by jimwalton » Sat Nov 19, 2022 12:33 pm
No, I do not agree. Genesis 2.7 is an expression of human mortality, not one of when life begins. "Dust" is a symbol of mortality (Gn. 3.19; Ps. 103.14; 1 Cor. 15.47-48). It means we are born by natural processes and will die by natural processes. All it is claiming is that God made us living souls, and that we are entities in relationship to God. It's an illegitimate use of Gn. 2.7 to claim it has anything to do with the issue of when life begins.
> What Biblical justification is there to say life begins at conception (deep inside the womb)
- 1. Humans bear God's image, marred by sin, from conception on (Ps. 51.5; 58.3).
- 2. The OT Law sought to protect the life of the mother and of the fetus (Ex. 21.22-25). A high value was placed on both. The fetus is given both "image of God" (Gn. 9.6) and nephesh status (see also Lev. 24.17-18). Furthermore, the fetus was not considered "a potential life or person" because it was still in the womb. From the perspective of Heb. 7.11, "potential life" is in the loins of the father. See also Amos 1.13b. Once an egg was fertilized, it seems to have "image of God" status.
- 3. The NT paints a pictures of the value of babies and children (Mt. 11.25; 19.13-15; 21.16), but these passages speak of already-born babies or children, not fetuses. Luke, however, uses the same Greek word, brephos, of the fetus in the womb (Lk. 1.41, 44) as he does of the newborn child (Lk. 2.12, 16; Acts 7.19; cf. 1 Pet. 2.2).
- 4. Conception is seen as a blessing (Mt. 1.20; Lk. 1.24-25, 30. 31; Jn. 16.21; 1 Tim. 2.15; 5.14). Pregnancy is viewed in a positive light.
- 5. God took on human flesh, which removes any doubt as to human dignity (Jn. 1.14; Phil. 2.6-7). He was who he was from the moment of conception.
- 6. The NT teaches personal continuity from womb to grave.
- 7. There is nothing in Scripture that even remotely suggests that the unborn child is anything less than a human person from the moment of conception.
No, I do not agree. Genesis 2.7 is an expression of human mortality, not one of when life begins. "Dust" is a symbol of mortality (Gn. 3.19; Ps. 103.14; 1 Cor. 15.47-48). It means we are born by natural processes and will die by natural processes. All it is claiming is that God made us living souls, and that we are entities in relationship to God. It's an illegitimate use of Gn. 2.7 to claim it has anything to do with the issue of when life begins.
> What Biblical justification is there to say life begins at conception (deep inside the womb)
[list][*] 1. Humans bear God's image, marred by sin, from conception on (Ps. 51.5; 58.3).
[*] 2. The OT Law sought to protect the life of the mother and of the fetus (Ex. 21.22-25). A high value was placed on both. The fetus is given both "image of God" (Gn. 9.6) and nephesh status (see also Lev. 24.17-18). Furthermore, the fetus was not considered "a potential life or person" because it was still in the womb. From the perspective of Heb. 7.11, "potential life" is in the loins of the father. See also Amos 1.13b. Once an egg was fertilized, it seems to have "image of God" status.
[*] 3. The NT paints a pictures of the value of babies and children (Mt. 11.25; 19.13-15; 21.16), but these passages speak of already-born babies or children, not fetuses. Luke, however, uses the same Greek word, brephos, of the fetus in the womb (Lk. 1.41, 44) as he does of the newborn child (Lk. 2.12, 16; Acts 7.19; cf. 1 Pet. 2.2).
[*] 4. Conception is seen as a blessing (Mt. 1.20; Lk. 1.24-25, 30. 31; Jn. 16.21; 1 Tim. 2.15; 5.14). Pregnancy is viewed in a positive light.
[*] 5. God took on human flesh, which removes any doubt as to human dignity (Jn. 1.14; Phil. 2.6-7). He was who he was from the moment of conception.
[*] 6. The NT teaches personal continuity from womb to grave.
[*] 7. There is nothing in Scripture that even remotely suggests that the unborn child is anything less than a human person from the moment of conception.[/list]