Life Begins at Conception

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It grows, it draws nourishment from it's mother it starts developing and forming arms, legs, eyes etc.

We don't breathe with our arms, legs or eyes. We breathe with our lungs. And not "developing" lungs either; fully-formed lungs.

If you're just talking about oxygen exchange at a cellular level, all cells do that.

Have you ever seen an embryo?

I've seen photos. Enough to realize that your anthromorphic descriptions of embryos don't fit with a morula or blastocyst, i.e. stages when the embryo is literally a microscopic ball of cells.

I know you directed this to someone else but I have the rational basis of seeing the development of different stages of growth in different embryos. I believe based on my observation that an embryo is a living, viable form, if not there would be no growth no change, the embryo would not be viable....

Unfertilized eggs grow, change and are viable.

 

[Charity]

We don't breathe with our arms, legs or eyes. We breathe with our lungs. And not "developing" lungs either; fully-formed lungs.

If you're just talking about oxygen exchange at a cellular level, all cells do that.


I've seen photos. Enough to realize that your anthromorphic descriptions of embryos don't fit with a morula or blastocyst, i.e. stages when the embryo is literally a microscopic ball of cells.


Unfertilized eggs grow, change and are viable.

Well speaking from a medical background, I know what I see.
I was speaking about oxygen exchange of an embryo/fetus and the oxygen received from the placenta/umbilical cord....not cells in a test tube or under a microscope.
When you actually see an embryo at different stages of development then I'll be happy to listen to your findings that are second hand info from a book, or photos....

 

[Charity]

We don't breathe with our arms, legs or eyes. We breathe with our lungs. And not "developing" lungs either; fully-formed lungs.

If you're just talking about oxygen exchange at a cellular level, all cells do that.


I've seen photos. Enough to realize that your anthromorphic descriptions of embryos don't fit with a morula or blastocyst, i.e. stages when the embryo is literally a microscopic ball of cells.


Unfertilized eggs grow, change and are viable.

In retrospect Penguin, I don't think that I have ever made a post that you didn't have to disagree with some fine point, and that's fine, Because I'm "woman", I'm strong and I can darn well take it.....
Example: What is a Zebra?
My reply: Looks like a horse and has black and white stripes
9-10ths Penguin: But let me bring to light that it is actually white with black stripes.
My reply: Ok! Zebra looks like a white horse with black stripes, have we changed the appearance of the Darned Zebra in other's minds...

Let's just put it under a microscope and check it all out in detail.....

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well speaking from a medical background, I know what I see.
I was speaking about oxygen exchange of an embryo/fetus and the oxygen received from the placenta/umbilical cord....not cells in a test tube or under a microscope.

Ah... so you're specifically talking about embryos past the stage when the umbilical cord has formed?

Does this mean you're not saying that a morula or a blastocyst is a "living, breathing life"?

 

[Charity]

Ah... so you're specifically talking about embryos past the stage when the umbilical cord has formed?

Does this mean you're not saying that a morula or a blastocyst is a "living, breathing life"?

Ah Haw! One more point for disagreement I'm sure....
I was speaking of "from the time the sperm meets the egg and is planted in the uterus the embryo is viable and dependent on the oxygen and nourishment from the mother".....Where it does live and grow......:bow: I frankly don't give a "rats fanny" about where the sperm or the eggs were prior to their union....

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

In retrospect Penguin, I don't think that I have ever made a post that you didn't have to disagree with some fine point, and that's fine, Because I'm "woman", I'm strong and I can darn well take it.....

When it comes to this topic, I think the "fine point" matters. The questions of what a very early embryo is factor very much into the question of when (or whether) abortion is acceptable, especially when we're talking about things like our positions on things like the "Plan B" pill: is it wrong to prevent the implantation of a viable embryo? I don't think that descriptions about what the embryo/fetus are like at later stages of development necessarily have a bearing on the answer to that question. At the very least, they don't give an accurate picture of the embryo under discussion in these sorts of cases.

 

[Charity]

When it comes to this topic, I think the "fine point" matters. The questions of what a very early embryo is factor very much into the question of when (or whether) abortion is acceptable, especially when we're talking about things like our positions on things like the "Plan B" pill: is it wrong to prevent the implantation of a viable embryo? I don't think that descriptions about what the embryo/fetus are like at later stages of development necessarily have a bearing on the answer to that question. At the very least, they don't give an accurate picture of the embryo under discussion in these sorts of cases.

