David here is reflecting on his own existence, to say a dear diary moment. Of course he existed in the womb because he is talking about it while he is alive and grown. Again nowhere does the verse you gave say that at conception God gives the gift of life. Show me a verse that says so. Also you have yet to show me with scripture was how God forms us in the womb? where does it show how God himself is forming in the womb? you saying God gave David the gift of life at conception is false. you are saying this the verse does not say this
You clearly dont understand what a blueprint is. regardless of God forming and giving life to a adult man. he is still showing us what is necessary for a being to be formed and possess life. that is what matters. in forming a being/body it must have a body viable to be alive/same as as that of Giod formed for Adam only then can that being/body merge with the breath of life and become aa living soul and possess life. Adam was a Human being formed regardless of size, same as in the womb it is a human being being formed. Us applying the same aspects performed by God in forming A HUman being that is Adam and posesssing life to that of a human being in the womb we can see and understand when and how that huamn being formed and possess life
Nor is there a formula that God used to make Adam out of dirt, or Eve out of a rib, or the universe out of nothing, in the Bible.
I don’t think you’re asking for a biology lesson. Rather, it seems that you want to justify abortion. You will believe what you choose to believe, in spite of the evidence. David wasn’t writing to his diary, he was writing to God in praise, and to us under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
So, biologically, life begins at conception. Scripturally, God decrees life before conception. Humans sometimes believe they can end the lives of other innocent humans before God’s ordination, without any guilt.
You might believe that, but the Bible doesn’t support that belief.
She’s going out the door! Good bye for now!
Show me the a verse where God gives gthe gift of life in the womb? why are you talking about biological life. how life is possessed as God shows is what matters. i am christian and believe in God. So what matters is what God say and does to show hoe life is possessed. The bible shows us this ONLY in genesis 2:7 yet you seem to reject the only standard of evidence in the entire bible.
good one!! Laughing with you, not at you! Pretty sure I understand what a blueprint is.
you talking about biological life while in a christian forum. the standard is God’s description of how life is possessed not biology AS a christian the authority is the word of God not biology
On Abortion. A fetus inside the womb has no freewill. But the woman herself Possess freewill. God respects our freewill so much so that he would never affect it. without freewill God would never have created us to begin with. The agency of the woman who actually has couscious will outways the existence of a fetus that does not have the capacity yet. Why would God prioritize a being with no Capacity for choice, no consiciousness and no freewill over a living person that possess all those things?
I appreciate that you cite Genesis 2:7 as a guiding verse for how you view the beginning of True Life. You say “God gives Life” and you distinguish God’s life from biological life. Great. me too. You say “only the God Life matters.” I agree. You say “Genesis 2:7 is the only descriptive definition in the entire bible that show us how a being is formed and possesses life and it is being done by God himself.” Great. I see it mostly like that too.I agree only God gives life, possessing true life only comes from God himself. God’s life is different than biological life. I agree with you, no argument.
The difficulty I am having, (and you have not addressed this part), is why have you come to the conclusion that God only grants His kind of life to a person who has developed to what “Google” says is the point of viability? Where did that connection come from? If Genesis is “the only descriptive definition in the entire bible that show us how a being is formed and possesses life” how does the Genesis passage lead you to conclude this miracle happens at about 6 months past conception? It doesn’t say that, even if Google does.
I know you “don’t care what most Christians believe” and you only “care what God says and does”, and that’s fine.
I also concede that The Bible never directly says God’s kind of life begins at conception, but neither does it ever say God’s kind of life begins at 6 months after conception, or at any other specific time.
I also realize you are actually arguing that someone who willfully terminates their pregnancy prior to the point of “materialization” as you say, has not broken the sixth commandment. I don’t agree, but I understand what you are saying.
I hear your logic when you say:
I am trying to understand you, but I don’t think I agree with a single sentence in that post. I think every statement is at least partially false. I will only comment on the question you ask.
““Why would God prioritize a being with no Capacity for choice, no consciousness and no freewill over a living person that possess all those things?”
The “priority” God places on this situation is not based on who has capacity, but on justice. There can be no standard of justice that would recognize or support one person’s “priority” to willfully end the life of another person just because the other person cannot defend themselves, or does not have “capacity”. God will always “prioritize” the rights of the defenseless against those who would unjustly end their life.
Psalm 116:6: "The Lord protects defenseless…”
Likewise, Psalm 82:3–4 commands leaders and judges to “defend the weak and the fatherless” and to “uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed,”
In Psalm 68:5: God is described as a “father to the fatherless, a defender of widows”.
