We know the ultra-conservative, fundamentalist Christians claim He does, but does God really perform an instantaneous, supernatural, transcendental magic act every time a human egg and sperm unite? Does God really create a brand new, never-before-existing, separate, complete, eternal, everlasting, sovereign, human being at every conception? What evidence do you have to support such a claim? It’s not in the Bible and there’s no scientific evidence to support it, so where did this religious belief come from?
2006-12-26 05:49:44 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Jhn 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
Isa 44:24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I [am] the LORD that maketh all [things]; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Isa 46:3 Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, which are borne [by me] from the belly, which are carried from the womb:
Isa 49:5 And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb [to be] his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD, and my God shall be my strength.
A logical argument against abortion
Many people will refuse to accept God's word as a standard by which they should live and make decisions. That is their right to reject it. Nevertheless, I offer the following as reasons for not having abortions.
What is growing in the womb of the woman is alive.
Even one celled creatures are alive.
What is growing in the woman is more than a one celled creature.
The nature of the life in the woman is human.
It is the product of human DNA, therefore it's nature, its essence is undeniably human.
Because it is human in nature, if left to live, it will result in a fully developed human baby.
Humans are humans not because they have feet, hands, walk vertically, and speak, etc. Not all people have feet, hands, can walk, and speak. They are humans because of their nature, their essence, not because of physical abilities or disabilities.
A person born without arms and legs is still human.
A person who cannot speak is still human.
A person in a coma, helpless, unaware, unmoving, is still human by nature and it is wrong to murder such a person.
What is growing in the womb does not have the nature of an animal, a bird, or a fish. It has human nature.
If it is not human in nature, then what nature is it?
If it is not human in nature, then does it have a different nature than human?
If so, then from where did it get this different nature since the only sources of its nature are human egg and and human sperm?
Objection: A cell in the body has human DNA and is alive and it is okay to kill it. So, it doesn't make any difference with a fetus.
Though it is true that a cell in the human body has DNA and is alive, a cell (muscle cell, skin cell, etc.) has the nature of being only what it is -- not a human. In other words, a muscle cell is by nature a muscle cell. A skin cell is by nature a skin cell. But, the fertilized egg of a human is by nature that very thing which becomes a fully developed human. Its nature is different than that of a muscle or skin cell because they do not grow into humans. Therefore, they are not the same thing.
A fertilized human egg has the nature of human development and it is alive. This is not so with a muscle or skin cell.
To abort the life, which is human in nature, is to kill that which is human in nature.
Therefore, abortion is killing a life which is human by nature.
Where, then, does the mother get the right to kill the human within her?
A question for those who believe in abortion and that the life in the womb is not human. Is it okay to take a fertilized egg between a man and a woman and place it in the womb of a dog?
If you say no, then why? If it is not human then it doesn't matter, right?
If you say no because it will become a human then you admit that it has human nature and is alive. If it is human in nature and alive, then you do not have the right to abort it.
If you say it is alright, why is it okay?
2006-12-26 05:56:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
In Islam ALLAH decides when to breathe a soul into the fetus making it a human being. Until that happens the fetus is just a fetus without purpose. It is only when ALLAH decides to breathe a soul into the unborn that it becomes a human and has a purpose. As to abortion in Islam that is murder and you can be punished for it by ALLAH unless you choose to repent and promise ALLAH never to get an abortion again. The only time abortion is allowed in Islam is when the risk of the mother's life is at danger if she continues with her pregnancy. Meaning if continuing with the pregnancy might cause the mother to die than it is ok and ALLAH will not find fault with that woman.
2006-12-26 06:51:45 · answer #2 · answered by robedzombiesoul 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The real question is about identical twins. Does the second soul get created with the first cell division or do both souls have to share the same cell until then? Do they have half-souls?
And what about vestigal twins? Did they get souls? Are their successful twins murderers?
The ancients who wrote the Bible didn't know about human eggs. They just thought it was the guy's "seed" and the woman was just a receptacle. They left us with all these questions....
2006-12-26 06:01:22 · answer #3 · answered by skepsis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Is the whole GOD, issue gonna be brought up every time someone says baby? the fact of the matter is that You,I,and Everyone else giving their opinion was once a fetus, someone gave us the gift of life, does it really matter who? every fetus deserves the same chance we got,and every person has a right to their own opinion regardless of their affiliation. We should stop forcing our beliefs on people and let everyone deal with the consequences of their actions.
2006-12-26 06:03:13 · answer #4 · answered by dfalllenangel 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Acts 17:28
By him we have life and move and exist
Ps. 36:9
With you [ Jehovah God ] is the source of life
Rom. 14:12
Each of us will render an account for himself to god.
Ps. 139:13-16
You [Jehovah] kept me screened off in the belly of my mother... Your eyes saw even the embryo of me, and in your book all its parts were down in writing
2006-12-26 05:58:55 · answer #5 · answered by mrs.mom 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
this completely breaks down when you apply logic to the problem, if "murdering" a fertilized egg is bad because god gave the egg a "soul" and murdering embryonic stem cell is bad because they are derived from a fertilized egg, at what point does it become okay to "murder" individual cells? they are all derived from the fertilized egg, is taking a tissue sample the same as being a serial killer??
2006-12-26 05:57:47 · answer #6 · answered by Nick F 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It is a fact that the Christian God is the world's most prolific abortionist. Daily on earth thousands of women undergo a spontaneous abortion - often times unaware they were even pregnant in the first place. That makes God one prolific abortionist...
2006-12-26 05:53:38 · answer #7 · answered by YDoncha_Blowme 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
It is in the Bible when God said
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you; and I ordained you a prophet to the nations." JEREMIAH 1:5
2006-12-26 05:54:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, it's just something people said back then because they didn't know any better. Now that we know the scientific truth, we don't need god no more.
2006-12-26 05:55:40 · answer #9 · answered by Cold Fart 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
the truth doesn't need to be believed. That's what truth is.
2006-12-26 05:52:57 · answer #10 · answered by jinenglish68 5 · 1⤊ 6⤋