General Question

Strauss's avatar

Does the Bible say that life begins at conception?

Asked by Strauss (23627points) July 14th, 2022

Since the Supreme Court Dobbs decision (24 June 2022) overturned Roe v. Wade there has been a lot of discussion on various platforms about the beginning of human life. Some believe life begins at conception, some believe life begins at first breath, and others say different. Many (not all) who are against abortion are also fundamentalist Christians, generally biblical literalists, meaning their beliefs are informed by the Bible. I am wondering if anyone can point me to chapter and verse which establishes when human life begins.

This is in the “general” section. I’d like to see honest, thoughtful discussion without reverting to name calling or character assassination. Thank you.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

22 Answers

elbanditoroso's avatar

The Old Testament (torah) has been interpreted for 2000 years to mean that life begins at birth. Strictly speaking when you draw your first breath.

one of many articles

The New Testament – that’s a different story.

JPCarlos's avatar

I am not a Bible scholar, but you can find your answer in Psalm 139:13 “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.” You can also find a reference to start of life in Isaiah 44:24 “your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb.” These are just two snippets from the Bible. Of course, there is an enormous difference when we are discussing this topic on a spiritual/religious level and legal standpoint. We might even consider how science sees this. But the Bible is quite clear on this. The clincher here is whether others will accept this.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Strauss's avatar

Does life begin at the first breath?
Genesis 2:7 (NIV)
Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Does life begin at one month?Numbers 3:14–15
And the Lord spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, saying, 15 “List the sons of Levi, by fathers’ houses and by clans; every male from a month old and upward you shall list.”

Is a fetus the same as personal property?
Exodus 21:22–25
If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

Jeruba's avatar

@Strauss:

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.

Matthew 5:38–39 (New International Version)

Jesus allegedly speaking here; Sermon on the Mount.

SavoirFaire's avatar

“The Bible definitely pinpoints a difference in the value of a fetus and an adult. Thus, the Bible would appear to disagree with the official Catholic view that the tiniest fetus is as important as an adult human being.”
Christian Life, Volume 29, Number 5 (1 September 1967)

“God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed. The Law plainly exacts: “If a man kills any human life he will be put to death” (Lev. 24:17). But according to Exodus 21:22–24, the destruction of the fetus is not a capital offense. [...] Clearly, then, in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.”
Christianity Today, Volume 13, Number 3 (8 November 1968)

“Be it further RESOLVED, That we call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother.”
—Southern Baptist Convention Resolution on Abortion (1 June 1971)

“Protestant theology generally takes Genesis 2:7 as a statement that the soul is formed at breath, not with conception.”
—Wayne Dehoney, former President of the Southern Baptist Convention, explaining the reasoning behind the above resolution to the Baptist Press (5 May 1976)

SavoirFaire's avatar

@JPCarlos I am a Biblical scholar, and I can tell you that Psalm 139 is about God’s omniscience. If one continues reading verses 15 and 16, one sees that the poet goes on to say: “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, Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.” The passage from Isaiah is generally taken to be a reference to the Book of Psalms (as is Jeremiah 1:5, which similarly tells of God’s omniscience by reference to His knowledge of us before conception).

It is also worth mentioning that the talk of being woven together in the depths of the earth is directly parallel to a belief found in the ancient Greek mystery religions, which were historically quite influential on Judaism. According to these religions, human bodies were of chthonic (aka subterranean) origin and magically transported to the womb (which people back then believed was only a fertile resting place and not somewhere that a body could develop, thus why the various homuncular theories of human development originated at the same time).

This is just one of the many elements Judaism (and later, Christianity) borrowed from the Greek religions (especially pre-Olympian Greek religions). The doctrine is related to the ancient Greek view that we exist before conception even happens in the form of our soul, and that we must wait for our body to be fully formed so that we can then be attached to it. Many modern Christians prefer to interpret this borrowing as being purely metaphorical rather than a borrowing of literal belief, but of course that means that one can no longer rely on a literal reading of the passage to support any particular view about when life begins.

