortion, it is a matter of personal preference within what God has revealed as proper Christian living. We can be guided by the principles of personal responsibility—stewardship of one's resources to provide for children (I Timothy 5:8)—and love toward one's mate (Ephesians 5:22-33).

Source: https://www.cgg.org/index.cfm/library/bqa/id/64/why-did-god-slay-onan-genesis-383-10.htm


The only thing I would add is that if a brother doesn't follow through with a levirate marriage then that doesn't mean he dies. Deuteronomy 25:5-10 makes no mention of that refusing such marriages amount to a capital offense. Onan may've been killed because of his deceptive way, that is, pretending to go along with a levirate marriage, while clearly not wanting it, as seen by his action of "spilling his seed".

Interesting stuff! I'd like to see a good debate on the topic between a Christian apologist and someone else.

 

[medusa53]

The difference between menstruation and masturbation is clear; one is by choice. The sin was committed when he CHOSE to rebel against God.

 

[Bill]

A god like that tends to push me towards atheism: mankind does not need a vengeful god. We already have enough homicidal psychopaths without adding a supernatural one to the mix.

 

[medusa53]

I know that it is hard to understand God sometimes; but only God knows who that "spilled seed" may have ended up being. On the other side of the coin; God is a very loving and forgiving God. I can testify to that myself. I once saw God as this big meanie holding a magnifying glass over us ants but I had it all wrong. I also thought He should give me whatever I wanted but discovered He is no a genie. No one forced me to turn to God; I didn't feel pushed. I just opened my eyes to all the good He was doing in my life, even though I was a mess, and asked Him to please help me straighten up.

 

[Bill]

On more than one occasion, scripture informs us that Yahweh must have slaughtered numerous babies and children as collateral damage to destroy evil adults he abhorred. It would seem that his superpowers lacked any degree of finesse. I have no desire or intent to try to weaken your faith but just let you know why it is not mine.

And it is not impossible for Yahweh to have evolved into a kinder god. Evolution is the natural way of all things, perhaps even those of a supernatural nature.

 

[Chapabel]

Jer.1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.​

 

[Chapabel]

A god like that tends to push me towards atheism: mankind does not need a vengeful god. We already have enough homicidal psychopaths without adding a supernatural one to the mix.

Trust me Bill it is Satan pushing you toward atheism. In fact he’s playing you like a fiddle.

 

[Bill]

A persuasive argument that Satan exists would be almost as welcome. (but as unlikely), that there is one or more gods out there. I would be able to trust you more if your case had some degree of persuasiveness about it.

 

[Chapabel]

I have presented all the evidence I intend to. You thumb your nose at all of it and then ask for more. Read the Bible if you truly want to know. Until then don’t ask for any more.

 

[Bill]

Quoting the bible and giving personal anecdotes does not amount to a shred of evidence. And, pray, what evidence have you ever presented that Satan exists?