The op was "Life begins at conception" I say yes, whether it is by the act of sex and the union results in pregnancy or whether by artificial insemination....No I don't think it's wrong to implant a viable embryo.

 

[Archer]

I disagree.

The sperm and the egg, the two cells that conception is all about, both have to be alive or there is no conception.

If two living cells never come together then two cells die! If two cells come together and form a new group of cells then the two have become one, if it dies naturally that is one thing but any other way is to kill it.

There is no way around it! It is not a lifeless hunk of meat, it is not yet a child still: "it is 100% human"

If a pregnant woman in her third trimester is killed (murdered) the perp can be charged with two counts of murder. No need to split hairs over it (when it is or is not a life). If it is unborn yet the potential is there if not acted on from the outside for a healthy birth you have killed a child.

 

[McBell]

The op was "Life begins at conception" I say yes, whether it is by the act of sex and the union results in pregnancy or whether by artificial insemination....No I don't think it's wrong to implant a viable embryo.

actually the OP is:

Is there any biblical basis for the claim that life begins at conception?

The blunt answer is no.
The reason being that at that time in human history they believed that man planted a seed and the woman was nothing more than an incubator for the seed.

We have since then learned all about conception, the fact that the woman provides half (the egg), and that men are not as special as they so wanted the world to think.

The thing is that life began a long long long time ago and is a continuous ongoing process. Thus making the whole "life begins at conception" nothing more than a self serving, political bull **** story.

 

[Charity]

actually the OP is:
The blunt answer is no.
The reason being that at that time in human history they believed that man planted a seed and the woman was nothing more than an incubator for the seed.

We have since then learned all about conception, the fact that the woman provides half (the egg), and that men are not as special as they so wanted the world to think.

The thing is that life began a long long long time ago and is a continuous ongoing process. Thus making the whole "life begins at conception" nothing more than a self serving, political bull **** story.

:biglaugh:

 

[McBell]

If two living cells never come together then two cells die! If two cells come together and form a new group of cells then the two have become one, if it dies naturally that is one thing but any other way is to kill it.

if you are talking specifically about the sperm and egg, I agree.
However there are many cells that never meet and their meeting is completely irrelevant to their survival.

There is no way around it!

No way around what?

It is not a lifeless hunk of meat,

Who is arguing that it is?
Perhaps if you were to stop with the red herrings and strawmen, the conversation could actually move forward?

it is not yet a child

I agree.

still: "it is 100% human"

Agreed.
Who has said that it is is not human?
Sure as hell was not me.

If a pregnant woman in her third trimester is killed (murdered) the perp can be charged with two counts of murder. No need to split hairs over it (when it is or is not a life). If it is unborn yet the potential is there if not acted on from the outside for a healthy birth you have killed a child.

this is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

 

[McBell]

:biglaugh:

what?

 

[Charity]

what?

The obvious error in your post, the woman provides half the egg....
Me thinks you need some anatomy classes.....Be ye prepared to do battle and when it comes to medical battle, I win....

 

[McBell]

The obvious error in your post, the woman provides half the egg....
Me thinks you need some anatomy classes.....Be ye prepared to do battle and when it comes to medical battle, I win....

wow.
You really need to pay better attention to what is written.
Please note the () around "the egg":

...the fact that the woman provides half (the egg)...
​

Here it is again with the () emphasized.
So as you can see, I did not say that the woman provides half the egg.

Win?
:biglaugh:

More like fail.

 

[Archer]

Is there any biblical basis for the claim that life begins at conception?

The first command God gave:

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." King James Version, Genesis 1:28[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]"God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." New International Version, Genesis 1:28[/FONT]
This is the first commandment to man!

Psalm 139


12 even the darkness will not be dark to you;
the night will shine like the day,
for darkness is as light to you.
13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.
14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.
15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place.
When I was woven together in the depths of the earth,
16 your eyes saw my unformed body.
All the days ordained for me
were written in your book
before one of them came to be.
17 How precious to [a] me are your thoughts, O God!
How vast is the sum of them!


