Expert: Rev. Stuart Woodward - 9/20/2004

Question
whats ur stand about this? what verses support your claim? where in the bible claims that a fertilized egg has a soul? you can add infos. tnx a lot.

Answer
Hello Lei,
Thank you for your question. It is an issue which will occupy the minds of many people in the next few years. The issue of course centres in the question: 'Where does human life begin?' From a Christian perspective we have to come to an answer based on the bible and sensible interpretation of its meaning. My fear is that many people want to answer that question on the basis of what is most convenient, or what best helps apparently solve another problem. It can't be right to do this.
Nor can it be right to define human life as beginning at that phase of development where the 'being' can survive unaided. But when does this ever happen? A child still needs to be fed and looked after for some years before it can look after itself. And what happesn to an old person who has had a stroke and depends on being fed to survive? Has that older person ceased to become a human being?
This all provides the backdrop to your question. The bible frequently refers to God's involvement in our lives whilst still in the womb. See Psalm 71:6, 139:13, Isaiah 44:2, 44:24, Jeremiah 1:5, Luke 1:15, 1:44. The clear inference from this passage is that God regards the unborn child as a human being and therefore with body, soul and spirit. At what point this happens is open to debate. I believe it is at conception. It could be argued that implantation is the moment.
So then comes the question about the basis on which human life ought to be created. The bible sees it as the responsibility of mankind to be fruitful and multiply. The gift of sex, as with all God's gifts is to be used according to His wishes, which I believe to be procreation and intimacy between husband and wife. In this context children are to be born out of love and regarded as a unique gift from God to be treasured, valued and protected.
It seems to me that there is something fundamentally wrong with the idea of creating a life for the purpose of being a reserve of 'spare parts' to service another life. It is a step, and a major step, towards the devaluing of human life as being sacred and from God, and towards seeing one life as more important than another. We cannot assume the right to do this.
As a side issue we also do not yet know the long term consequences of cloning on the human race and on medical treatment. The risks of disaster are very great.
I hope my comments oare of some help to you and I wish you well as you further think through these matters.
Stuart Woodward