The Bible is Unequivocally ‘Pro-Life’

When Christians claim to be both ‘pro-choice’ and ‘pro-life’ they betray ideological bias and ignore the broader teachings of Scripture

In an Opinion piece entitled Does life start at conception? That’s not what the Bible says, Christian novelist Matt Mikalatos defended a “pro-choice” position regarding abortion. From the article:

“Given that the Bible is less than clear about exactly when life begins, I — like many Christians — am pro-choice, even though I’m anti-abortion. Pregnant people should be able to make this often difficult and painful decision with their doctors, their loved ones, their counselors or religious advisors.”

Being personally pro-life but politically pro-choice is becoming a common approach to the topic of abortion. Sadly, many Christians have adopted this stance. However, that approach is problematic at best, hypocritical at worst.

The main argument offered by Mikalatos for holding such a position is that the Bible is unclear about when human life starts. Psalm 139 is his first target.

The go-to Bible passage for proving that life begins at conception is Psalm 139, a song written by Israel’s King David. David says, “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.” And, “My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them.”

The translation from Hebrew to English has obscured some specificity, though. If we’re going to treat this passage as a scientific fiat about the beginning of life, we need to look at it more closely. The word translated “inward parts” is the Hebrew word for “kidneys.” The ancient Hebrews believed the kidneys were the seat of our deepest emotions. However, if we’re going to read this passage for insight about when life begins, kidneys don’t start forming until the fifth week post conception, and they don’t start working until the beginning of the second trimester.

Likewise, in verse 15, David says his “frame” was not hidden from God. The actual word here is bones. A fetus’s bones start to harden at week 13, right around the same time the kidneys start functioning.

Growing up in evangelical — largely Baptist — churches, I was taught that the most important thing in interpreting the Bible is context. In context, Psalm 139 isn’t about babies, or conception, or when life begins. It’s about how God knows our deepest, most hidden feelings, knows where we run away to, knows us better than anyone else. (Bold, mine)

Mikalatos may be correct in concluding that Psalm 139 is not “a scientific fiat about the beginning of life.” However, to suggest that Psalm 139 “isn’t about babies, or conception, or when life begins” is a dangerous leap.

In his essay, The Sanctity of Human Life in the Womb – Psalm 139, pastor Ray Fowler covers similar ground… but reaches very different conclusions. He writes:

The Hebrew word for “inmost being” here is actually the word for “kidneys,” which probably sounds a little strange to us at first, “O Lord, you created my kidneys.” Well, God did create our kidneys, but that’s not what David is talking about here. In those days when you dismembered an animal, the kidneys were the very last organ you would reach, and so in Hebrew thought the kidneys came to represent the innermost part of the person, your very inmost being. Nowadays we use the word “heart.” 

Fowler concludes,

God created your inmost being, not just your physical self, but your soul or your spirit as well. Human beings are not just physical beings. We are much more than just biology and chemistry. We are much more than just animals. From the very time of creation God distinguished human beings from all other animal life. Genesis 1:27 tells us that “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” And so we are persons created in the image of God. We have personality; we have the gift of speech; we have a moral nature. God not only created your physical body. He also created the person inside – your inmost being. (Bold, mine)

Whereas Mikalatos interprets Psalm 139 as simply meaning “God knows our deepest, most hidden feelings,” Fowler interprets it as confirming the wonder of God forming every human being in His very image. This is a crucial distinction.

The distinction between biological life and spiritual, or soulish, life is what many “pro-choice Christians” use to justify their position. They argue that because no one knows exactly when a fetus becomes a soul or a person, abortion on demand should be permissible. As Mikalatos puts it, he is “pro-choice” because “the Bible is less than clear about exactly when life begins.”

But while the Bible may not be absolutely clear about when life begins, it is absolutely clear about what that life is, and why we should approach it with the utmost of dignity and respect.

God confers infinite value upon the developing human being. For example, in Exodus 21:22-23, God included protection for the unborn in His Law. If a pregnant woman was injured, causing her to lose her child, then the one who caused the injury was to be executed. Why? “A life for a life” (vs. 24). That phrase, and the prescriptive punishment, reveals that God considers the life of the unborn just as valuable as that of a grown man. In God’s estimate, the unborn, developing child is just as valuable as the fully formed. He makes no value distinction between the two.

Even non-Christians acknowledge this. For example, Nat Hentoff was a Jewish atheist. He was also a politically progressive civil libertarian. He said this:

Once the sperm and the egg meet, and they find a sort of nesting place in the uterus, you now have a developing human being. It’s not a kangaroo. It’s not a giraffe. It’s a human being. And that development in the womb until the person comes out is a continuing process. Therefore, if you kill it at any stage–first three weeks, first three months—you’re killing a developing human being. (Bold, mine)

While the Bible may not tell us exactly when a fetus becomes an actual human being, science does. 95 percent of biologists agree that human life begins at fertilization. Hentoff is right: Abortion at any stage in the pregnancy is the termination of “a developing human being.”

This is why many early Church leaders and faith communities believed that abortion was a great moral evil. One such document, the Didache, one of the earliest Christian documents in possession, specifically addressed the subject. In his article, Notes From The Didache On The Early Christian View Of Abortion, R. Scott Clark expounds upon Didachean texts concerning abortion.

This passage should give pause to those self-identified Christians who glibly announce that they are pro-choice. The Didache was not indifferent about abortion nor does it hesitate to list abortion (and infanticide) with other gross violations of the natural and moral law: murder, adultery, pederasty, sexual immorality, magic and sorcery, coveting, perjury, greed, and conspiracies (2:1–7). The pagans were known to try to induce abortions, which the Didache prohibits. It is hard to imagine the author of the Didache announcing that he is personally opposed to abortion but supported it as a matter of public policy any more than they would say the same about murder of adults, pederasty, and the like.

The Bible may not be absolutely clear about when life begins, but it is clear about what that life is – it’s a human being made in God’s image. And being created in God’s image confers infinite worth upon the unborn human.

Of course, the “pro-choice Christian” will argue, “But we don’t know when God’s image is actually placed into the human being.” From there, they shrug and defer the “difficult decision” to the mother. Appealing to biblical ambiguity regarding the “ensouling” of the unborn child becomes a simple way to avoid taking a stand.

However, the distinction between a soulless fetus and an “ensouled” child is not one the Bible makes. Rather, Scripture affirms that God is intimately aware of the unborn person, miraculously fashions their physical being, and stamps them with His very own image.

When Christians claim to be both ‘pro-choice’ and ‘pro-life’ they betray ideological bias and ignore the broader teachings of Scripture. By keeping one foot in the pro-choice camp and the other in the pro-life camp, these believers can elicit cred from political liberals and not offend the “worldly,” while still professing allegiance to Christ and His Body. It’s a dangerous middle to maintain.

Yes, there are many complexities to the abortion issue. And of course, Christians must exercise grace and compassion to those who wrestled with the choice to abort. However, citing biblical ambiguity as a license to claim the “pro-choice” label, is at best, inconsistent. At worst, it’s a blatant misuse of Scripture and a defaming of the sacredness of human life.