Re: [asa] Event or process revisited

From: David Buller <bullerscience@gmail.com>
Date: Thu May 17 2007 - 20:29:02 EDT

On 5/16/07, Don Winterstein <dfwinterstein@msn.com> wrote:
>
> The human fertilized egg does indeed have a human soul, but it's a soul
> far less advanced than that of any adult mammal. As the fetus grows,
> it forms successively more advanced souls until it reaches a point where it
> becomes the kind of person that I believe God has an interest in saving
> eternally. I don't believe God has any long-term interest in fertilized
> human eggs or microscopic embryos.
>

If God has no "long-term interest" in an embryo or even a fetus (where would
you draw the line? at birth?), than the embryo is in essence no different
from any "animal." Both have souls but, not eternal ones. Killing an
animal is not morally wrong. As soon as you come to the conclusion that God
doesn't have an eternal interest in embryos, than why in the world would we
object to abortion? As you said, an embryo has less of a soul than any
other "fully formed mammal." I would strongly object to the last sentence
in Don's statement above. The Biblical authors seemed to think that God had
a "long-term interest" for them from their conception onward:

"On you was I cast from my birth,and from my mother's womb you have been my
God"

"And now the LORD says,he who formed me from the womb to be his servant"

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,and before you were born I
consecrated you;I appointed you a prophet to the nations."

If you would would object to an early-term abortion, I would be interested
in hearing on what grounds you would do so.

-David Buller

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu May 17 20:29:24 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu May 17 2007 - 20:29:24 EDT