In Proverbs 31:8–9: Believers and leaders are called to “speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves” and defend the rights of the destitute.
You ask “Why would God prioritize a being with no Capacity for choice, no consciousness and no freewill over a living person that possess all those things?" The answer is Justice. God is Just and will always “prioritize” the one with little or no capacity over the one who possesses strength or power. This is not debatable.
I’m still interested in how (other than a man-made concept) how you think God declares that he imparts His life into a person at about 6 moths post-conception.
Thanks
KP
Let me explain, When God made us he gave us the ability to share a quality that he only possess, which is that creating. But we are made in God’s image so that quality to create is not identical in that we can only form a being in the womb. This process happens biologically. but now, only God alone can give life. This tells us that in the womb the biological being that is forming must at some point possess life, given that God gives that life, that tells us that God must at some point give the necessary trait to give the biological being in the womb life. The ONLY descriptive definition of how God gives a being life is found in Genesis 2:7, it becomes the only way we can also understand how a being in the womb possess life/is given life. in Genesis 2:7 God is forming a human being’s body. A human being body is also formed in the womb. God forms a human being’ body himself, but for us, God gave us the ability for a being to be formed biologically in the womb. Remeber we are made in his image so that means we share qualites of creating but they are not identical. For God he forms the body himself but for us the body is formed biologically in the womb. Now here is there thing when God forms the body it is formed to the point whereby it is complete/viable to be alive given that the intention is for it to possess life. Only then does God give that body his breath of life and it becomes a living soul and possess life. For us the body biologically forms in the womb, From what God did to give a body life we to must meet the neccessry standard for life to be given by God to the biological being forming in the womb. The standard is that the biological body in the womb must be complete/viable to be alive which is the same standard as God. only then can God give the breath of life to that body and it becomes a living soul and possess life. A biological being in the womb is only viable/complete to be alive from 6 months +(6 moths moving foward. i am not saying 6 month is the specific point, i am saying it is the starting point and can move forward to 7 month, or 8month or 9 month) That is the medical benchmark and clinical viability. We neccessitate the knowledge of when the biological being in the womb is viable/complete to be alive given that we possess that ability. God does not have to give us that information because he does not form the biological being in the womb we do. So when at 6 months +(6 moths moving foward. i am not saying 6 month is the specific point, i am saying it is the starting point and can move forward to 7 month, or 8month or 9 month). only then will God give the breath of life and the being becomes a living soul and possess life. Do you get me?
How would you put this verse into perspective?
“The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.” Matthew 26:24
Jesus is referring to Judas Iscariot, the only disciple of the original twelve who betrayed him when he(Judas) had the breath of life.
In this verse, is Jesus saying that it would have been better for that man to have never seen the light of day if he died in the womb? Jesus still said he was a man which still pertains to life.
God would have never created us without freewill. This tells us Freewill is thee most important thing God values for/to us. Everything else comes second. Why would God value justice over freewill when freewill is the very thing needed For God to create us? Justice can not be applied to us if we never existed, thus freewill comes first cause it neccessitates us being created
Notice what Jesus says he says IF, telling us he is talking about a possibility not something actually happening. possibilities are not definitions for actual living experiences.
Uh oh. Possible world theories! Modal counterfactuals!
When Jesus said - “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.”
So the if/then conditional statement doesn’t apply to real life? That certainly must be false!
God does it all the time. Like “If you reject My Word, you will suffer for it.” “If Socrates hadn’t drunk the hemlock, he wouldn’t have died when he did.”
We do it too. Like - “If a baby isn’t an ACTUAL baby yet, it’s okay to kill it.”
The question isn’t if it’s real life or not. If it isn’t real life, it could be real life. The question is, is it true or not. The modal counterfactual possibilities help us to understand if the real life conditional statements are true or not.
1 Like
From an exegetical standpoint, the postulation of an autonomous, unconditioned human will (liberum arbitrium in its absolute sense) is fundamentally incompatible with New Testament anthropology. Within Pauline and Johannine theology, human agency is not conceived as a neutral, self-deriving capacity operating independently of divine governance.
Rather, true freedom (eleutheria) is teleologically and pneumatologically defined, it is realized exclusively when human willing is conformed to, and energized by, the indwelling Spirit of the Triune God. To posit a libertarian independence from divine sovereignty is to lapse into the Pauline category of life ‘according to the flesh’ (kata sarka), which reduces confession to nominalism (homologountes men…).
Would you agree here @kv100 , if not, give me your defintion of “freewill”
Shalom.
J.
