Board index ‹ Abortion

[Alva]

Based on religious logic, I think killing all fetuses is the right thing to do. First of all, I want to clarify I don't have this position at all. But I want to look at it from a religious perspective.

Since christianity says the soul is given to the person at conception, a fetus has a soul. Now, I've been thinking what happens if a fetus dies or is killed before it actually gets to live its life. Since it's a soul, it has to go either to heaven or to hell. No way around it.

If the fetus is sent by God to hell, I wonder why you would have to adore such a god in the first place. However, this case kills the rest of my argument. If you have a convincing argument why a fetus soul should go to hell, go on.

The other case is the fetus soul going to heaven. If you agree with this, I ask: if EVERY fetus soul goes to heaven by default, why live at all? Why test people in this often painful world and have them the chance to being sent to hell? I say, killing a fetus GUARANTEES they will go to heaven, thus saving them from the risk of eternal damnation. A counterargument could be that killing them we're preventing them from living wonderful experiences. As a non-believer, I agree (if the fetus has a good, illness free, loving life prospect). But if I believe there's an afterlife full of bliss, which by concept can't get any better than it is, then making them to live in an imperfect world is just making them wait for an obviously much, much better experience.

The final issue is that the person in charge of killing them would go to hell without a doubt. But I say, shouldn't a person that sacrifices his/her soul in order to send many, many more lives to heaven, be considered almost a saint, if not more? Consider that person agrees with being tortured for eternity, just so more people can be saved from hell.

[jimwalton]

The ends don't justify the means, especially in this particular case. The brutal murder by abortion of children just to send them to heaven is barbaric. It's abhorrent to say, "I love humanity so much I will kill them all." The logic may be straight forward, but the thinking is skewed by immorality. It's a contradiction to kill in order to give life.

[Axis of Evil]

Nothing you said actually affects the argument. You're just asserting that "it would be bad".

[jimwalton]

That's the point. The argument was that killing all fetuses is the right things to do. I argued that it would be bad, "immoral," and "a contradiction," therefore not the right thing to do.

[Alva]

Consider eternity for a moment. Wrap your mind around 1 year. Then 10, and 100 and 1000 and billions and trillions of years. I can't possibly imagine eternity at all, let alone an eternity full of torture. I think, if there's a chance, as little as it is, of a person even be at risk of having such a tragic end, it's better to prevent it from the beginning than to unnecessarily expose them to that risk.

Assume the fetus grows to be a good person, and has an anazing terrestrial life, in the very best of the cases. That person will do good on Earth, die, and go do heaven. If that person were killed at conception, it would have had all those years (if we can talk about time in heaven) living much better in heaven, in the presence of God, and wouldn't have had a risk of going to hell.

I ask, why is it immoral to kill someone if that in the end guarantees an overwhelmingly better situation? A death, compared to eternal salvation, is like comparing a vaccination to a life free of illness, except eternal salvation is incredibly much better than that it's almost not comparable.

[jimwalton]

The appropriate thing would be for you gain a proper biblical understanding of hell, rather than with the caricatured stereotype you're rolling with now.

There are many theories from thinking Christians that possibly hell is not eternal for everyone there, but there may be future opportunities for some to be reconciled to God after appropriate punishment and as they continue to make spiritual choices. Hell is a difficult doctrine to sort out. Without a doubt there are verses that talk about eternal punishment, but they don't necessarily include all of those who are separated from God. There are verses that talk about God reconciling all things to himself (Rom. 11.15; 2 Cor. 5.19; Col. 1.20), and so some theologians think that God will continue his work of reconciliation even into eternity, such that those who "serve their time" will at a later date be reconciled with God ("reconciliationism"). There is another position called "semi-restorationism" where, after appropriate punishment, those who desire a relationship with God will be partially restored, and those who do not, even after punishment, will opt to remain separated. So hell is eternal, but not necessarily eternal for everyone. While the Bible speaks about eternity, possibly only those who stay eternally defiant will be eternally punished. Some even believe in annihilation. It's hard to know.

The Bible also teaches the principle of reasonable accountability. According to Romans 5.13, people are not held accountable for what they had no possibility of knowing or knowing about. In Deuteronomy 1.39, the children who were too young to make a realistic decision are not judged, but are shown mercy; their level of accountability was directly related to their moral awareness. Isa. 7.15-16 teaches the same thing: God deals differently with people based on their knowledge. So we're getting a sense of the fairness of God, and that he takes many things into consideration as he makes his perfect decisions: opportunities, intellect, motives, behavior, and environment. Any judge worth his salt gives weight to these things. People will be judged on the basis of what they know and what they did with it.

We know there are degrees of punishment in hell; it's not "One Fire Fits All." People can be punished worse or less based on their lives and what they deserve. There are also many theories from thinking Christians that possibly hell is not eternal for everyone there, but there may be future opportunities for some to be reconciled to God after appropriate punishment and as they continue to make spiritual choices.