So if God knows us before, then is it not murder in the eyes of God to kill an unborn child.

 

[TimothyA]

Is there any biblical basis for the claim that life begins at conception?

I'm a Hellenic Polytheist and Pro-Life... maybe not as Pro-Life as some, but significantly Pro-Life nonetheless. I don't know about the Bible, but there is evidence that at least some Greeks believed life began at evidence of movement. I believe current technology proves that a baby responds to stimuli and feels pain at about 10 weeks, along with playing with hands and feet. Moreover, some religious opinions lean against abortion to complete calls against it, while the Greek legal systems took a very 'legal but limited' approach, even restricting a woman from having an abortion if the father wanted the child.

My personal stand is that abortion as a necessary medical procedure for the health and welfare of the mother is very different from abortion as an elective procedure based on the desires of the individual. Elective abortions should be limited to only the first few weeks, when the embryo can only be described as cells, and only then with the consent of the father. If a woman has the right to choose not to be a mother, a man deserves an equal right to choose to be a father.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If two living cells never come together then two cells die! If two cells come together and form a new group of cells then the two have become one, if it dies naturally that is one thing but any other way is to kill it.

No matter what, that original sperm cell and egg cell will die in short order. Either they will fail to create an embryo, or they will be destroyed naturally as the developing embryo replaces old cells with new ones.

The first command God gave:

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." King James Version, Genesis 1:28[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]"God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." New International Version, Genesis 1:28[/FONT]
This is the first commandment to man!

I see nothing in this passage that says anything about whether life begins at birth, conception, or before.

Psalm 139


12 even the darkness will not be dark to you;
the night will shine like the day,
for darkness is as light to you.
13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.
14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.
15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place.
When I was woven together in the depths of the earth,
16 your eyes saw my unformed body.
All the days ordained for me
were written in your book
before one of them came to be.
17 How precious to [a] me are your thoughts, O God!
How vast is the sum of them!


So if God knows us before, then is it not murder in the eyes of God to kill an unborn child.

What an odd passage. If we take it as a general statement about all of humanity and not just this one individual, then as a side effect, it denies free will ("All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be"), which has interesting implications for other theological issues like the Problem of Evil and whether Hell is a just concept.

However, getting back to the topic, exactly what do you think this passage implies about fetal development? It seems to say that while he was in the womb, God saw his "unformed body", but it also says God saw the life stretched out before him. Obviously, the second part wasn't literally happening at the time, so why must we assume the first part implies what you're suggesting?

Frankly, I don't see this passage as having anything to do with this issue. I think it's a poetic way of saying that God is wise and all-knowing.

 

[Archer]

No matter what, that original sperm cell and egg cell will die in short order. Either they will fail to create an embryo, or they will be destroyed naturally as the developing embryo replaces old cells with new ones.

[/size]
I see nothing in this passage that says anything about whether life begins at birth, conception, or before.


What an odd passage. If we take it as a general statement about all of humanity and not just this one individual, then as a side effect, it denies free will ("All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be"), which has interesting implications for other theological issues like the Problem of Evil and whether Hell is a just concept.

However, getting back to the topic, exactly what do you think this passage implies about fetal development? It seems to say that while he was in the womb, God saw his "unformed body", but it also says God saw the life stretched out before him. Obviously, the second part wasn't literally happening at the time, so why must we assume the first part implies what you're suggesting?

Frankly, I don't see this passage as having anything to do with this issue. I think it's a poetic way of saying that God is wise and all-knowing.

Denial! Good for you I have held 2 of my now departed sons in my hands, one died in them, I know what life is.

 

[MSizer]

Denial! Good for you I have held 2 of my now departed sons in my hands, one died in them, I know what life is.

That's not the same thing. I would never belittle your experience with your sons, I have no idea what it would be like to experience what you have shared with us, but it has nothing to do with the arguement though. I don't doubt that your love for your son was indescribably powerful, but that doesn't resolve any biological dispute about conception. Your point, respectfully, appeals to your own feelings about the value of a human, not it's origin.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Denial! Good for you I have held 2 of my now departed sons in my hands, one died in them, I know what life is.

If that's your real justification for believing what you do about this, then why the Bible study side show?