I happen to believe in an individual human spirit. I cannot prove the moment when that spirit is present with the indiviudal soul. That leads me to search for supporting evidence of when the soul is present and thus assume the parallel presence of the spirit at the same time, to be safe.
I can make a very good case for the soul being present at the zygote age. You may draw conclusions from that ... I do not accept the 'potential' when there is already an organism present at zygote age. Potential is what sperm and ova are.
Pick up a real acorn and carefully open the meat of it. At the dividing line of the two halves you will find a small oak tree already in evidence. The same can be done with any peanut in the shell. An acorn has within it a real already visible oak tree. People come up with lots of foolish stuff when trying to dismiss truth in order to support what they want to be true but is not true. I would refer you to the specious term 'pre-embryo' This falsehood has sucked in no less than Orin Hatch.
You may have read the term 'fertilized egg' when referencing a petri dish embryonic aged human. Fact is, when fertilization occurs there is no loger an ova or egg, there is a distinct new organism, even though the zygote and morula ages are spent inside the zona pellucida of the original ovum. Even in this age spent inside the original cell membrane of the ovum, the new individual life is differentiating cells to allow for implantation and formation of the first organ for survival of the living organism. The problem with most falsehoods perpetrated to support killing embryos for their body part, they try to alter the truth to fit their desired paradigm, and that can be deadly.
The first application of embryonic stem cells used to treat a Parkinson's patient killed the patient because the stem cells harvested contained cells to produce the body for life in the air world AND cells for the placental encapsultation. The embryo had already differentiated cells yet those pushing a falsehood claim embryos are undifferentiated cell masses from which stem cells must be harvested for treatments and research.
In short, use a simple test to measure a notion regarding the earliest ages in human life: is the object of the discussion an organism or merely portions of a future organism; is there an actual organism present? If the object is a human organism, he or she (and the sex can be determined at earliest age) is a human being at earliest age in a lifetime already begun. Growth and metabolism evidence life and that is active manifestation of the soul of life, so assume the spirit is there also, unless proven later to be inaccurate. [That is your cue to try and raise the winning argument. To which I will reply, 'would you shoot into a box where at least one child was playing, even if two children may be in the box?]
"That is your cue to try and raise the winning argument." SHOULD READ Twinning, not winning. Tired, 61 year-old fingers ...
ping
I agree with much of what you wrote, and you argue your points persuasively. Don’t worry yourself that I’m not being fully convinced, I’m one of those people who think abortion is an indeterminate issue that can’t be neatly and quickly rationalized by either side.
We agree that the embryo is a living organism of the human species from the moment of conception. You brought up an interesting point about our ‘lifetime’ beginning at conception. We might, in the future, then add 9 months to our ages!
I believe there exists a spiritual soul and a human spirit. The ‘human spirit’ I would call ‘personhood’ – the thing that makes us different than animals. The moment when each of these begins is very unclear and open to speculation, and I think this is what nearly every abortion discussion boils down to.
It seems to me (what presumption!) that God is interested in personhood, not just static life. Personhood is when one would have a chance to make moral or immoral decisions and face ethical dilemmas. Your ‘soul’, I believe, is grown by your conscience, which doesn’t appear until ‘personhood’. Before that, if it exists, it is neutral and untouched. Then the question becomes, is its essence defined by its function or does the soul go through a life cycle – being conceived, birthing, growing, then dying? In short, I don’t think God is interested in the science, I think he’s interested in whether or not our soul has had a chance to begin a relationship with Him.
I’ve not heard the ‘twinning argument’, perhaps you can explain it and your reply to it.