Does Life Really Begin At Conception?

[Jeanne]

We've had a number of discussions about the Scripture which says:

Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

When we were talking about Genesis and the flood, we also determined that insects are not considered life forms in the same way that people, animals, and birds are because they do not have blood. This raises the question: is a fertilised egg still considered a human life before it has a blood supply? I think the heart forms about two weeks into the gestation period.

[creationliberty]

Now you're transitioning from a discussion about the definition of life, to a discussion about the definition of blood.

[Jeanne]

What do you mean? Does a fertilised egg have blood before it attaches to the mother's womb? I'm pretty sure it gets nutrients from the mother's blood before it has blood of its own and I believe that qualifies for it having blood. But what about before the mother's blood can get to it?

[Kenneth Winslow]

For the sake of this conversation, don't we need to first define exactly what "conception" is?

Is 'conception' when an egg receives seed?

Or, does 'conception' mean the conception of life, which then requires blood?

Or, is the exact point of the beginning of life a mystery, impossible to pinpoint?

Again, what exactly is conception?

I'm not sure if the Webster's 1828 is of any help or not.

CONCEPTION, n. [L., See Conceive.]
1. The act of conceiving; the first formation of the embryo or fetus of an animal.
I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception.  Genesis 3.
2. The state of being conceived.
Joy had the like conception in our eyes.
3. In pneumatology, apprehension of nay thing by the mind; the act of conceiving in the mind; that mental act or combination of acts by which an idea or notion is formed of an absent object of perception, or of a sensation formerly felt.  When we see an object with our eyes open, we have a perception of it; when the same object is presented to the mind with the eyes shut, in idea only or in memory, we have a conception of it.
4. Conception may be sometimes used for the power of conceiving ideas, as when we say, a thing is not within our conception.  Some writers have defined conception as a distinct faculty of the mind; but it is considered by others as memory, and perhaps with propriety.
5. Purpose conceived; conception with reference to the performance of an act.
6. Apprehension; knowledge.
And as if beasts conceived what reason were, and that conception should distinctly show.
7. Conceit; affected sentiment, or thought.
He is too full of conceptions, points of epigram, and witticisms.

[Kenneth Winslow]

CONCEIVE, v.t. [L., to take.]
1. To receive into the womb, and breed; to begin the formation of the embryo or fetus of animal.
Then shall she be free and conceive seed. Numbers 5. Hebrew 11.
Elisabeth hath conceived a son in her old age.  Luke 1.
In sin did my mother conceive me. Psalm 51.
2. To form in the mind; to imagine; to devise.
They conceive mischief and bring forth vanity. Job 15.
Nebuchadnezzar hath conceived a purpose against you.  Jeremiah 49.
3. To form an idea in the mind; to understand; to comprehend.
We cannot conceive the manner in which spirit operates upon matter.
4. To think; to be of opinion; to have an idea; to imagine.
You can hardly conceive this man to have been bred in the same climate.
CONCEIVE, v.i.
1. To have a fetus formed in the womb; to breed; to become pregnant.
Thou shalt conceive and bear a son.  Judges 13.
2. To think; to have a conception or idea.
Conceive of things clearly and distinctly in their own natures.  The grieved commons hardly conceive of me.
3. To understand; to comprehend; to have a complete idea of; as, I cannot conceive by what means this event has been produced.

[creationliberty]

Again, the conversation you're starting is over the definition of blood; like where is the line between a cell and blood, but none of this is necessary. It's a simple fact that blood is borrowed from the mother until the baby begins to production process on his/her own, which is how everything forms in the baby. Children must take what is given from the mother until it's time to come out. (And even then he/she still takes from mom.) This is why the woman has a "way" (i.e. period), which discharges the blood if there is no seed of the man to connect with; that blood remains after conception to give the child what he/she needs for life to continue to grow.

[Kenneth Winslow]

It's a simple fact that blood is borrowed from the mother until the baby begins to production process on his/her own, which is how everything forms in the baby.

So, the point in time when a baby starts to produce its own blood is irrelevant. The baby is in fact alive by virtue of the mother's blood.
Very interesting!
That makes sense. 

[Joop]

So, the point in time when a baby starts to produce its own blood is irrelevant. The baby is in fact alive by virtue of the mother's blood.

Really? Then what about test tube babies? At what point in time will that baby be alive? After placing in the mother's womb?
And if we are destroying one-celled embryo's, aren't we destroying life, or just distroying some cells?

I'm not really sure whether (maternal) blood has to do with an embryo being a real life-form or not. This bible vers may give some insight:

My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of then Psalm 139:15-16

[anvilhauler]

Really? Then what about test tube babies? At what point in time will that baby be alive? After placing in the mother's womb?
And if we are destroying one-celled embryo's, aren't we destroying life, or just distroying some cells?

Test tube babies is people messing around with things they shouldn't be.  It is God who either allows you to have children or not have children. 

For women who are barren, live with it.  That's life.  God can however visit them if he wishes to and give them a child even later in life than people thought possible.  One only has to look back through scripture to see the times that has happened.

