Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Possible Duplicate:
Do Fetuses have souls? Is the aquisition of a soul instantenous or continuous?

What Scriptural basis has been used in Christianity to support the idea that the soul is already in the fetus before the fetus starts breathing, i.e. before it is delivered?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Dan Andrews, El'endia Starman Oct 1 '12 at 19:11

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

    
related post : christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/9542/… – Mike Oct 1 '12 at 16:37
    
I closed as a duplicate because the current top-voted and accepted answer on that question answers this one. – El'endia Starman Oct 1 '12 at 19:13
    
i would suggest we keep this one around as a signpost. I agree it should be closed, but not deleted. – Affable Geek Oct 2 '12 at 12:42

Jeremiah 1:5

"Before you were formed in the womb, I knew you."

This conflicts with Exodus 21:22

22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely[e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows.

(The implication here is that a fetus is treated as property, not life)

share|improve this answer
2  
Personally, I am very Pro-Life - but I would warn against trying to make that argument strictly from Scripture. It can be done both ways. – Affable Geek Oct 1 '12 at 16:11
    
The Jeremiah passage could be understood as indicating God's foreknowledge. "I knew you before you were even created". – DJClayworth Oct 1 '12 at 17:31
1  
The implication (that a fetus would be considered property) only holds if the 'injury' clause applies to the pregnant woman, and not the (unborn til this point) baby. Especially given Exodus 21:23 and on contain the standard 'limiting' clause (eye for eye, etc). – Clockwork-Muse Oct 1 '12 at 18:08
    
Where do you get the idea that that verse treats the unborn child as property? Because the parents must press the suit on the child's behalf? But what would you expect? If a 2-year-old was injured, would you expect him to fight for recompense himself? – Jay Oct 3 '12 at 4:10
1  
@AffableGeek As Brilliant and Clockwork note, you appear to be assuming that "injury" refers to injury to the mother rather than to the baby. If it means injury to the baby, then this law calls for very severe penalties on someone who harms an unborn baby. In any case, the fact that in some cases the penalty is a fine rather than retribution does not at all prove that the unborn baby is considered property. ... – Jay Oct 11 '12 at 7:35

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.