From: rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: ABORTION: WHEN Does Human Life BEGIN?
Date: 10 Nov 92 18:11:16 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <1992Nov09.170021.28822@bnr.ca> ingrcfb@bnr.ca (Charles Board) writes:
|In article <74157@hydra.gatech.EDU>, rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
||> In article <1992Nov06.211949.14647@bnr.ca> ingrcfb@bnr.ca (Charles Board) writes:
||> |In article <73889@hydra.gatech.EDU>, rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
||> ||> In article <Bx9J8z.5F1@news.udel.edu> roby@chopin.udel.edu (Scott W Roby) writes:
||> ||> |In article <72646@hydra.gatech.EDU> rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
||> ||> |>
||> |
||> |Richard, I'm really trying to understand your (and other prolifer's) view of
||> |this passage, but I don't see how you get it.
||> 
||> Personally, the confusion that seems to be present on the net has to do 
||> with the claim by those who seem to be against the Pro-Life movement.  One 
||> particular person on the net (Publius) says that the Pro-Life interpretation 
||> of this verse denies God's foreknowledge.  I've not heard anyone teach
||> it the way Publius says it is taught.  However, I don't know all of what 
||> is being taught and so I can't vehemently deny it.  However, I've asked 
||> him to present who is teaching this passage in such a way that it 
||> denies God's foreknowledge.
||> 
||> I don't deny God's foreknowledge.  The passage speaks to God knowing
||> Jeremiah before he was formed in the womb (i.e., God knew him before.
||> This is about God's foreknowledge and is not teaching that Jeremiah existed
||> before he was formed in the womb.)  The passage also speaks to God
||> setting Jeremiah apart before he was born.  Again this speaks to
||> the ability and desires of God - not Jeremiah.  God set him apart before
||> he was born and this could have been while he was being formed in the
||> womb or even before he was formed in the womb.  I'd vote for the latter,
||> since I believe God knew ALL that was going to happen.
||> 
||> ||> |>Jer 1:5   "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you
||> ||> |>      were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to
||> ||> |>      the nations."
||> ||> |>
||> ||> |>The passage talks about God's foreknowledge - and how he had 
||> ||> |>selected Jerimiah BEFORE HE WAS BORN and BEFORE HE FORMED HIM.
||> ||> |>The point is that if God looks upon a person before he was
||> ||> |>born and before he was born as a person to do great works for
||> ||> |>Him, then how can one say the unborn person has NO worth.  God
||> ||> |>had already planned for Jerimiah to do many things.
||> ||> |
||> ||> |So Jeremiah was known by God before he was formed, i.e., before 
||> ||> |conception.  So:
||> ||> 
||> ||> My position is that God knew before hand - not that Jeremiah
||> ||> existed before hand.  This also has to do with free will.  I
||> ||> believe God knows what is going to happen, but man has the
||> ||> will to do what he wants to do - God knows what man chooses.
||> ||> God doesn't direct our actions, but knows them.
||> |
||> |You seem to be saying that God can know something before it exists
||> |(your paragraph above), but can't set something apart before it exists.
||> |If he CAN set something apart before it exists then "before you were
||> |born I set you apart" says NOTHING about whether Jeremiah existed before
||> |birth. Are we agreed so far? I hope so, it's elementary logic.
||> 
||> I didn't say Jeremiah existed prior to his forming in the womb.
||> As I point out above, God could have set Jeremiah apart when he was in
||> the womb, but I believe it was prior to that - maybe even before the 
||> foundation of the world, since God knows what is going to happen.
||> 
||> |So the only way this verse can support the view of existence before birth
||> |is to assume that God CAN'T set something apart before it exists. So if
||> |you are to use this verse to oppose abortion the burden falls on you to
||> |show that God CAN'T set something apart before existence (but CAN know it).
||> |Care to take a stab at it? 
||> 
||> Again, the passage speaks to two stages in the life of Jeremiah.  One
||> was his forming in the womb and the second was his birth.  God can set stuff
||> apart before it exists. Look at what is said about God in reference to
||> Abraham.  God said that he would make Abraham the father of many nations,
||> but Abraham and Sarah did not have any children at that time - God calls the
||> things there are not as though they were. 
||> 
||>    Rom 4:17   As it is written: "I have made you a father of many nations." He
||>       is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed--THE GOD WHO
||>       GIVES LIFE TO THE DEAD AND CALLS THINGS THAT ARE NOT AS THOUGH THEY
||>       WERE.
||> 
||> ||> |BOTTOMLINE:
||> ||> |I don't see how the special case of Jeremiah (set apart) advances the 
||> ||> |cause of either side of the abortion debate anymore than a discussion of 
||> ||> |Mary's special case of conception would further the cause of either 
||> ||> |side of the birth-control debate.
||> ||> 
||> ||> God placed significance upon Jeremiah in the womb by pointing out
||> ||> that that was part of his life, as is the birth as is all if one's
||> ||> life - God know about all of this before hand, but the part that
||> ||> is singled out is the forming of Jeremiah in the womb and is
||> ||> birth - God called him before that, but those are if nothing else
||> ||> given equal standing in the life of Jeremiah.
||> |
||> |I can't make any sense of the paragraph above past the first comma -
||> |please try a re-write (without so many confusingly placed pronouns).
||> 
||> Sorry - I'm not a good proofreader.
||>  
||> God placed significance upon Jeremiah in the womb by pointing out that 
||> that was part of his life just as his birth is also part of his
||> life.  God knows about all of this before hand.  God singled out Jeremiah's
||> "forming in the womb" and "his birth".  I believe God called him before 
||> both of those events.  I believe it just as easily could have ALSO said that
||> God knew him before he could walk, before he could talk, and so on.   
||> However, the mention of the earliest stages of life have more weight.
||> If nothing else both the forming in the womb and the birth are given equal 
||> standing in the life of Jeremiah.
||> 
||> |As for the part before the comma - you haven't shown yet shown any 
||> |reason to believe the womb-time was part of Jeremiah's life, to do
||> 
||> It is just as much a part as his birth.
||> 
||> |that you've got to tell us why God can't set something apart before
||> |it exists. And even if you can, then you've only shown that JEREMIAH
||> 
||> God can set something apart before it exists - he calls things that
||> are not as though they were.
||> 
||> |existed before birth...I think Scott's point above was that that 
||> |doesn't necessarily say anything about "normal" pregnancies.
||> 
||> Was Jeremiah more than a man?  Except for Jesus and Adam and Eve, we 
||> all come by the same route.
||>
|
|So, let's see if I've got your view straight - you believe:
|a) the "knowing" and "setting apart" in this verse are not relevant to
|the abortion issue (since you believe both can [and do] happen prior to
|conception)
|and

