So what about abortion? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.
Well, I suspect this chapter will get some responses from readers. After all, abortion is one of those hot topics today. So let’s dive in and see what it says.
Longman does say the Bible doesn’t say exactly when life begins, but even granting this, the evidence on when life begins is clear.
“Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a ‘moment’) is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.” — Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.
“Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” –Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition, Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. p. 16.
“Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite, a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.” — E.L. Potter, M.D., and J.M. Craig, M.D. Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant (3rd Edition). Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975, page vii.
“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of life of a new individual.” –Bradley M. Patton, Human Embryology, 3rd Ed., (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), p. 43.
“The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.” –J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Friedman, Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics (Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders, 1974), p. 17 (cf. 23).
“We talk of human development not because a jumble of cells, which is perhaps initially atypical, gradually turns more and more into a human, but rather because the human being develops from a uniquely human cell. There is no state in human development prior to which one could claim that a being exists with not-yet-human individuality. On the basis of anatomical studies, we know today that no developmental phase exists that constitutes a transition from the not-yet-human to the human.” –Erich Blechschmidt, Brian Freeman, The Ontogenetic Basis of Human Anatomy: The Biodynamic Approach to Development from Conception to Adulthood, North Atlantic Books, 2004, p. 7.
So even if the biblical witness was silent, the scientific witness is there.
What about a passage like Exodus 21:22-25?
22 “When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
Longman brings up several translations and interpretations. I will not dare challenge him on the Hebrew of the passage. He concludes that this passage cannot really be used for either side in the abortion debate. I meanwhile think it’s interesting that the eye for an eye concept is there, including life for life. One aspect to consider is that if two men are quarreling, punching a nearby pregnant woman is likely not an intentional act.
What about the situation in Numbers 5 of a woman undergoing a ritual to prove she has not been unfaithful to her husband. Longman says in this case, a divine abortion could be going on, but I find this quite lacking. If a man has not been with his wife in a long time and she winds up pregnant, he doesn’t need a test. He knows the answer. I do not see anything in here that indicates an abortion takes place.
He does argue that according to Ecclesiastes 6:3-5, a stillborn fetus does not have the same position as a live child after birth. I do not think the Teacher is interested in saying that. I think he is saying a live child sees life, but a child that is dead never has to see it. It is not about the status of the persons involved.
On p. 150, he does say that abortion is the end of potential life and is wrong and sinful. The problem here is that it is not potential life. It is life. Why did Longman not cite any references in biology on this? Furthermore, what makes stopping potential life wrong? Is it wrong for a couple to not have abundant sex because they could be stopping life coming into the world? (Why do I suddenly picture a lot of my male readers insisting that yes, we should have abundant sex?)
He also says the most ardent pro-life supporter does not have a funeral or a gravesite for a miscarriage. Some do. At worst, he can say pro-lifers are inconsistent. If this is the strongest objection he has, it is a weak one.
In the end, I wish that Longman had looked at various other experts in the field before writing. It’s disappointing he did not seriously engage.
In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)
Support Deeper Waters on Patreon!
