Sanders: Communism Light...

[seer]

I believe the question was why does god allow so many die naturally in the womb?

Sin...

[Starlight]

So, are both of you atheists insisting that you know that there is a soul present at conception?

If God puts souls into people it would seem more sensible and more likely that he does it once it's clear that the individual will survive. So maybe at a few months or years after birth would seem the most kind of time frame.

That is one of the most avoided things among pro life, anti-abortion Christians.

Certainly on the discussions on this forum the anti-abortion crowd likes to disingenuously pretend their position isn't all about the soul. As a group they seem very dishonest.

[simplicio]

No, there sinply going by your assumption and wondering if that be the case why does god allow them to die naturally in the womb.

I know. I was yanking your chain, in the context of this forum it is funny, yet not trolling[. (though a sense of humor and a knowledge of Christian theology is needed)

So the question then is why does god allow them to die naturally in the womb?

A lot.

I believe the question was why does god allow so many die naturally in the womb?

How is accountability assigned?

In general, we differentiate between natural happenings, and things influenced by human agency. When we are talking religion, the phrase for natural happening is godidit.

[simplicio]

[QUOTE=Starlight;715454]snipped, included in response to JimL, on human agency, Divine will, and natural happenings.

Certainly on the discussions on this forum the anti-abortion crowd likes to disingenuously pretend their position isn't all about the soul. As a group they seem very dishonest.

Because for most, it is less about abortion and all the attendant theological issues, but more about a cultural consensus and political stance. Christianity is incarnational.

[Leonhard]

Is it too hard for God to have foreknowledge and know if a fetus would be aborted and refrain from putting a soul in it if that is going to happen? And if that's too hard, is it too hard for him to wait til after the abortion and then stick the soul of an aborted fetus into a newly conceived fetus?

Of all attempted defenses of abortion within a Christian ethics framework, done by a pro-abortionist, this has got to be the worst arguments I've seen.

[Starlight]

Of all attempted defenses of abortion within a Christian ethics framework, done by a pro-abortionist, this has got to be the worst arguments I've seen.

Reason?

[simplicio]

Reason?

Because it is reductionist, and from a Christian viewpoint, absurdly so.

An end of marriage (or the conjugal act), which is a virtuous relationship, is procreation and education, the emphasis on the soul of the baby or fetus is one narrow aspect of procreation, the metaphysical part of a biological process of reproduction.

[Tassman]

So, are both of you atheists insisting that you know that there is a soul present at conception?

That is one of the most avoided things among pro life, anti-abortion Christians. One the one hand we insist that ensoulment occurs at the moment of conception, and person hood is tied to the existence of the soul (same soul of Jesus who is our Savior).

[simplicio]

I, for one, do not accept the existence of 'souls' at all let alone when they are supposedly implanted. More significantly, it is only a relatively recent phenomenon that they were implanted at conception. The Jewish tradition was that it didn’t occur until the first breath – citing 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 soul”.

I would think that few atheists today accept the existence of a soul. Just as few would likely accept the existence of angels, persons without bodies.

The scholastics followed Aristotle, positing the soul at a short period after conception (I think a week) and a few weeks more for a girl child to 'get' the soul. Both Greek and Hebrew words for spirit also can mean breath. Soul and spirit are not exactly synonymous. Soul also carries the sense of life, so the medievals speculated that all animals had an animal soul, plants had a plant soul, but only man had a spiritual soul.

Complicating it is that we create following the divine example, the Lord placed a soul into Adam, the first man. So it is part of human nature to have a soul, the biological act of reproduction, a creative human act, results in a corresponding creative divine act of a soul which did not exist prior. We can trace the mechanics, eggs, nuclei, and DNA, of the body to assign an origin, but not the soul which has no size, shape, color, or anything to measure with a scientific instrument or register with our bodily senses.

Hence my comment about our blurred understanding of concepts of natural happening and goddidit.

[Sparko]

If God puts souls into people it would seem more sensible and more likely that he does it once it's clear that the individual will survive. So maybe at a few months or years after birth would seem the most kind of time frame.

Even if he did that, how would we know and it wouldn't absolve us of the guilt. We are still killing a human being. You don't even believe in a soul.

There are also Christians who believe we ARE a soul. A person is a soul, not that we are a spirit inhabiting a body.

Certainly on the discussions on this forum the anti-abortion crowd likes to disingenuously pretend their position isn't all about the soul. As a group they seem very dishonest.

I have never used a soul to argue abortion with atheists. It would be a waste of time and I think the fact that a fetus is a human being should be enough reason to not kill them.

[Tassman]

I would think that few atheists today accept the existence of a soul. Just as few would likely accept the existence of angels, persons without bodies.

All these hypotheses are incoherent notions.

[simplicio]

All these hypotheses are incoherent notions.

Incoherent to whom?

Incoherent has been used to describe notions like evolution and quantum theory, Catholicism and Protestantism, atheism and agnosticism. People's understanding may be incoherent.

[Leonhard]

Reason?

If you're operating within a Christian system of ethics, you don't proceed to make conclusions based on what God might do.

[Leonhard]

Tassman, repeating this, won't make it true. If you keep repeating this, we'll keep repeating the responses you never deal with.

The murder of a fetus has been condemned as early as the 1st and 2nd Century.



Orthodox Jews condemn abortion as murder

Source: myjewishlearning.com

At the same time, feticide is prohibited by Jewish law, though there is disagreement over the exact source of this prohibition and how serious an infraction it is. Some consider it biblical in origin based on a verse (Genesis 9.6) that prohibits shedding the . Moreover, Judaism teaches that the body is ultimately the property of God and is merely on loan to human beings.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture considers fetuses alive

Starting with the New Testament, Luke 1:41, 44 clearly reveals that babies were considered alive and responsive while still in their mother's womb. That means killing them would have been regarded as the same as murder. And that is something repeatedly condemned.

List of Church Father and Jewish Rabbis from 1st and 2nd Century condemning abortion

• I Enoch
• Sibylline Oracles
• Pseudo-Phocylides
• Flavius Josephus
• Didache
• Apocalypse of Peter
• Epistle of Barnabas
• Origen
• Athenagoras of Athens
• Tertullian
• I Enoch
• Cyprian
• Clement of Alexandria
• Hippolytus of Rome
• Basil the Great
• Jerome
• Apostolic Constitutions
• Synod of Elvira
• Synod Ancyra
• John Chrysostom
• 3rd ecumenical council (Chalcedon)

[rogue06]

Tassman, repeating this, won't make it true. If you keep repeating this, we'll keep repeating the responses you never deal with.

The murder of a fetus has been condemned as early as the 1st and 2nd Century.



Orthodox Jews condemn abortion as murder

Source: myjewishlearning.com

At the same time, feticide is prohibited by Jewish law, though there is disagreement over the exact source of this prohibition and how serious an infraction it is. Some consider it biblical in origin based on a verse (Genesis 9.6) that prohibits shedding the . Moreover, Judaism teaches that the body is ultimately the property of God and is merely on loan to human beings.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture considers fetuses alive

Starting with the New Testament, Luke 1:41, 44 clearly reveals that babies were considered alive and responsive while still in their mother's womb. That means killing them would have been regarded as the same as murder. And that is something repeatedly condemned.

List of Church Father and Jewish Rabbis from 1st and 2nd Century condemning abortion

• I Enoch
• Sibylline Oracles
• Pseudo-Phocylides
• Flavius Josephus
• Didache
• Apocalypse of Peter
• Epistle of Barnabas
• Origen
• Athenagoras of Athens
• Tertullian
• I Enoch
• Cyprian
• Clement of Alexandria
• Hippolytus of Rome
• Basil the Great
• Jerome
• Apostolic Constitutions
• Synod of Elvira
• Synod Ancyra
• John Chrysostom
• 3rd ecumenical council (Chalcedon)

But it's only a recent phenomena