Agreed.

|b) The significance to the abortion issue comes from the "fact" that God
|mentions "formed in the womb" and "birth" as "events" in Jeremiah's life.

Agreed.

|Am I with you so far?

Yes.

|As to a). 
|Every sermon, article, etc I've heard on the topic places the relevance to
|the abortion issue in the fact that Jeremiah was "called" before birth. You

I'd have to see the article.  Yes, he was called before birth, but that
has to do with God's ability and not Jeremiah's existence.  As I cited,
God calls things that are not as though they are.

|are free to hold different opinions on this, but I think this is where the
|confusion comes in. The objection that the traditional pro-life interpretation
|of this verse negates divine foreknowledge (advanced by Publius among others)

If you can email to me or include an unedited track passage or something 
that presents this "tradional view", then I could agree or disagree with 
you on your understanding of this traditional view.  I'm not saying it
is not out there.  

|applies to the usual interpretation, but (as I see it, Publius can speak for
|himself) doesn't apply to your views if I've summarized them correctly above.

Agreed.

|So your interpretation wiggles (not meant perjoratively) out of this difficulty,
|but does so at the cost of losing about all of the pro-life force of the verse.
|Because b)
|NO ONE on the pro-choice side denies that human beings are "formed" in the womb!!
|The question is "When is the forming significantly complete?".  IF, as you believe,
|we are "formed in the womb", then we are NOT formed at conception. Think of a timeline

We begin at conception - and are formed (grow) all along in the womb, as
we continue to do until we are about 25 years old.  I haven't said
pro-choicers deny the forming (growing) in the womb.  Conception is
a definite point in this processes.  Birth is a definite point too,
but without conception and the forming we wouldn't get to birth.  All
of them are significant.   You can't have the latter without the former.

|                 a                 b                           c
|-----------------|-----------------|---------------------------|
|             conception    forming process complete          birth
|                             (person exists)
|
|The fundamental question in abortion is where does b lie? Traditional 
|pro-life position is that b=a. But note that it seems to me that the only
|biblical verse they offer as evidence is this Jeremiah quote and it says
|NOTHING about conception. In fact,as you seem to agree, it mentions only

The passages that mention conception lump it very closely to the
sex act.  The passages pretty much pertain to those who are in
the linage of Jesus - it often says so and so lay with his wife and
she conceived.

The conception of Jeremiah isn't mentioned here, but we know it happened.

Again, the forming, which began at conception, and the birth are give
equal significance.  

|b & c. It offers NO INFORMATION AT ALL as to the relationship between 
|a & b, hence it says ABSOLUTELY nothing about the abortion question!!!!
|Where do you see any applicability at all?

The forming is significant, else why mention it?  For the sake of
the argument, if one grants that the forming process is not started at 
conception, but some where else but yet prior to birth, then there should
be some reasonable restrictions placed on abortion. However, the pro-choice
side continues to lobby for NO restrictions.  Some could argue that
SOME reasons are valid for abortions, but as it is now one can get an
abortion for ANY reason.  Why not have some restrictions?

|Couple this with 3 other facts:
|  a) Pro-lifers can't (at least to my knowledge) provide any other biblical
|     "evidence" against abortion

John the Baptist leaped in his mother's womb, when Mary, who was six months 
pregnant with Jesus, came to visit them.  Conception is often mentioned
as the starting/initial point - and you agree it is the starting point,
correct?  As you say, people want the supposed right to relinquish
their responsibility and so have pushed the issue to this supposedly
vague devolopment period.  Abortions are generally performed after the 6 
or 7 week of pregnacy not at conception.  The unborn is perfectly viable
in the womb.  It is man's technology that cannot support the baby outside
the womb - God's design (the woman's womb) can support the life.

|  b) they consistently ignore a verse that has God saying that a pre-birth 
|     "life" and a post-birth life are not equivalent (the Exodus passage)

Is the pre-birth life insignficant?  I think not.

|  c) They consistently ignore the FACT that god commands the Jewish priests
|     to commit abortions. (Numbers 5)

This was a judgement against adultery.  Have we gone so far as to
think that what was a punishment is now to be desired?

|and you see why we question the motives & integrity of those who claim biblical
|backing for banning abortions. It just ain't there (of course even it was there
|it wouldn't be sufficient grounds to impose it on non-Christians).

Justice can be imposed on any one - check out the legislative system.
It may not be imposed on purely religious grounds, but just because
religion agrees or supports something doesn't make it only a church issue.
The church opposes murder as does the state and we think this is ok.
We (Americans) are to prompt the common welfare of the people.

For Christ and His Kingdom,
Richard Pitts


-- 
rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu       |    
Atlanta, GA                --|-- 
                        -|-  |  -|-
                         |   |   |
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc