I’m trying to reconcile what scripture says with the common belief that abortion is murder. Can anyone point me to scripture that builds that gap?
- Thread starter kv100
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Adam didn't live for nine months in a females womb . I can c by your posts that u have all the answers . U have made your mind up long ago and don't intend to ever change it . That's ok , we r all allowed to do that . It must b nice to b so convinced that u r right on every count . I have found that as I have lived and gained life experiences , my thoughts and feelings about many things have changed over the years . That still happens to me now . Same thing when I read God's Word , even after 30 years I'm still learning and contemplating what I read as if it was new to me . One thing I try to keep in my mind is that , one day , I'm going to have to stand in front of Jesus , that gentle , kind , loving man , who suffered so much in order to bring me to God , and I shall have to give account of myself , my whole self , words , deeds , thoughts , feelings and beliefs . He will and in fact he does ! every day ! look into my heart and mind , and he knows me . Better than I know me . That's true of all of us . Now none of us is perfect and for sure we can say that there r some things that seem a bit uncertain or unclear to us , so there is room for individual interpretation . However , some things r very clearly stated . If we can't c those things that r very clear , how can we hope to understand those things that r a bit vaguer ? May God bless u on your journey as u grown , in understanding and appreciation of your Saviour .
I'm going to share something quite personal . My grandad was a P.O.W. in Burma in WW2 . He was brought up in a large family in extreme poverty . He volunteered at the start of WW2 , aged just turned 19 . He was literally starving . He thought if he joined the army he might just get something to eat . He never saw one German , he fought the Japanese . They used mustard gas , he lost a lung . He killed many Japanese in hand to hand combat with a knife ( I could go into details but it would b too long , maybe some other time ) then he was captured and was a P.O.W. for 3 and a half years . He was 6ft 2inches , the Japanese hated tall people . When liberated he weighed less than 100lbs . They didn't send them straight home but they were sent to India for 6 months to get their health back and put some weight on . My grandad adored India and the people there . He had never known such kindness and generosity as the people of India showed him and his buddies . Cut to 2001 . He's dying of cancer , at home , surrounded by children and grandchildren . He's terrified , he doesn't want to die . Why ? Fear . Fear of all the men he killed , dozens . Fear that God will punish him . It made absolutely no difference what any of us said to him . As far as he was concerned he murdered those men . He hated them , but he didn't think that gave him the right to murder them . He was inconsolable . Only the morphine eased him . So , we can all theorise but , unless we have done these things ourselves , we cannot assume or presume to know how we , or others may or may not feel , having done things that torture their conscience .
I have. You are correct. in this case the sacrifice was to Molech the pagan god of fertility (wealth and ease). The very definition of "Convenience Abortions".
I tend to concur with the idea that a person should be recognized as alive when human pattern brain waves can be detected that is at least consistent with our understanding of death. After brain waves cease, there are living human cells that could in theory be protected and encouraged to grow into a new, physically alive person, yet we find excuses not to follow such a path, and I concur. As for what to do after human pattern brainwaves are detectable, I would suggest that abortion be allowed only after a judicial ruling that the very specific abortion be allowed for some medically justifiable reason, such as the mother's life or some fatal, detectable genetic defect in the fetus, but not because the fetus is inconvenient, there was plenty of time for such an abortion prior to the brain wave detection. Refusal to follow these guidelines and have an unauthorized abortion would then be an acceptable criminal matter to my mind, although I would nto suggest a specific penalty and rather leave that to state level legislatures.
More likely, the reference is to Isaiah 64:8 that says, Oh Lord,…we are the clay and you are the potter. We are all the work of your hand.” Or, Jeremiah 18, “…can I not do with you as this potter does? declares the Lord. Like clay in the potters hand, so are you in my hand. “
Not abortion.
Born children were placed upon the Moloch extended "hands". Then a lever system lifted them up and into its "mouth".
...and there you have it. A distinction without a difference.
Precious friend, how about "What Saith The Scripture?":
"Behold I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Psalms 51:5 AV)
David had an identity at conception, eh?-------------
And, precious friend(s), Please Be Very Richly Encouraged and Edified
In The Lord Jesus Christ and In His Precious Word Of Truth, Rightly
Divided:
The Bible: The BIG Picture
Amen.
David there was referring to how his mother became pregnant. It isn't z reference to describe how all people are conceived.
Psalm 127
Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one's youth. Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.
Deut. 19:10 " That innocent blood BE NOT SHED in thy land, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for and inheritance, and so blood be upon thee." You can"t be anymore innocent than a child in their mothers womb.
In ' the old days ' which means , not that long ago , they didn't know anything about brain waves or human cells that can live after death or wether the mother's life was in danger or detectable genetic defects , there were no guidelines etc . The time span that all or any of these things have been known is infinitesimal compared to how long we haven't known about any of those things . Before that , people , especially pregnant women , just had to rely on their God , whichever one they happened to believe in . This was the state of affairs for thousands of years across all civilizations and cultures . I wonder how God feels about these medical reasons we now apply to what used to b His domain .
My reasoning is not anti-Scriptural but rather para-Biblical, because the issue of abortion is not specifically addressed.
The passages you cited do not specify at what point the fertilized egg is deemed to be no different from a born baby, so that its end should be mourned in the same way.
Luke 1:41 indicates it is at least by the time a baby can "leap" in the womb.
Gen. 25:22 indicates it is at least by the time twins can "jostle" each other in the womb.
Exo. 21:22 indicates it is at least by the time a baby can be born prematurely and survive.
Psa. 139:16 indicates it is before the baby came to be.
Thus, Christians must employ divine logic in order to persuade atheists abortion and extra-marital fornication
that results in unwanted babies are wrong.
Deut. 28:4, 15&18 do not declare unborn babies to be morally accountable!
It means that those who do not obey the Lord will reap the just curse/consequences.
Thus, the issue is indeed open to debate, which is why it is wise to employ the reasoning I recommended if you want society
to stop accepting sexual immorality and abortion as a birth control method.
Re "How can u not think that ending another person's life isn't murder ? What else is it then ?"
Possibly capital punishment, justifiable homicide, God's will, abortion before sentience/personhood, etc.
Re "What makes us humans think that's it's EVER ok to kill another human being ? eg self defense or in a time of war ?"
Yes, etc.
Your entire “para‑Biblical” argument collapses because Scripture already gives the category you claim is missing — personhood grounded in God’s creative act, not human developmental milestones — and every text you cited actually undermines your sentience‑threshold model, because Luke 1, Genesis 25, Exodus 21, and Psalm 139 do not give minimums (“at least by the time X happens”), they give recognitions of persons who already exist; your reasoning treats biblical descriptions of fetal activity as indicators of when personhood begins, but the texts treat those activities as expressions of persons who were already known, named, blessed, judged, or protected by God before those activities occurred; your claim that “the issue is open to debate” is not a biblical conclusion but a philosophical concession — Scripture never defines moral accountability by neurological development, never ties covenant membership to brain function, never treats the unborn as morally neutral tissue, and never suggests that society must determine personhood because God left it ambiguous; Deut 28 does not need to say “the unborn are morally accountable” because the curses fall on the fruit of the womb, which only makes sense if the womb contains persons under covenant blessing or curse, and your attempt to reinterpret that as mere “consequence” ignores the fact that covenant curses only fall on covenant members; your “divine logic” is not divine — it’s natural theology trying to fill a gap that Scripture does not leave open, and your strategy of persuading atheists by adopting a sentience‑threshold is not persuasion but surrender, because it trades the biblical foundation (God’s creative act, God’s image, God’s covenant claim) for a secular criterion God never gives; the Bible’s logic is simple: if God forms, knows, names, blesses, judges, and protects the unborn, then the unborn are persons, and if the unborn are persons, then intentional killing of the innocent is morally identical to any other homicide — the civil penalty is determined by lawful authority, but the moral category is fixed.
I know my "argument" does not collapse for those who are open to truth, because I was a naive pro-choice person before I converted to being pro-life, but learning about fetal development prompted me to amend my view.
The meanings of the texts are debatable, which is why the issue is being debated and right reasoning is required in order to resolve the disagreement.
Deut. 28 should be updated/amended in light of Ezek. 18 & 20.
You also fail to address the abortion issue fully, advocating funerals and capital punishment for the death or killing of a one-second old zygote. Instead, I note that you want to assign punishment for abortion to "civil authority", when you ought to take responsibility for the execution of unrepentant serial murderers--both women and men who abetted the abortion.
Your reply doesn’t salvage your model because you’re still assuming that “debate” equals “biblical ambiguity,” but disagreement among people does not mean disagreement in Scripture; the texts you cite don’t give thresholds for personhood — they give recognitions of persons already known, blessed, judged, or protected by God, which means your developmental‑milestone logic is imported, not exegeted; updating Deut 28 “in light of Ezek 18 & 20” is not hermeneutics but revisionism, because Ezekiel clarifies individual moral responsibility, not the nature of prenatal personhood, and it never overturns covenant categories God Himself established; your charge that I “fail to address abortion fully” by implying funerals or capital punishment for a one‑second zygote is a rhetorical overreach,
I never said that, and Scripture never requires that, because civil authority determines penalties, not private theologians, and the moral category (intentional killing of the innocent) does not automatically dictate the civil sentence; your insistence that I must personally “take responsibility for executions” is not biblical ethics but vigilante logic — the same Paul who calls abortion murder also says the sword belongs to lawful authority, not to individuals; and your appeal to your former pro‑choice experience doesn’t strengthen your argument, because personal biography is not a hermeneutical principle — the issue is whether Scripture grounds personhood in God’s creative act or in sentience, and every text you cited supports the former, not the latter.
I might note on this matter that a Jewish understanding is that personhood is linked to life and occurs when the first breath is taken based on the creation of Adam, who was made by God but did not become a living being until God breathed life into him, after his formation.
And while scripture is silent on the question of abortion, it is known by science and those who are aware of ancient records beyond the Bible that there used to be a now extinct plant that could be used to initiate an abortion in the Mediterranean region. Or do you believe that the ancient Israelites were the only group in the region that did not know about this plant?