I should probably keep reading the responses, but I have not, so I apologize to anyone I repeat. Your argument relies on a specific theological interpretation of Genesis 2:7 that treats Adam’s creation as a literal prototype for biological human development in the womb. However, from a Biblical and textual perspective, that framework makes several logical leaps that conflict with the broader context of Scripture.
Genesis 2:7 details the special, direct creation of the first human out of dust. Not the biological development of unborn children inside a mother. Applying the creation mechanics of Adam directly to fetal development ignores that Adam had no biological mother, no womb, and no embryonic stage.
The phrase “breath of life” (neshamah) in Genesis 2:7 refers to the divine spark of life given directly by God to inanimate matter. The text does not establish a timeline or threshold for fetal viability, nor does it state that breath must enter a body through physical lungs at 6 months of gestation.
Your argument claims Genesis 2:7 is the “only descriptive definition/blueprint” for life. However, Scripture explicitly describes human life and identity existing in the womb before birth:
"For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth.
Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them." Psalm 139:13–16
“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.” Jeremiah 1:5
The unborn John the Baptist leaps for joy in Elizabeth’s womb upon hearing Mary’s greeting, acknowledging Christ while both were still unborn. Luke 1:41, 44
The Hebrew used in Exodus 20:13 for “Do not kill” is lo tirtzach (לֹא תִּרְצָח), which specifically translates to “You shall not murder” (unlawful, intentional taking of human life). We kill things all day long. From mosquitoes to animals for food. Constructing a modern gestational cutoff (like 6 months) to determine what counts as “life” requires inserting non-biblical medical concepts into the ancient text.
Your argument takes a passage describing the unique creation of Adam from dust and uses it to overrule the rest of biblical imagery regarding life in the womb. Sorry, but that is not accurate.
Be blessed, be a blessing.
Peter
Nope.
He is mixing scripture with human-made concepts and labeling it as divine teaching, which is misleading. If done on purpose, then it is a false teaching.
God says.
Psalm 139
The problem is you are wrong. I hope you’re just ignorant and not purposely misleading.
You really seem delusional. As I said, I hope just ignorant. Ignorance can be education. Excusing sin and changing the Word is not ignorance. Also remember that flesh and her is not her body; it is the little human’s body that God wishes to bring into the World. Interfering with God and Murdering that innocent life IS Murder.
Peter
1 Like
Are you aware of the words you are typing for commenting?
You said:
I can’t be sure what you mean when you use the term “freewill”.
-
The only place the term “freewill” is used in the Bible is in reference to “offerings”, gifts offered willingly to The Lord, in other words, donations that were not prescribed or required. So the Bible uses the term “freewill” to imply “willingness”.
-
Usually, in casual conversation, people using this term mean something similar to “independence”. When Christians use this term, they most often mean a person’s ability to make their own choices and control their own actions without any coercion or influence from outside forces, including God.
From your writings, I can’t be sure what YOU mean by “freewill”. @Johann is likewise trying to understand your definition (post #33). You are using the term in a very different way than anything I have heard from anyone else.
You say
- “it (freewill) is the most important thing God values for/to us. Everything else comes second.”,
- “freewill is the very thing needed for God to create us”, and
- “freewill comes first because it necessitates us being created.”
Am I representing your ideas accurately?
To you, “freewill” doesn’t mean “willingness” like The Bible uses the word, and it doesn’t mean “independence” like most people use the term. If I you could help me understand what YOU mean by “freewill” I might be able to comment more intelligently on it.
Even so, you seem to rely on an assumption that before about 6 months after conception, the person in the womb has “no capacity for choice, no consciousness, and no freewill (whatever that means to you), and therefore you say they have no right to protection, and no right to existence. To your way of thinking, destroying that person does not violate God’s law.
So, to you, does this same standard apply to all persons who are in this condition; I mean do all people whom we assume have “no capacity for choice, no consciousness, and no freewill”, also have no right to existence? I know some folks who probably fit these conditions. I use the word “assume” because you are “assuming” a person who is less than about 6 months past conception does not possess these traits. I’m not so sure.
Have you considered this, that:
“… even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him.” (Hebrews 7:9-10)
And have you considered your personal ideas against Paul’s teaching to the Church in Rome:
“…nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.” That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed. For this is the word of promise: “At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son.”
And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” (Romans 9:6-13)
I think these two references may shed some light on your current understanding of how people are “made”.
I’d love to hear what The Lord teaches you through these two passages.
KP
Without freewill would God have created us, yes or no?
Since God alone can give the gift of life, can you give me scripture that shows us when inside the womb God gives the gift of life?