What does it mean to be human and how is that zygote displaying those traits that define it clearly as human?
Is it only the possession of a particular genome?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
When does life begin?
- Thread starter Kfox
- Start date
Is it only the possession of a particular genome?
Obviously, the embryo is a living cell right after conception, which is why it is possible to produce a baby from a frozen embryo. However, the question is when does the soul enter the embryo or fetus or when does a human life start. According to Michael Newton (https://www.amazon.com/Journey-Souls-Studies-Between-Lives/dp/1567184855) who has studied this using hypnotherapy, the soul does not enter the fetus until a few months after conception (it varies). But even after that, it does not stay there for long. Staying in the womb continuously for nine months, is too confining/boring for the soul. The soul flits in and out of the fetus in order to get accustomed to being in the body. Even after birth, it is not permanently with the baby's body until after a few years (maybe 5). This explains in part still-born babies or sudden-infant-death-syndrome when the soul decides at the last moment not to take the leap into a human life. However, at some time close to the time of birth, the soul has established a connection with the fetus, so the viability of the fetus outside the womb is probably the best moment to consider as the start of a human life.
Audie
Veteran Member
Life began with the first self replicating
molecules.
Audie
Veteran Member
That is a question-imo, an idle one- not
THE question.
So, what is THE question?
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Seems argumentative to me.
Good Good --- that is the point of being here .. to present valid argument .. but, unfortunately ... your post lacks an argument --- never mind valid one.
Audie
Veteran Member
Who says there is one
The title of this thread is "When does life begin?" If you don't think this question is valid or needs to be answered, why are you here?
McBell
Unbound
At any point is any part of the process involves something that is not human?
And if so, what is it?
I mean specifically, what is it?
Unless there is a claim that something not human is involved in the process, I fail to see how the "human" specification is even relevant.
seems to me this is a false dichotomy.
that seems to be asking for biological specification/qualifications far above my knowledge base.
Audie
Veteran Member
The particular question was about insertion of soul.
Which is an idle and frivolous question.
Why respond so off topic?
Last edited:
Ok.
McBell
Unbound
Seems to me that instead of saying "life begins at conception" they should be saying "the individual begins at conception".
Daemon Sophic
Avatar in flux
Life simply continues from the monoploid germ cells, into the diploid zygote. But this is a discussion in the General Religious Debates; SOOooooo.... The OP is more likely looking for "when does the developing organism forming from the zygote actually get a "soul" and therefore become a human person"? Which @Kfox indicates on page #2, post #30.
So, what do we know, from a religious aspect?
1. - It undeniably cannot be at conception. Why? Because of identical twins and triplets, etc.... A set of paternal twins are just 2 eggs fertilized by 2 sperm. But IDENTICAL twins/triplets result from just 1 egg and 1 sperm, forming a diploid zygote, and then it starts dividing. And somewhere along the line (sometimes at 2 cells, or at 4 cells, or 16, or 256....); some of the cells break away, and a second fetus starts to grow alongside the first. So unless you suggest that twins have a split/partial soul compared to the majority of us (and I know that no sane theist does), then it has to be later in development.
2. - "Ensoulment" is highly unlikely to occur at any time during the first trimester. Why? Because roughly 1/3 of all conceptions and uterine implantations actually "auto-abort" during the first 3 months of pregnancy. Yes, that does make God the most prolific abortionist in all the history of humanity, let alone the history of medicine. So unless the theists are suggesting that their divine "All-Father" is a sadomasochistic pig-dog, who simply enjoys creating souls just to burn them...... then Nope. Not until after 12 weeks..... minimum.
3. - If we limit ourselves to Christianity, then the so-called infallible Bible (I'm citing the New International Version) has over 560 references of the work "life". Most of these do not apply to babies or developing fetuses. Many, refering to animals and/or people individually as being alive or not, mention the phrase "breath of life". Suggesting that breathing air (or at least oxygen from the water, perhaps) is the defining requirement for being counted as Alive. Thus, only upon birth into the Nitrogen/Oxygen atmosphere, do they get life.
Another frequent reference, when discussing life in a person, is blood or "Lifeblood". If this is the defining feature of personhood/life, then we have to figure on a timeframe of roughly 10 weeks gestation; by which point the fetal circulatory fluid (few red blood cells. Mostly water and proteins (including heme groups)), transitions from mostly the so-called "yolk-sac", to the placenta. Mind you, the fetus never really has a fully functional circulatory system until soon after breathing atmosphere, and having the umbilical cord cut/crushed.
