Please help me understand this one. I never "bought" it

by berylblue 12 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  berylblue

  I would love your thoughts on this one:

  Life is sacred to Jehovah. (No problem there.)

  The fetus is sacred to Jehovah.

  It is devastating when a woman loses a child during pregnancy. However, that child will not be resurrected because it did not yet take the breath of life.

  Abortion is murder.

  However, this murdered child will not get resurrected because SHE did not take the "breath of life" either.

  Only babies who are live births will be resurrected.

  The way I see it (yes, mere me, I admit it), you can't have it both ways. Either a fetus IS a human worthy of resurrecting, or it isn't, in which case, why would it be wrong to abort?
• 

  unclebruce

  I don't think you need any help at all bb,

  you just took a broadside at the tower and shot a hole a printing press couldn't fill. well done!

  unclebruce
• 

  Shutterbug

  Odd you should bring this up, as I really had a mental wrestling match with this little "problem." If the fetus isn't alive, then it should be ok to remove it, much as you would a gall bladder. If it is alive it should be treated with tenderness and care. Personally, I think the fetus is alive, it's simply getting it's oxygen and nourishment from the mother, and women who have had babies will tell you the baby is very active before birth.

  So, even though abortion disturbs me, I got out of the judgement business 20 years ago and if someone has the proceedure, I won't think any less of them for doing what that individual thought was necessary. Bug
• 

  blondie

  The WTS gives its typical "leave it up to Jehovah and Jesus but..." answer but "we can speculate." I tried to explain this to a Bible student without success. I figure if God can create the world he can come up with an answer about resurrecting life that began at conception but was not a live birth.

  But what if the embryo was more developed, had become a fetus or even was close to full term? There are many possible situations. However, there is no point in speculating, for there are countless sad consequences of imperfection suffered today. In the restored Paradise our loving heavenly Father will reverse man’s sinful condition and bring marvelous blessings. Many people will be resurrected. The decision as to how the resurrection will be carried out, and to what extent, rests with Jehovah and Jesus. We can be sure that the decision will reflect Jehovah’s perfect wisdom and justice.

  BUT THEN THE WTS HAS TO SPECULATE (EVIDENTLY IS A WTS BUZZWORD MEANING THE BIBLE DOESN'T SAY BUT WE HAVE AN OPINION)

  This accords with our knowledge of resurrection in Biblical examples. Those who were resurrected evidently were brought back to life as the individuals they had been at death. That is, children who died were resurrected as children, adults as adults. (2 Kings 4:17-20, 32-37; Luke 7:12-15; 8:40-42, 49-55; John 11:38-44) Would it be reasonable to think that if a "hidden miscarriage" had occurred in Job’s case, in the New Order that microscopic embryo would be restored to his mother’s womb to continue a pregnancy of which she might have been unaware? That does not conform to what the Bible shows about the resurrection, which always involved persons who had been born and existed as separate individuals before God.—John 5:28, 29; Acts 24:15.
• 

  Sangdigger

  Once again, the wts has everybody wrangling over the minutest legalistic details. eg.....how far along should the fetus be before its considered a real human? How would Jehovah ressurect a fetus since it died a fetus?....blah blah blah.......sorry to be so negative, i just get so sick of the wts trying to have an answer for everything, and its all so LEGALISTIC its NAUSEATING.

  berylblue, you have once again like so many others on this site exposed the Tower for its mind numbing hypocrasy.

  From a biblical point of view, all i can think of at the moment is God said he knew Jeremiah before he was in the womb. So the way i see it, Jehovah saw Jeremiah and everything he would do in life before he was born. So in Gods mind, Jeremiah might as well have been full grown while he was yet in the womb. So when someone commits abortion, why wouldnt God give the "fetus" a full grown body that he/she wouldve been if they had continued in life?
• 

  HoChiMin

  The blood doctrine is more important to the WT than a childs life. Keep them safe until their born then deny them blood and sacrifice them to the WT god. I'd like a GB member to explain this gem to me.

  HCM
• 

  rebel

  Good question bb,

  I have often wondered about this. If the foetus is not a life, why does it say somewhere in the OT that if two men are fighting and one knocks into a pregnant woman and causes her to lose her baby, that man must be put to death - a life for a life? Either the foetus is a life or it isn't. According to this passage, it is a life. Also, why would abortion be wrong if you were not actually taking a life.

  A sister I knew had a stillbirth and the elders said she would not see him in the resurrection. I always thought that was a load of rubbish - how did they know this? There is nothing about that in the Bible. I think some elders just make things up as they go along.

  xxR
• 

  NeonMadman

  I think some elders just make things up as they go along.

  I think the whole organization makes things up as they go along. The Bible simply doesn't say anything about the status of a fetus should it die prior to birth. The only answers we can possibly come up with are pure speculation. But, in typical cultic fashion, the WTS feels that it needs to have an answer for every question, so they "speculate" and it becomes official doctrine with which to rule people's lives. Unfortunately, in this case, their speculative doctrine flies in the face of their position on abortion. If they would just speak when the Bible speaks, and shut up when it doesn't, they wouldn't have these problems (which is not to say that they wouldn't have other problems, but, hey...).
• 

  Xander

  Blondie - what and where were those quotes you cited?

  That's brilliant, I never even KNEW they had an opinion on this issue (well, strange, it just never came up), but what an amazing problem they have!
• 

  blondie

  Whoops, that is the 3/15/84 Question From Readers pages 30-31, Xander.

  Blondie

  Reminds me of the Talmud regarding gathering eggs on the Sabbath. If the chicken was kept for egg-laying purposes then it was considered work and forbidden on the Sabbath, but if the chicken was kept for meat purposes then the egg could be gathered because it was only part of the chicken that fell off. Oy ve!

  The WTS teaches that God transferred the lifeforce of Jesus from heaven into a single fertilized cell and implanted that in the womb of Mary. If God would do that, why not reimplant the fertilized cells that had miscarried or aborted to grow again and be born? You can tell that men without children write the answers to these questions.