I happen to be convinced hell is not literally fire, but the agony of true separation from God. I say that because fire doesn't have degrees of punishment, but hell does. Degrees of separation makes more sense to me than degrees of being burned. I believe hell is degrees of punishment, based on the sin (though not levels of hell, as in Dante. Ironically, though, even Dante said hell is an endless, hopeless conversation with oneself). Here's my proof:

Mt. 11.22-24 – "more tolerable"
Mt. 23.14 – "greater condemnation"
Rev. 20.13 – "each in proportion to his works"
Lk. 10.12 – "it will be more bearable for Sodom than for that town"
Lk. 12.47-48 – beaten with few blows or more blows

It's apparent to me that you misunderstand hell. Hell is not where God throws people he doesn't love anymore. Hell is where people choose to go who don't want anything to do with a relationship with God. I can say with confidence that God doesn't want anyone to go to hell. Hell was not made for people; heaven was made for people. You misunderstand if you think that God somehow stops loving people, even though at one time they were his beloved children, and he sends them to hell when they no longer please him. God opens the doors of heaven and invites everyone in, but many people simply refuse to come, despite his promises of blessing, his intent to reward, his desire for relationship, and his personal sacrifice to make it free for anyone to come. Hell (separation from God) is the only other choice for people who don't wish to be united with God.

Look at it this way: God is life. If you choose against him, you choose death. It's not like God is being cruel. You freely chose not to have anything to do with life, and so you chose death. That's your prerogative, but don't blame God. To choose to be with God is to choose life, love, fellowship, peace, and joy. To choose not to align with God you automatically choose all the antitheses: death, isolation, and torment. It's not like the church is forcing you to love him or burn. It's just that if you choose against God, you choose death, isolation and torment, what the Bible calls hell. Don't blame God for that.

My bottom line is this: Those who turn away from God will be separated from the life of God. Though we can't be sure about the form or duration of that separation, this we can be sure of: it will be a horrible experience, and God will be fair about the form and duration of it. If you reject God, you take your chances.

So, it's not necessarily "an eternity full of torture." Second, it's tempered to fit the extent of the crime, which any just judge would do. Third, if instant heaven was always the best choice, God would kill us all upon birth, so you're not thinking it through correctly. Fourth, it's a contradiction to kill to save life.

[Axis of Evil]

> I argued that it would be bad

Bad in what regard? The point was it would be better for the fetuses. You need to argue that going straight to heaven is somehow not better for the fetus. You aren't doing this and instead asserting that it's just bad.

[jimwalton]

Heaven is not just this flowery kind of existence for all, and hell is not endless torment for all. There are all kinds of different degrees of punishments and reward, suited to how people lived. There are many theories from thinking Christians that possibly hell is not eternal for everyone there, but there may be future opportunities for some to be reconciled to God after appropriate punishment and as they continue to make spiritual choices. Hell is a difficult doctrine to sort out. Without a doubt there are verses that talk about eternal punishment, but they don't necessarily include all of those who are separated from God. There are verses that talk about God reconciling all things to himself (Rom. 11.15; 2 Cor. 5.19; Col. 1.20), and so some theologians think that God will continue his work of reconciliation even into eternity, such that those who "serve their time" will at a later date be reconciled with God ("reconciliationism"). There is another position called "semi-restorationism" where, after appropriate punishment, those who desire a relationship with God will be partially restored, and those who do not, even after punishment, will opt to remain separated. So hell is eternal, but not necessarily eternal for everyone. While the Bible speaks about eternity, possibly only those who stay eternally defiant will be eternally punished. Some even believe in annihilation. It's hard to know.

Supposing it's true that the kind of experience you have in heaven (since that is where babies go, as far as we know) is really dependent on how you lived your life, and even possibly how you respond to Christ's continue efforts to reconcile you (if that branch of theology is in the right vein) after you die. It just may possibly have been better to have lived your life one way or the other.

Therefore, it's just downright immoral to slaughter babies to give them a good one. We may not actually be doing them justice, if I dare even use that word in this context, to butcher them at birth. And I still say it's an outrageous and untenable self-contradiction.

[Spackle]

Have you even read the Bible? You do know that Yahweh commits and orders multiple acts of mass murder and genocide, right?

[jimwalton]

This is pretty funny. Thanks for making me laugh. It was a good way to start off the day. I have read the Bible multiple times and studied it more deeply than you can imagine. What your comment reveals is that (1) you have read the Bible only 1" deep and haven't really studied it to see what it is genuinely teaching, (2) you have been misled by false teaching about what is going on those texts, and (3) a discussion could be worthwhile if you have an open mind to learn what the Bible really says.

Where's the mass murder to which you refer, because it makes a difference?

I should hope you understand the difference between murder and justice. Like, when the Allies conquered Germany in WWII, that was justice, not murder, right? There was an atrocity going on that had to be stopped.

Each place where God rightly judges wicked people(as we would expect any good judge to do) for the crimes they've committed is a separate matter, and it's not fair to generalize. So let's get more specific so we can talk more knowledgeably.

Let me know if you want to discuss this further.