 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:17 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | Do you think it should be illegal to swat flies? |
No.
| Quote: | | Do you think it should be illegal to destroy embryos? |
Yes.
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8230
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But flies feel more suffering than embryos do when you harm them, so why should it be illegal to kill the one which feels less suffering, while allowing people to kill the one which feels more suffering?
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | But flies feel more suffering than embryos do when you harm them, so why should it be illegal to kill the one which feels less suffering, while allowing people to kill the one which feels more suffering? |
The issue, as I see it, isn't about suffering. It's about the sanctity of human life. (BTW, how did McCain/Obama answer this question?)
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8230
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mattathias wrote: |
The issue, as I see it, isn't about suffering. It's about the sanctity of human life.
|
Assume for a second that stem cell research requires the destruction of embryos. What about the sanctity of the lives of the people who will be saved by the research?
| Mattathias wrote: |
(BTW, how did McCain/Obama answer this question?) |
I don't know; I didn't watch the interviews.
However, no U.S. president in history (and especially not G.W. Bush) has ever held human life to be sacred. The job necessarily involves killing people.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | Assume for a second that stem cell research requires the destruction of embryos. What about the sanctity of the lives of the people who will be saved by the research? |
The sanctity of life of the former must, without their consent, be taken from them to preserve the sanctity of life for the latter. Someone is given a choice in this scenario and someone is not. I stand on the side of those who are denied the opportunity to give their consent.
| Quote: | | I don't know; I didn't watch the interviews. |
I don't believe they were asked. We seem to be drifting away from the OP.
| Quote: | | However, no U.S. president in history (and especially not G.W. Bush) has ever held human life to be sacred. The job necessarily involves killing people. |
Just one more reason that you will not find my name on a presidential ballot.
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8230
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mattathias wrote: |
The sanctity of life of the former must, without their consent, be taken from them to preserve the sanctity of life for the latter. Someone is given a choice in this scenario and someone is not. I stand on the side of those who are denied the opportunity to give their consent. |
By 'those who are denied the opportunity to give their consent', you're talking about groups of a few dozen cells...
How, by any stretch of the imagination, is a tiny group of cells a person? Don't you think you're throwing away a lot of information to make this definition stick?
You kill more human cells every time you sneeze than are lost when one of these embryos is destroyed...
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | By 'those who are denied the opportunity to give their consent', you're talking about groups of a few dozen cells... |
I'm talking about an embryo; a human life.
| Quote: | | How, by any stretch of the imagination, is a tiny group of cells a person? |
Please see my previous comments on conception.
| Quote: | | Don't you think you're throwing away a lot of information to make this definition stick? |
Perhaps. But is it not possible to obtain this same information from other stem cell research? Research that does not require that taking of a life?
| Quote: | | You kill more human cells every time you sneeze than are lost when one of these embryos is destroyed... |
I believe you are confusing "cells" with "human life" in this statement.
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8230
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mattathias wrote: |
| Quote: | | How, by any stretch of the imagination, is a tiny group of cells a person? |
Please see my previous comments on conception.
|
If a human becomes a soul at conception, then how do you explain twins and chimeras? What happens when one fertilized embryo splits into two and becomes identical twins? Do they both share one soul? Does each get half a soul? Does one get a soul, and the other has no soul?
Also, what *theological* reasons do you have for believing that ensoulment happens at conception?
It never says this in the Bible, so why do you believe it?
| Mattathias wrote: |
| Quote: | | Don't you think you're throwing away a lot of information to make this definition stick? |
Perhaps. But is it not possible to obtain this same information from other stem cell research? Research that does not require that taking of a life? |
You've misunderstood my meaning. By 'throwing away information', I'm not talking about the potential information which we could get from research; I'm talking about your willingness to equate the importance of a single cell to that of a fully-grown and functional human. In order to make that comparison stick, you have to throw away a whole lot of information.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | If a human becomes a soul at conception, then how do you explain twins and chimeras? What happens when one fertilized embryo splits into two and becomes identical twins? Do they both share one soul? Does each get half a soul? Does one get a soul, and the other has no soul? |
They are both souls.
| Quote: | | Also, what *theological* reasons do you have for believing that ensoulment happens at conception? |
Begetting is the act of a father, conception is the act of a mother, to bring a human being into existence. This is how God's command to multiply (Genesis 1:28) is accomplished.
When and how do you believe a person comes into being?
| Quote: | | You've misunderstood my meaning. By 'throwing away information', I'm not talking about the potential information which we could get from research; I'm talking about your willingness to equate the importance of a single cell to that of a fully-grown and functional human. In order to make that comparison stick, you have to throw away a whole lot of information. |
In that case, my response to your question would be no.
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8230
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mattathias wrote: |
| Quote: | | Also, what *theological* reasons do you have for believing that ensoulment happens at conception? |
Begetting is the act of a father, conception is the act of a mother, to bring a human being into existence. This is how God's command to multiply (Genesis 1:28) is accomplished. |
I don't see how this is a theological argument that ensoulment happens at conception. It is just as easily an argument that ensoulment happens at birth.
| Mattathias wrote: |
When and how do you believe a person comes into being? |
It's a sliding scale. At conception, an egg is fertilized, and we have one human cell. It is no more or less significant than any other human cell. Over approximately 9 months it grows and develops. At some point its nervous system has developed sufficiently so that it can feel pain. This is as reasonable a time as any to call it a 'person', since it is our nervous systems which are the most important part of being human.
Ensoulment can't happen at conception because if it did, then abortion would be a very bad thing. Abortions were widespread in the ancient world, and yet there isn't a single verse in the Bible forbidding them. Jesus never talks about it even once. They were practiced all the time back then, so Jesus would have been aware of them (not to mention that he's the son of God, so should have some level of omnipotence about these things). If Jesus thought that abortions were bad, he would have mentioned it in his teachings. But he didn't.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 1:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | I don't see how this is a theological argument that ensoulment happens at conception. It is just as easily an argument that ensoulment happens at birth. |
A person is a soul. Birth is the moment when a person is able to survive outside of the mothers womb.
| Quote: | | It's a sliding scale. |
This is obviously where you and I disagree. Playing "sliding scale" with a human life is repugnant.
| Quote: | | At some point its nervous system has developed sufficiently so that it can feel pain. This is as reasonable a time as any to call it a 'person', since it is our nervous systems which are the most important part of being human. |
"As reasonable time as any"...except if that time happens to be the moment of conception?
| Quote: | | Ensoulment can't happen at conception because if it did, then abortion would be a very bad thing. |
That's a remarkable rationale.
| Quote: | | Abortions were widespread in the ancient world, and yet there isn't a single verse in the Bible forbidding them. Jesus never talks about it even once. They were practiced all the time back then, so Jesus would have been aware of them (not to mention that he's the son of God, so should have some level of omnipotence about these things). If Jesus thought that abortions were bad, he would have mentioned it in his teachings. But he didn't. |
Could you direct me to your source of information for abortion practices/statistics for first century Judaism?
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8230
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mattathias wrote: |
A person is a soul. Birth is the moment when a person is able to survive outside of the mothers womb.
|
A person has both body and mind/consciousness/soul. It's silly to say that a person is simply a soul.
| Mattathias wrote: |
| Quote: | | It's a sliding scale. |
This is obviously where you and I disagree. Playing "sliding scale" with a human life is repugnant.
|
No it isn't. If anything, using grossly binary reasoning to approximate an extremely nuanced topic is repugnant because so much information is ignored and thrown away.
There is nothing special about a fertilized egg. It's just a single cell. To equate a single cell with a human being is ridiculous. It completely devalues human life. A human contains literally trillions of cells. A fertilized egg is a single cell. If you can't see the difference, then your reasoning is massively flawed.
One could argue that it's a 'potential' human, but this argument has at least two major flaws:
1. It takes considerably more time, energy, and growth for that single cell to become a human being. You're completely ignoring this.
2. The technology exists to clone a human from any cell with DNA in it. This means that every single human cell is a 'potential person'. If this is your criterion for personhood, then every time you scratch your nose, you're committing a holocaust.
| Mattathias wrote: |
| Quote: | | At some point its nervous system has developed sufficiently so that it can feel pain. This is as reasonable a time as any to call it a 'person', since it is our nervous systems which are the most important part of being human. |
"As reasonable time as any"...except if that time happens to be the moment of conception?
|
Yes, that's probably the least reasonable time.
| Mattathias wrote: |
Could you direct me to your source of information for abortion practices/statistics for first century Judaism? |
Abortion was common in the ancient world, and certainly in ancient Greece and Rome:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_abortion
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | A person has both body and mind/consciousness/soul. It's silly to say that a person is simply a soul. |
You either aren't familiar with the Hebrew concept of man or you are and find it silly.
| Quote: | | Abortion was common in the ancient world, and certainly in ancient Greece and Rome: |
Thanks. But my interest and inquiry is in regard to abortion practices/statistics for first century Judaism.
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pondering
King of the Jungle
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Posts: 1508
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: |
[ If Jesus thought that abortions were bad, he would have mentioned it in his teachings. But he didn't. |
He also didn't say anything about slavery. You propose we bring that institution back?
My take on the 4 books that purport to say what Jesus said (The Gospels of Matt, Mark, Luke and John) focus on "the next life" or individual responsibility... not so much on group social policy....
_________________
Links of note:"Review for Doubting Christians"
Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs
“You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong...You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.” - Ronald Reagan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 8230
Location: Victoria, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mattathias wrote: |
Thanks. But my interest and inquiry is in regard to abortion practices/statistics for first century Judaism. |
My point is that abortions have been around for thousands of years. Jesus would have been aware of them, and yet he didn't say a single word against them in his teachings. This should give you pause.
Do you *seriously* think that God considers abortions to be murder? According to Christians, God is omniscient. This means that in 3000 B.C., God could see what a big deal the whole abortion debate was going to be in 2008. You've got a lot of explaining to do if you want everyone to believe that God thinks abortions to be an abomination.
Why on Earth would He have neglected to mention the evil of abortions in the Bible? If they were that bad, wouldn't He have EXPLICITLY condemned them? He goes on in detail about the taboo of eating shellfish at certain times! You seriously think it would have slipped His mind to mention abortion, if it really was that bad???
And it gets even worse: Not only does He not mention it in the OT, but Jesus never mentions it in the New Testament, either!
And what's more, God and Jesus don't even provide us with the means of DERIVING that abortion is wrong! Never once in the Bible does it mention when ensoulment happens!
The only reasonable conclusion to come to is that God does not consider abortions to be murder.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