"With its first breath, the baby's pulmonary vascular resistance substantially drops, which is in response to the oxygen now present in the lungs and the physical act of breathing. With the umbilical cord clamping after birth, the systemic vascular resistance increases, helping the blood flow toward the lungs. The ductus arteriosus has a left-to-right flow within 10 minutes. The smooth muscle in the ductus arteriosus responds to the oxygen by increasing calcium channel activity, causing constriction and, ultimately, shunt closure. The increased systemic resistance also raises the pressure in the left atrium to be higher than the right atrium, and this causes the foramen ovale to close."
If these changes did not occur (or if they occurred before birth), the baby (or fetus) would die.
Note: The Bible also mentions "soul" roughly 95 times, none of which is part of a discussion on fetuses or conception. None discuss the time at which a person gets a soul. Also, the 60+ references to "conceive" have no reference to receiving a soul or spirit.
So, what do we know, from a religious aspect?
1. - It undeniably cannot be at conception. Why? Because of identical twins and triplets, etc.... A set of paternal twins are just 2 eggs fertilized by 2 sperm. But IDENTICAL twins/triplets result from just 1 egg and 1 sperm, forming a diploid zygote, and then it starts dividing. And somewhere along the line (sometimes at 2 cells, or at 4 cells, or 16, or 256....); some of the cells break away, and a second fetus starts to grow alongside the first. So unless you suggest that twins have a split/partial soul compared to the majority of us (and I know that no sane theist does), then it has to be later in development.
2. - "Ensoulment" is highly unlikely to occur at any time during the first trimester. Why? Because roughly 1/3 of all conceptions and uterine implantations actually "auto-abort" during the first 3 months of pregnancy. Yes, that does make God the most prolific abortionist in all the history of humanity, let alone the history of medicine. So unless the theists are suggesting that their divine "All-Father" is a sadomasochistic pig-dog, who simply enjoys creating souls just to burn them...... then Nope. Not until after 12 weeks..... minimum.
3. - If we limit ourselves to Christianity, then the so-called infallible Bible (I'm citing the New International Version) has over 560 references of the work "life". Most of these do not apply to babies or developing fetuses. Many, refering to animals and/or people individually as being alive or not, mention the phrase "breath of life". Suggesting that breathing air (or at least oxygen from the water, perhaps) is the defining requirement for being counted as Alive. Thus, only upon birth into the Nitrogen/Oxygen atmosphere, do they get life.
Another frequent reference, when discussing life in a person, is blood or "Lifeblood". If this is the defining feature of personhood/life, then we have to figure on a timeframe of roughly 10 weeks gestation; by which point the fetal circulatory fluid (few red blood cells. Mostly water and proteins (including heme groups)), transitions from mostly the so-called "yolk-sac", to the placenta. Mind you, the fetus never really has a fully functional circulatory system until soon after breathing atmosphere, and having the umbilical cord cut/crushed.
"With its first breath, the baby's pulmonary vascular resistance substantially drops, which is in response to the oxygen now present in the lungs and the physical act of breathing. With the umbilical cord clamping after birth, the systemic vascular resistance increases, helping the blood flow toward the lungs. The ductus arteriosus has a left-to-right flow within 10 minutes. The smooth muscle in the ductus arteriosus responds to the oxygen by increasing calcium channel activity, causing constriction and, ultimately, shunt closure. The increased systemic resistance also raises the pressure in the left atrium to be higher than the right atrium, and this causes the foramen ovale to close."
If these changes did not occur (or if they occurred before birth), the baby (or fetus) would die.
Note: The Bible also mentions "soul" roughly 95 times, none of which is part of a discussion on fetuses or conception. None discuss the time at which a person gets a soul. Also, the 60+ references to "conceive" have no reference to receiving a soul or spirit.
And yet, how "individual" is it when it is basically a parasite that is not viable outside of its human host? That is, it is absolutely dependent upon another in a way that even those who deny the interdependence of all existence have a hard time being dismissive of. There are many reasons why RvW was the sensible compromise, but this above all others is the prime.
No viability = no human rights.
It really should be that simple.
We Never Know
No Slack
First life was unicellular (a single cell).... So there's that.
Last edited:
We Never Know
No Slack
"parasite"
I don't much care for that word as a description.
But...we all are basically parasites to earth.
Last edited:
It is not off-topic at all. I believe human life starts when the soul enters the fetus. 'When does life start' is exactly the topic of this thread.
Audie
Veteran Member
If opinion = fact then I guess nothing is ot.
Audie
Veteran Member
That's making the word meaningless