Furthermore, there is far more evidence that the Bible says life begins when one first draws birth. First, the words most commonly used to refer to the human soul or spirit, are נשמה (neshama = “breath”) and רוח (ruach = “wind,” or “breath” by analogy). For reference, the term “holy spirit” comes from רוח הקודש (ruach hakodesh). This equivalence of “soul” and “breath” can be found in many passages, such as Genesis 2:7, Genesis 7:15, Deuteronomy 20:16, Ecclesiastes 12:7, Isaiah 42:5, Job 33:4, Ezekiel 37:5–6, Joshua 11:11, 1 Kings 15:29, John 3:5–8, and John 20:22.

Again, there is a parallel to the Greek usage of πνευμα (pneuma = “wind” or “breath,” with a connotation of being in motion as in blowing). The other Greek word that means “soul,” ψυχη (psuche or psyche), also comes from the verb “to blow” (and eventually comes to mean “mind,” which is where we get “psyche” and “psychology”). Indeed, we see this and the previously mentioned chthonic elements of early Greek thought come together in Genesis 2:7 when God makes Adam’s body out of earth and then makes him into a living thing by breathing into him.

Finally, there are several passages in the Bible that suggest a fetus is not of any intrinsic value, some of which have already been referenced in previous answers. Exodus 21:22 tells us that the penalty for causing a miscarriage is a fine, whereas Exodus 21:23 tells us that the penalty for ending a life is to be killed oneself. It therefore follows that miscarriage must not, according to the law given in Exodus, count as ending a life. This is in keeping with Genesis 38:24, in which being pregnant does not prevent Tamar from being sentenced to immediate death by immolation. It also accords with Leviticus 27:1–7, in which we find out the monetary value of people by age and sex. No one below one month of age is given any value at all (just as how, in Numbers 3:15, only males a month old or more are considered persons to be counted by the census).

The clearest case, however, might be found in Numbers 5:11–31. There we learn that any man who has the merest suspicion that his wife might have been unfaithful may be brought to a priest for a test. If she is guilty, this test will abort whatever pregnancy might be in progress and sterilize her for life. If she is innocent, then she will not be harmed. Note that there is no consideration whatsoever to the possible fetus. All that matters in this scenario is that no man be forced to raise a child that he did not sire. Like the case of Tamar, pregnancy is not considered an extenuating circumstance.

kritiper's avatar

It doesn’t say. There was no science to back the concept on back then.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Thanks @SavoirFaire for the great answer and to @Strauss for the question.

But as with anything that touches the abortion issue, facts and the history really don’t matter.

The bible-thumping pro-life crusaders will argue that everyone else is misreading the bible and their interpretation absolutely is the right one— Even if bible scholars say something different.

So much of the right wing pro-life identity – their superego – is based on their belief in the correctness of their interpretation of scripture. It is so internalized by them, that questioning or criticizing a stance on abortion is a personal insult to their being. If you criticize their beliefs you are criticizing them personally.

It’s that perception of a personal attack that gives them license to hate others (LGBTQ), burn books, torch synagogues and mosques, and other despicable acts.

Summary: what the bible says doesn’t matter if you are a ‘true believer’..

LostInParadise's avatar

Here is a link to what my favorite religion Web site, Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, has to say about the biblical view on abortion. Link

Brian1946's avatar

@elbanditoroso

“The bible-thumping pro-life crusaders will argue that everyone else is misreading the bible and their interpretation absolutely is the right one— Even if bible scholars say something different.”

“Fact from fiction, truth from diction.” ;)

gorillapaws's avatar

There’s more Biblical support in favor of slavery than there is against abortion. As @SavoirFaire points out, the Bible literally says unfaithful women should be made to drink an abortifacient. And yet it was literally permissible to sell daughters under the age of twelve into sex slavery. I can’t wait for the Supreme Court to justify that one (perhaps a strict textual analysis based on 3/5 of a person paired with their new interpretation of the establishment clause).

Pandora's avatar

The real question should be, should our laws be scripted by what the bible says when we are a nation of many faiths and those who do not follow or believe in the bible. People get hung up on what the bible says when those who are believers of the bible should be the only one to follow the bible. I am Christian and would never have gotten an abortion. My choice to do that. My faith shouldn’t decide for everyone else. We are all responsible for ourselves. And to have a Nation of real religious freedom, then I must accept that I have no authority over someone else’s belief as they have no authority over mine.

The moment people go into what the bible says then all is lost and religious persecution is possible. You hold others to believe what you believe and anything else is evil.

JLoon's avatar

No. The bible doesn’t say that.

