Fake Christian fails to defend abortion

Of all issues on Earth, abortion is simultaneously the easiest to defend, and the hardest. It's the hardest to defend because it is quite literally indefensible. There are no good arguments for abortion. Arguments do exist, but they rely primarily on misguided emotions, denial of reality, and smooth lipped sophistry. This, sadly, is why it's the easiest to defend. It's the hardest to defend logically, but it's the easiest to defend by sheer deceit, and crocodile tears.

Adding to this struggle is the so-called Christians who contribute to it. From a purely Biblical perspective, after the flood, God commanded "Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man. “Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man. And as for you, be fruitful and multiply; Bring forth abundantly in the earth And multiply in it.”" (Genesis 9:5-7). This was prior to the Law of Moses, but rather, was part of the post-flood covenant God made with Noah, his sons, and all their descendants after them. There is no evidence that this was ever repealed, and in fact, even in the New Testament, we are told very clearly "...you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." (1 John 3:15).

Furthermore, God has not left us with a system of anarchy and vigilante justice. In Romans 13:1-7, we read "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor."

We see, then, that God gives us governments with the express purpose of being a terror to evil, even bearing a sword to avenge and execute wrath against those who practice evil. Of course, that doesn't mean they will always do this, for the government themselves are still people. In fact, the government to whom Paul himself submitted were very evil, and very much were a terror to good works. Yet, if the government functions as it should function, it will punish evil works, such as murder.

Furthermore, with the logic of the aforementioned 1 John 3:15, we can reasonably surmise that whether or not the government punishes murder on Earth, God will punish it in Hell. Of course, thanks to the Gospel, it is possible to have that expunged. David, after all, was a murderer, having killed Uriah the Hittite in order to take Bathsheba from him following their affair. I wish to make this much very clear: "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us." (1 John 1:8-10).

Nevertheless, while the confession of sin leads to its forgiveness, impenitence can only lead to everlasting doom. For that reason, I contend that it is impossible to be a Christian and support abortion. At the very least, it seems support for abortion is symptomatic of false faith. If we know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him, and we see someone is an unapologetic murderer, the only sound conclusion is that he has no eternal life abiding in him. That is, he quite literally is not saved. We can also throw 1 Timothy 5:8 in here, as it says "But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."

But perhaps I'm looking at this all wrong. Maybe abortion isn't murder after all. If this is the case, abortion would not be murder. In order to establish that a murder has happened, we must establish two things: A human victim, and an inexcusable, premature end to their lives. So, killing a chicken isn't murder, we actually eat them to sustain our lives. Self defense is a valid reason to risk killing, even if the attacker is human. That's not murder. As previously established, the government can kill a capital criminal, it's not murder. Even cannibalism, while sinful for other reasons, would not be murder if your actions did not lead to the death of the victim.

So, for abortion to be murder, we need to establish that a baby is a human life, and abortion takes that life away for unjust reasons. It's worth noting that the Bible gives a direct example in the Law. "“If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus 21:22–25). This passage clearly treats the child as a life. If the child dies as a result of the man's actions, he is treated as a murderer and killed.

Furthermore, we have other examples of people being treated as fully human from the womb. Luke 1:39-45, for example, shows John the Baptist leaping for joy in his mother's womb, because Mary, Jesus' mother, had come to visit. That's a New Testament reference (so there goes the covenantal defence) that clearly depicts a living child showing an emotional response. While you can argue this was due to the filling of the Holy Spirit, you cannot argue the Holy Spirit temporarily transformed a non-human into a human 3 months earlier than he was supposed to be human. John was human in the womb, and his life was as precious as a child 10 times his age.

But there are a surprising number of so-called Christians, like "Reverend" Caleb Lines, who claim this isn't the case. There is a popular argument that life begins at first breath, not at conception. After all, this is what it says in Genesis 2:7.

But does it? Let's have a look at what the verse really says: "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." Well that makes things awkward... In context, this is of course talking about Adam. It's not talking about a child in the womb, it's about a man being formed before the first womb. In fact, a few verses later, "...the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: “This is now bone of my bones And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.” Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." (Genesis 2:21-24).

Ironically, notice nothing is said about God breathing into Eve's nostrils. And obviously, not even an abortionist will argue a woman is not alive until the Lord creates her from her husband's rib... The argument is asinine from the beginning. Obviously, the beginning of the first people's lives would have been quite different from the beginning of the lives that descended from them. Adam and Eve were never babies. They never started in a womb. They didn't lose their baby teeth, they didn't go through puberty, they probably didn't even have belly buttons. To apply their origins to us is the plainest of absurdities.

But what's ironic about Mr. Lines' case is he follows it up with "...plus it's not a biology textbook". So, on the one hand, he's arguing for the biological beginning of life, using the Bible as a biology book. On the other hand, he's arguing the Bible isn't a biology book, and therefore cannot be used to argue for the biological beginning of life. In other words, he is adding another layer of hypocrisy.

But what do the actual biology textbooks say? Well, first, you don't even need one to know how ridiculous this argument is. Do you imagine it takes 9 months to grow a formless blob that magically transforms into a human as it exits the womb? A woman's reproductive anatomy is not the biological equivalent of a 3D printer! Of course a baby is as human an hour, a day, even a week before it takes its first breath, as it is the moment the umbilical cord is cut.

In fact, it's actually viable a fair amount of time before that. The NHS considers a pregnancy "viable", i.e. "...they could survive if they were born right now and given the right support" (1), at 24 weeks. This overlooks the record holder, Nash Keens, who was born at exactly 21 weeks in July of 2024 (2). So, clearly, life begins a fair bit earlier than first breath.

But is viability the criteria for life? Not according to "The Developing Human", which is a widely used embryology textbook in medical schools. This says "Human development begins at fertilization when a sperm fuses with an oocyte to form a single cell, a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." (3).

So, the Bible is not a biology textbook, yet Mr. Lines appeals to it for his standard of when life begins. The Developing Human is a biology textbook, yet no doubt Mr. Lines and his ilk would complain about using it as a guide to theology. To this complaint, I say amen. Let us use biology textbooks to inform our biology, and our Bible to inform our theology. When there is overlap, let us take extra heed, for the Lord has given us two witnesses.

And what do those witnesses say? Both affirm life at conception. Therefore, for the Bible to condemn murder is necessarily to condemn abortion, for abortion prematurely steals what is biologically confirmed as an innocent human life. We should therefore assert that abortion is a grand evil, and that banning it is a Biblical imperative for any government that takes its role as seriously as the Lord desires.

As for those who support it, there is a solution. For the Christians, the answer is simple: Obey the God you know. For the non-Christians, the answer is to come to know Him. In all cases, know that your life is short. "The days of our lives are seventy years; And if by reason of strength they are eighty years, Yet their boast is only labor and sorrow; For it is soon cut off, and we fly away." (Psalm 90:10). Judgement awaits all of us, and the only way to survive it is faith in Christ. Those who love Him will be saved, but that salvation will lead to obedience. "Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him. He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked." (1 John 2:3-6). We must all repent of the sin of murder, even if that murder is the culturally accepted abortion of Western society.

References

1. NHS - Week by week guide to pregnancy, 24 Weeks - Best Start in Life (link)

2. Millward, Adam - “Nash is pure joy in a tiny package”: Most premature baby born 19 weeks early turns one, Guinness World Records, July 23rd 2025 (link).

3. Moore, Keith L. et al. - The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 9th Edition, Saunders Elsevier, December 19th 2011 (accessed via Kor Academy) (link).

AI usage

1. Photoleap AI was used to create green viruses, which were subsequently blurred to form the background of the header image.