Trying to cheat God's system is a complete lack of faith.  A lack of faith in one area will soon expose that the person has next to no faith in any area and they are on the road to destruction.

I want.  I want.  I want.  I want it now.  What's the holdup?  I expect to get what I want, when I want it.  Does God not know who I am and how important I am to me?

Luke 23 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
29 For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck.

Hence always being careful what you ask for   ......   because you may just get it.

[Joop]

Test tube babies is people messing around with things they shouldn't be.  It is God who either allows you to have children or not have children.

Okay, but this would be another topic to discuss.

[anvilhauler]

Whether life began at conception or not is sort of rather a moot point and probably wouldn't matter unless you were looking at killing one.

If a woman has an embryo growing in her womb then if it goes to term then she is going to be a mother.  Any interference with that growing embryo is un-Godly. 

[Jeanne]

I guess my real question in all of this is about birth control pills. (Not that this is an issue for me at 61 years of age, of course.) Do birth control pills that prevent a fertilised egg from attaching to the uterine wall count as abortion since there is no blood yet?

I acknowledge, however, what Kevin said about reproduction being something we shouldn't ought to mess with though. Unmarried women should, of course, not be having sex at all, but what about the married ones who either don't want kids at all or don't want any more than they already have (the husband being in agreement with all of this)?

[Chris]

I've wanted to research this.  I remembered hearing the verses below a few years ago.

Genesis 38:8-10 KJV
And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. [9] And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. [10] And the thing which he did displeased the Lord : wherefore he slew him also.

This man prevented his seed from being recieved by the woman, and God killed him for his sin.  I'm not sure why God chose to kill him, but this form of contraception is definitely not mentioned under good circumstances.  While I was reading the chapter to try to get more context, I came across a verse about conception.

Genesis 38:18-19 KJV
And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet, and thy bracelets, and thy staff that is in thine hand. And he gave it her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him. [19] And she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood.

Judah took his daughter in law that was playing a harlot.  She conceived and then arose.  It seems from the sequence of events listed, that she conceived before she left the presence of Judah.

I did a quick google search, and I found that fertilization can take minutes to days.  The same diagram showed that implantation takes 5 to 15 days. That being said, it seems that the bible defines conception as the fertilization of the egg in the verses above.

I still want to study further to understand if the prevention of pregnancy is sinful in all cases (other than abstinence). I'm not convinced that the first example shows that God disapproves contraception, but I'm also not convinced that God approves.

[creationliberty]

No, it wasn't that God killed him because he didn't impregnate a woman in general. God took his life because the man was taking advantage of the woman due to a religious custom; the custom was to make sure she could bring forth an heir, not so he could get sexual pleasure out of his sister-n-law. Because he took advantage of her, God slew him, and He might have done the same to Judah if not for the fact that she deceived Judah and he later repented and took responsibility for his actions.

[anvilhauler]

I'm not going to go through a whole lot of research papers to prove that artificial steroids used in birth control pills causes epigenetic alterations in the DNA of mankind.  Hopefully it is enough to note that it is well proven that this does happen.

Those changes in DNA not only affect the next offspring but also their offspring right down the line and may cause a lot of severe damage.  Damage may also of course be being done to the health of the woman taking those steroids.

Just do a search for "birth control" and "epigenetics"

https://www.google.co.nz/search?source=hp&ei=u5GAXL7YIMLjvgSl7YmIBA&q=%22birth+control%22+%22epigenetics%22&btnK=Google+Search&oq=%22birth+control%22+%22epigenetics%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i22i30.5961.20892..23376...0.0..0.289.6319.0j5j24......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0j0i131j0i10.KqVdrd1_6iE

I haven't even read it but here is a typical website that might tell you a bit.

Oral Contraceptives, Epigenetics, and Autism
https://http://www.hormonesmatter.com/oral-contraceptives-autism-epigenetic-damage/


Q. Artificial steroids    .....  how dangerous could they ever be? 

A.  Don't even consider taking compounds like that in to your body.

Why not just use natural family planning like people had to years ago.  Then, not only do they have family planning but they will have learned self control at the same time.

[Jeanne]

Thank you, Kevin! I knew I could count on you to provide all the scientific/technical stuff.

[anvilhauler]

Thank you, Kevin! I knew I could count on you to provide all the scientific/technical stuff.

   Thanks Jeanne.

[Jeanne]

Okay, now I've had another question come up on this topic; what about all the IVF embryos that are destroyed in clinics all the time? Is that still murder too? (I'm not endorsing this procedure but I do know people who have had it done.)

[strangersmind]

What is ivf?

[Jeanne]

IVF = In Vitro Fertilisation; sometimes referred to as 'test tube babies'. It's where doctors take eggs and some sperm and manually fertilise them to later be implanted into the mother. Couples who have tried many things and failed to conceive often resort to this. Several eggs are used at once to insure at least one viable embryo. The problem is that this procedure usually results in more fertilised eggs than are needed and after the successful implantation of one into the mother, the rest are discarded.

The question again is, is this still murder because even though you have a fertilised egg, it has not been implanted and therefore has no blood supply. If life is in the blood, is an artificially conceived embryo still considered a life?