What it does say is -
“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness of me. Yet you will not come to me that you may truly have life.”

Kaocah's avatar

I prefer to answer based on what scholars of the human soul say. Clinically dead people who were resuscitated in hospital emergencies return saying everything they saw and heard outside their bodies. Consciousness, which is life, exists before, during and after the disposal of the physical body. In fact Paul says somewhere that “if we have a material body, we have a spiritual one” that continues after death. Did you like to know?

Demosthenes's avatar

Some good answers here. I won’t bother restating what others have said. I will just say that ultimately it doesn’t matter because a pro-life stance isn’t rooted in Biblical literalism. It’s an entire framework that values life from the moment of conception. It doesn’t depend on whether or not the Bible directly supports it (it also stems mostly from Catholicism and Catholics do not believe that all spiritual truth is contained only within the Bible as many Protestants do).

SavoirFaire's avatar

@Kaocah Except that the actual “scholars of the human soul,” by which I mean those who have tested the claims that you are repeating here, have repeatedly found that none of those out of body experiences can be verified. The people who claim to have been floating above the scene as they were resuscitated can never accurately recall details about what was on top of shelves or someone’s head. The people who claim to have heard people talking around them can never accurately repeat bits of conversation other than the ones that they’ve already been told occurred. And the rest of your response is just an argument by assertion (as is Paul’s, though he has an excuse: he is conveying doctrine, not proffering an argument). Believe what you like, but don’t pretend it is backed by anything resembling evidence.

@Demosthenes I think the point of the question, though, is that many people claim that their view is Biblical (and many of those who are less committed assume it’s in the Bible and accept it as an article of faith rather than as something they’ve researched or thought about). To the extent that such a view is not Biblical, it undermines that source of conviction. Just because the point is not decisive does not mean it is unimportant.

I would also argue that my pro-choice stance does not preclude me from valuing life from the moment of conception. It’s just that the location of that value in my overall moral framework is different place than its location in the overall moral framework of a person who believes that abortion should be illegal. Life of all kinds is valuable, but that value is not absolute. Nor is it the only valuable thing. I can value life and support legal abortion at the same time.

kritiper's avatar

@Kaocah I think it is moot just what the human brain can conceive of when starved of blood and oxygen for even a short time.

Zissou's avatar

Concerning Exodus 21:22, it seems there is real disagreement among Bible scholars over whether it is talking about miscarriage or premature birth: https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/76131/is-exodus-2122-about-a-premature-birth-or-a-miscarriage

Strauss's avatar

@Zissou Thanks for the link. If I read correctly, the reference to the Didache (1st Century CE Christian Commentary) seems to indicate that opposition to abortion is not so much biblical as it is doctrinal in Christianity.

Zissou's avatar

The Bible doesn’t explicitly ban abortion per se. It does ban murder, though, so if the unborn are persons (using modern terminology here), the Bible bans murdering them. The personhood of the unborn was not and is not simply a doctrinal question, it is a scientific and philosophical question, and by the time the New Testament was written, philosophic and medical thought supported the view that the fetus attained personhood before birth, although not immediately upon conception.

The New Testament could also be interpreted as condemning abortion for reasons that do not depend upon whether the fetus is a person or whether abortion is homicide in the strict sense. The Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5, see also 1 John ), which @Jeruba quoted above, calls for a morality based on internal conversion rather than mere external observance. It says that even to say “raka” to someone or call them a fool violates the commandment against murder, and even to look at a woman with lust in one’s heart violates the commandment against adultery. One can infer from this a moral stance of reverence for life that prescribes mutual love, respect, and commitment between partners and also respect for and openness to the process that brings new life into the world.

Such a morality entails the rejection of the sexual consumerism, oppressive social structures, and hypocrisy that make the termination of a healthy pregnancy seem like a live option in so many cases. Even if we set aside First Amendment issues, such a morality does not clearly justify using the power of the state to enforce a ban on abortion, especially not in cases of medical necessity or rape, but I would argue that it does allow Christians to say without contradiction that they are personally opposed to abortion while supporting politicians who might be pro-choice if those politicians support just policies in other areas.

JLeslie's avatar

I thought God kills babies in the Bible? Or, is that just the Old Testament?

God/nature certainly miscarries a ton of babies.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther