Today was Sanctity of Life Sunday. The message today was on abortion. What does the Bible say about that?
The first major issue is, "When does a fetus become a life?" David in the Psalms says that God saw him in his mother's womb. When Mary went to visit her cousin, John the Baptist lept for joy at the presence of Jesus while they were both still in the womb. If the Bible makes it clear that a fetus is a life, it obviously makes it clear that it is wrong to take an innocent life. I think it's worded something like: "Thou shalt not kill." There is forgiveness for abortion, just like there is forgiveness for every other sin as long as there is true repentance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I'll play devils advocate.
The argument was never about murder, or the killing of life, the real argument lies in the question "what is life?" Is an apple life? In your point of view the answer is yes, and by eating it you are killing a tree.
What about immediately after consception. That single cell could not "jump for joy" does this mean that it is not life?
When in psalms that it states that God saw him in his mothers womb does not really prove that David was alive at the time. One could claim that God also sees the inside of volcanoes or the ground 4feet below you but that doesn't make those alive.
Point taken. What I will say to that is this:
Ps 139:16
16 Thine eyes have seen my unformed substance; and in Thy book they were all written, the days that were ordained {for me} when as yet there was not one of them.
(NAS)
You missed my last point. God saw David as an unformed substance. So what? God can see rocks, and clouds, but that doesn't mean that they are living. The second problem with using this verse is that unformed substance doesn't=living. All the rest of that verse is saying is that God knows how long you will live.
What this verse is saying is that every life is seen and recognized by God even before it begins. If God recognizes a life before it begins, how much more should we after conception? Again, I see your point, but I think your scraping the bottom of the barrel a little bit. The other thing to be considered is why do women get abortions.
According the the research wing of a major pro-choice group, 90% of abortions are for convenience. They aren't rape victims, they aren't being harmed by their unborn child, they just don't want to deal with a child. A big argument for abortion is that if a child wouldn't have a "good" life, then maybe it would be better if they weren't born.
There are millions of starving children all over the world. Should they all be killed because we can't solve world hunger?
On the other hand, I have a feeling I know your position, and I know you're trying to be difficult, so neither one of us is going to be satisfied by a response from the other.
If you want to go scientifically, a child has readable brain activity just a few days after conception. It doesn't take a long time for a child to be a "life," scientifically speaking.
Ps 139:13-16
13 For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother's womb.
14 I will give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Thy works, and my soul knows it very well.
15 My frame was not hidden from Thee, when I was made in secret, {and} skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth.
16 Thine eyes have seen my unformed substance; and in Thy book they were all written, the days that were ordained {for me} when as yet there was not one of them.
(NAS)
Oftentimes, I've also found that those playing devil's advocate are really more irritating than those that actually believe what it is they are arguing. The ones that really believe what they're defending aren't trying to get one particular response out of you, and they generally have better, less ridiculous arguments.
I wasn't trying to sound harsh on that last part, but I couldn't find a better word to describe Devil's advocate arguments. They have their place, but can get carried away.
again, i understand that the only reason i am arguing is to be annoying, and that you missed my point. the argument isn't about murder it is about the very definition of life. I didn't say you should kill unwanted babies. I said an unformed substance isn't life and therefore can't be killed. You define life as having a brain with readable function. that means that apples, trees, and jellyfish aren't actually living in your eyes. That means in your eyes the morning after pill is not actually abortion.
then again you do state that God recognizes life before it even existed (based on the verses you listed) which is a statement that I will ignore due to the Arminian vs. Calvinistic (freewill vs. Gods will) debate that would ultimately occur.
p.s. I can catch a clue you want to be left alone and i understand but I just couldn't let you have every one of your posts uncontested.
Post a Comment