I 100% hear this, and think that people often abuse or misuse scripture in ways that further hurts people that are hurting.
But I will use the logic that Christian evolutionists (like myself) use: the Bible is not a science textbook. The ancients did not know the biology of human development. But biology tells us that from conception, there is new life in a woman's reproductive system. So, does God cherish life?
We use the argument that God cherishes life when we talk about "creation care" and the environment, and rightly so. So why does that argument disappear when it comes to the new biological life in a woman, if she decides she does not want that life? Why does a "choice" decide what is biologically true? It is wishful thinking and not Biblically, ethically, or logically consistent.
That said, we should not use this to shame or condemn women. We should use it to support women and offer hope and support.
Greetings. I happened to find your 5/3/2022 article today. The context was the court decision at the time. I have argued from both science and scripture, to prove that "abortion" (the murder of the unborn child), except to save the mother's life, is morally wrong. See my original Appalachian Irishman website article: WORLDVIEWS in CONFLICT: PRO-LIFE ARGUMENT WON EASILY (published 6-30-2022; article #337). Perhaps you will form a solid conviction on the topic, by a proper understanding of science and scripture. Jesus affirms the right to life of the innocent unborn, of course.
Thanks Giulia, and apologies. I thought your comment was directed at me since it seems to me that the author is making an argument for why abortion is not prohibited by biblical exegesis.
Hi Giulia. I think you are responding to my comment; if so, you are making several giant assumptions. To clarify: first, my wife is my pastor. Second, she is the one who has enlightened me on this topic the most (she has a degree in Biblical Studies). Third, just because I am a man does not mean I have not thought out the scriptural ramifications of this topic; in fact my study of scripture leads me to the conclusion that all life is sacred, whether that is a fetus, a convict, a transgender person, a tree, and animal, or an "enemy". This is all predicated on the rules of the Kingdom of God and what we see in scripture. So to presume that I don't respect the moral agency of women is unfair and inaccurate, and it is an unfortunate conclusion that people jump to about all men who are pro-life.
Finally, I am a father. I watched as my daughter grew in my wife's body. I felt her kicks, and I watched as she responded to my voice within moments of being born. I will always cherish the lives of those in utero because it is clear to me that their lives are as sacred as my own. I think this is the conclusion that we must draw from the ethic of Jesus. We can respect (and demand!) the autonomy and agency of women, while also respecting the agency and autonomy of humans who are in utero.
I 100% hear this, and think that people often abuse or misuse scripture in ways that further hurts people that are hurting.
But I will use the logic that Christian evolutionists (like myself) use: the Bible is not a science textbook. The ancients did not know the biology of human development. But biology tells us that from conception, there is new life in a woman's reproductive system. So, does God cherish life?
We use the argument that God cherishes life when we talk about "creation care" and the environment, and rightly so. So why does that argument disappear when it comes to the new biological life in a woman, if she decides she does not want that life? Why does a "choice" decide what is biologically true? It is wishful thinking and not Biblically, ethically, or logically consistent.
That said, we should not use this to shame or condemn women. We should use it to support women and offer hope and support.
Greetings. I happened to find your 5/3/2022 article today. The context was the court decision at the time. I have argued from both science and scripture, to prove that "abortion" (the murder of the unborn child), except to save the mother's life, is morally wrong. See my original Appalachian Irishman website article: WORLDVIEWS in CONFLICT: PRO-LIFE ARGUMENT WON EASILY (published 6-30-2022; article #337). Perhaps you will form a solid conviction on the topic, by a proper understanding of science and scripture. Jesus affirms the right to life of the innocent unborn, of course.
Thanks Giulia, and apologies. I thought your comment was directed at me since it seems to me that the author is making an argument for why abortion is not prohibited by biblical exegesis.
Hi Giulia. I think you are responding to my comment; if so, you are making several giant assumptions. To clarify: first, my wife is my pastor. Second, she is the one who has enlightened me on this topic the most (she has a degree in Biblical Studies). Third, just because I am a man does not mean I have not thought out the scriptural ramifications of this topic; in fact my study of scripture leads me to the conclusion that all life is sacred, whether that is a fetus, a convict, a transgender person, a tree, and animal, or an "enemy". This is all predicated on the rules of the Kingdom of God and what we see in scripture. So to presume that I don't respect the moral agency of women is unfair and inaccurate, and it is an unfortunate conclusion that people jump to about all men who are pro-life.
Finally, I am a father. I watched as my daughter grew in my wife's body. I felt her kicks, and I watched as she responded to my voice within moments of being born. I will always cherish the lives of those in utero because it is clear to me that their lives are as sacred as my own. I think this is the conclusion that we must draw from the ethic of Jesus. We can respect (and demand!) the autonomy and agency of women, while also respecting the agency and autonomy of humans who are in utero.
Peace to you.