The Bible on abortion

[Safe-Keeper]

OK, so Radrook has been posting in the other thread about how the Holy Bible allegedly is against abortion:

Here is the way in which the Bible wants us to view the life of an unborn human:
Exodus 21
22 “And in case men should struggle with each other and they really hurt a pregnant woman and her children do come out but no fatal accident occurs, he is to have damages imposed upon him without fail according to what the owner of the woman may lay upon him; and he must give it through the justices. 23 But if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul,22 “And in case men should struggle with each other and they really hurt a pregnant woman and her children do come out but no fatal accident occurs, he is to have damages imposed upon him without fail according to what the owner of the woman may lay upon him; and he must give it through the justices. 23 But if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,[/b].... NWT

This article provides more info along those lines:

Abortion
http://www.catholic.com/library/Abortion.asp

Abortion
http://www.catholic.com/library/Abortion.asp

To which I replied:
​

Forcing a miscarriage by brawling is not abortion.

This because the Bible passage, which I was familiar with already, was clearly about accidentally bringing about a miscarriage, rather than having an abortion.

Radrook replies:
​

I used the example to show how God views life in the womb regardless of its developmental stage as opposed to how many humans view life in the womb.

At this point, I chose to start this thread to not derail the other one further.

And to address his latest point: as anyone who's read the Bible knows, it does not matter whether God loves a given human or not, as He is quite eager to butcher them by the millions anyway. The Israelites were God's chosen people, yet he killed 3000 of them when they worshiped the Golden Calf. God commands humans to 'not kill', and then orders them to slay every living human and animal in Jericho. So God loving something very clearly does not equal to Him not wanting it destroyed. Thusly, unless you find a passage specifically dealing with abortion, I'm far from convinced.

And as a side note, God's view in the Bible seems to be no different from liberals' view today:

Fetus=Potential human.
Miscarriage=Bad (as in sad).
Inducing miscarriage without mother's consent=Very bad.
Abortion=None of my business.
​

 

[This Guy]

Of course God is against abortion, it might have been a female and able to be sold into slavery if not killed!

OK, this is probably what will be given as Biblical support against abortion.

Genesis 38 (King James Version)

7 And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.
8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.
10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

It's hard to tell from this short passage if God was upset because of the seed going to waste, or because Onan didn't want to have children via his Brother's wife.

There may be other references that aren't coming to mind also.

This psychopathic God of the Bible, that doesn't repent:

Numbers 23:19-God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent

Yet :

Genesis 6:6-And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Exodus 32:14-And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

Apparently can change all he wants, and still be viewed as the never changing rock upon which the faithful can lean in times of need (if you happen to need a natural disaster, or something that is)

So, it's easy to believe that he can be against abortion, while at the same time ordering the murder of entire cities, including livestock.

 

[Radrook]

.... as anyone who's read the Bible knows, it does not matter whether God loves a given human or not, as He is quite eager to butcher them by the millions anyway.

There are millions of people who have read and studied the Bible and don't reach that conclusion whch you claim to be inevitable.

Psalm 103:8
The LORD is merciful and gracious,Slow to anger, and abounding in mercy.

That's because they are understanding the Bible in its full context, and not isolating passages an basing wild generalizations on those selected passages.

Your statement contains three serious errors:. 1, Eagerness to kill, butcher status, and God's love not mattering.

1. Eagerness

Anyone who has read the bible without any hidden agenda of without bias knows that God repeatedly expresses his reluctance in executing anyone.

Ezekiel 33:
11 Say to them: ‘As I live,’ says the Lord GOD, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.


2. Love doesn't matter?

The Bible tells us that God himself is the personification of love, and that he doesn't executes those he loves. Quote to the contrary, we are told that he has wonderful blessings in store for those he loves-blessings such as eternal life in perfect health on a paradise earth, and eternal life in heaven for some others.

Revelation 21:4
And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.

===========================================================================


3. Butcher?

To butcher is to take life indiscriminately or excessively. Does the Bible tell us that God does so? No, it tells us that those removed from the scene in that way were crass violators of the moral law. Of course, their children's death is the issue. Was God showing hatred toward their children-or merely postponing their relocation to a better environment under his kingdom via the resurrection? If we take Gods personality into consideration and his attributes-the most prominent of which is love-then that latter conclusion is the logical one to reach.

The Israelites were God's chosen people,....

That depended on their behavior.

Deuteronomy 30:19
....I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live;


If they violated the agreement they'd promised to abide by-then their special status would no longer apply. That's why the Ten Tribe northern Kingdom was taken into exile to Assyria and the Two Tribe southern Kingdom was later dissolved and the people allowed to be taken captive to Babylon. When faithful, he would protect them as he did against Pharaoh and against Assyrian king Senacherib's army.

yet he killed 3000 of them when they worshiped the Golden Calf.

Cause and effect. The same way God has established laws of nature which can't be violated without consequences. This is similar to a person ignoring the force of gravity by jumping off a cliff, killing himself, and his family blaming God because of the consequences.

Galatians 6:7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever
Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. ... God is not mocked; for whatever a man shall sow,


============================================================================

God commands humans to 'not kill', and then orders them to slay every living human and animal in Jericho.

The proper translation is "murder" not "kill"

Thou Shalt Not Kill: Does God Violate His Own Commandment?
http://av.rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyK...ww.godandscience.org/apologetics/notkill.html

So God loving something very clearly does not equal to Him not wanting it destroyed.

Erroneous conclusion

Thusly, unless you find a passage specifically dealing with abortion, I'm far from convinced.

Would you require that of the USA Constitution when it mentions freedom of speech, or life and liberty enumerate all the minute details where this is applicable or not applicable? Of course not. You infer, don't you? As the founding fathers expected you to infer based on those principles. So too the Bible.

And as a side note, God's view in the Bible seems to be no different from liberals' view today:

Fetus=Potential human.
Miscarriage=Bad (as in sad).
Inducing miscarriage without mother's consent=Very bad.
Abortion=None of my business.
​

None of his business?????

That's a misrepresentation on two counts. First, since the Bible repeatedly tells us that human life concerns God. In fact, even to the extent of providing his own son to suffer and die in order to provide the legal basis for us to be able to attain eternal life and avoid eternal death. Second, because the unborn is considered fully human and not potentially human. That should be clear from the requirement of life being taken from the culprit of the unborn's death. In short, the unborn's life was considered a full equivalent of an adult human's life. If it had been considered a mere potential than the legal basis for the death sentence for the one causing the miscarriage would have been missing.

John 3:16
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Then Judah joined with Simeon to fight against the Canaanites living in Zephath, and they completely destroyed the town. So the town was named Hormah. In addition, Judah captured the cities of Gaza, Ashkelon, and Ekron, along with their surrounding territories. The LORD was with the people of Judah, and they took possession of the hill country. But they failed to drive out the people living in the plains because the people there had iron chariots. The city of Hebron was given to Caleb as Moses had promised. And Caleb drove out the people living there, who were descendants of the three sons of Anak.

Judges 1:17-20 NLT

I've got an iron chariot too. Does that mean that God cannot defeat me either? Or does God just kill me at random like all these other folks? What did thay do wrong; other than living in some place God wanted for his Judy people?

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Wow, somebody defending the Old Testemant? That's a new one.

What part of God's divine plan was the murder of women who were not virgins on their wedding night? Or the punishment for breaking any of the Ten Commandments?

Oh but of course, they were different times back then...

 

[Fiona]

22 “And in case men should struggle with each other and they really hurt a pregnant woman and her children do come out but no fatal accident occurs, he is to have damages imposed upon him without fail according to what the owner of the woman may lay upon him;

different times indeeed.....

 

[This Guy]

different times indeeed.....

I been looking for that there Woman store! I want ta buy me a couple! They orter be good fer sumtin.

 

[Ichneumonwasp]

My understanding, and I'm no expert, is that both abortion and infanticide were not practiced by the early Israelites (after the whole sacrifice of Isaac thing was worked out, I mean). I even remember e-mailing Amy-Jill Levine at Vaderbilt about the question, since I was interested, and her understanding IIRC is that infanticide was directly forbidden. I don't think abortion ever comes up directly in the Tanakh, so I don't think there is a way to resolve such an issue except to look at the passage already cited and the view of infanticide (as it relates to Israelites, since it was fine to kill the enemy in holy war).

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Radrook, I'm not commenting on your entire long, nitpicking post, mostly as almost none of it concerns abortion. But I'll respond to a few parts.

There are millions of people who have read and studied the Bible and don't reach that conclusion whch you claim to be inevitable.

That's because they are understanding the Bible in its full context, and not isolating passages an basing wild generalizations on those selected passages.

I don't make 'wild generalizations about selected passages', I read the Bible. Which means that passages like this one...

Psalm 103:8
The LORD is merciful and gracious,Slow to anger, and abounding in mercy.

...are pretty meaningless to me.

The God of the Old Testament is not merciful, gracious, slow to anger or abounding in mercy. He kills people at the drop of a hat. There are many passages in the Bible where God gets angry and lashes out at the people who anger Him (and usually at quite a few innocent bystanders as well, just for good measure), and only one that I remember where He gets angry and then manages to calm down. This one passage is the one where Moses is up on the mountain to get the Commandments, and discovers that the Israelites have been corrupted in Moses' absence. God wants to lash out at them, but Moses calms Him down and then goes to check the situation out himself - and then kills 3000 of them.

Anyone who has read the bible without any hidden agenda of without bias knows that God repeatedly expresses his reluctance in executing anyone.

Ezekiel 33:
11 Say to them: ‘As I live,’ says the Lord GOD, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.

No, anyone who's read the Bible knows that this is dead wrong. You, in fact, are the one who appears to not have read the Bible. Lines like Psalm 103:8 and Ezekiel 33 mean nothing when the Old Testament is full of examples that prove them wrong.

Cause and effect. The same way God has established laws of nature which can't be violated without consequences. This is similar to a person ignoring the force of gravity by jumping off a cliff, killing himself, and his family blaming God because of the consequences.

Do you think capital punishment is an appropriate punishment for those who do not adhere to Judaism? Why/why not?
When a person rebels against an oppressor (for example the Buddhists in Tibet), is the oppressor or the demonstrator to be blamed when the oppressor spills their blood?

The proper translation is "murder" not "kill"

And killing someone for following the 'wrong God' is not murder now?

 

[This Guy]

SNIP

And killing someone for following the 'wrong God' is not murder now?

Well, it's murder if it's a Christian or Jew your killing. Otherwise, it's all cool.

 

[Radrook]

different times indeeed.....

The subject of how women were treated under the Law of Moses contitutes am entirely different thread. Actually, it's a subject that has been discussed previously on this forum and to which I provided an extensive explanatory scriptural response. But to go on that tack now would deviate the thread. So if you do wish to discuss, it please make it separate thread. That would prevent the confusion which usually tends to ensue when subjects go off on off-topic tangents.

 

[Radrook]

different times indeeed.....

The subject of how women were treated under the Law of Moses contitutes am entirely different thread. Actually, it's a subject that has been discussed previously on this forum and to which I provided an extensive explanatory scriptural response. But to go on that tack now would deviate the thread. So if you do wish to discuss, it please make it separate thread. That would prevent the confusion which usually tends to ensue when subjects go off on off-topic tangents.

 

[Almo]

The Bible isn't relevant anyway.

 

[Radrook]

The Bible isn't relevant anyway.

It all depends on what you mean by relevant. Ummm, what do you mean by relevant?

 

[Radrook]

Radrook, I'm not commenting on your entire long, nitpicking post, mostly as almost none of it concerns abortion. But I'll respond to a few parts.

I only nitpick when nitpicked.

The God of the Old Testament is not merciful, gracious, slow to anger or abounding in mercy.

The OT prophets thought so. Ever consider the reasons why?

He kills people at the drop of a hat.

Completely out of context! He has been swift in passing judicial judgment and executed on some occasions. On others he has taken centuries warning those who taunt him. Still on other occasions, as he did with Niniveh-he spared the people when they repent even though he'd sent his prophet to deliver a message of destruction. It all depends on what he decides to do after reading the individual hearts.

Jonah

3:
10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

After Jonah showed anger because God had not destroyed the city God responded in the following way:

4:
10 But the LORD said, “You have had pity on the plant for which you have not labored, nor made it grow, which came up in a night and perished in a night. 11 And should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty thousand persons who cannot discern between their right hand and their left—and much livestock?

There are many passages in the Bible where God gets angry and lashes out at the people who anger Him (and usually at quite a few innocent bystanders as well, just for good measure), and only one that I remember where He gets angry and then manages to calm down.

God doesn't need anyone to help him calm down. Neither is his anger one which is out of control or expressed on a whim as you say. What you are describing isn't the OT or the NT God.

BTW-Both are the same God but seem like different God's to some because of their limited selective reading of the NT. For example, Jesus as commander in chief of his Father's heavenly armies is ignored.

Revelation19 NKJV

Christ on a White Horse

11 Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. 12 His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had[e] a name written that no one knew except Himself. 13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean,[f] followed Him on white horses. 15 Now out of His mouth goes a sharp[g] sword, that with it He should strike the nations.

Also ignored are many references in the NT about God's plan to destroy the nations, cleanse the earth of all wickedness via the death penalty applied to all who choose to practice evil. Instead people prefer to view Jesus as a little baby in a manger. That can prove to be a fatal mistake.

But such actions are taken only after detailed and ample warning has been provided. In mankind's case more than 6000 years of time for us to know what his intentions are toward his earth. Is that killing at the drop of a hat? Prior to the flood Noah was sent to preach to the people. They knew what was required but refused to listen. I guess that too is a drop of a hat? Israel repeatedly sinned against him. And yet he kept repeatedly forgiving them, accepting them back as his chosen people though they grieved his heart with their conduct. That isn't being merciful? Peter denied Jesus three times while Jesus was being spat upon and beaten-yet God accepted Peter as an Apostle-that isn't being merciful? God could have justifiably wiped mankind from the face of the earth, yet he sent his son to give us an opportunity to gain eternal life though we don't inherently deserve it-that's not being merciful?

This one passage is the one where Moses is up on the mountain to get the Commandments, and discovers that the Israelites have been corrupted in Moses' absence. God wants to lash out at them, but Moses calms Him down and then goes to check the situation out himself - and then kills 3000 of them.

Bolding mine in order to show how words are being used in an effort to sway the reader.

The prophets who wrote positively about our creator had their very good reasons. If indeed God were not slow to anger and merciful, as you say-then you would not be here brazenly taunting him.

As for the disobedience if his chosen people and his judicial decisions in reference to them,
we can tag these as lashing out in order to convey irrationality and all other negatives you are intent on conveying via well chosen expressions in the service of your intentions. But please note that those same actions can be described in either a neutral tone or in one which enhances God as a righteous judge carrying out well-deserved sentences in order to discipline and train his people in righteousness. We can engage in such word games if you wish though I would prefer not to.

bTW

Who are we to say if bystanders which God deems worthy of the death sentence are innocent or not?

Do you think capital punishment is an appropriate punishment for those who do not adhere to Judaism? Why/why not?

From a Christian standpoint no one is required to adhere to Judaism ever since Jesus established a new covenant.

When a person rebels against an oppressor (for example the Buddhists in Tibet), is the oppressor or the demonstrator to be blamed when the oppressor spills their blood?

A relationship between humans can't be used as a comparison of God's relationship to mankind. Conclusions derived from the example will be irrelevant.

And killing someone for following the 'wrong God' is not murder now?

Murder is the unjustified taking of human life. God's taking of human life is always justified.

God can deprive anyone at any time of life and it would not have been murder because sinners have no inherent right to life. The misconception is that we sinners have a right to live on God's earth and do as we please. They are wrong on both counts. We have no right to do as we please on God's earth and neither do we have an inherent right to demand life regardless of our behavior. Life is a gift reserved only for those who abide by the universal laws God chooses to establish. Break those laws and we automatically choose non-citizenship in God's universe. Which means we are permanently out of the picture whether we like it or not.



=====================================================================


[

 

[MarkCorrigan]

The OT prophets thought so. Ever consider the reasons why?


[

Because they thought God would kill them, maybe? (Of course this assumes that the record in the bible is accurate)

Maybe they thought they would be killed like the following people:

(see list a little way down, it even has a cumulative total)

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html

 

[Radrook]

....(Of course this assumes that the record in the bible is accurate)

We have absolutely no justifiable reason to assume otherwise. In fact, the ones who come out eating crow repeatedly are those who assume otherwise.

Maybe they thought they would be killed like the following people:

The ones making those declarations knew that God could detect hypocrisy and that making hypocritical statements would get them nowhere. So your suggestion doesn't fly.

(see list a little way down, it even has a cumulative total)

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html

I don't need to see lists of people God considered unworthy of life since such lists to me are
irrelevant. In fact, you could increase that list by ten billion and it still would be irrelevant to my perception of who God is and why he chooses to do what he decides to do. You probably are wondering why.

 

[Robert Oz]

Anyone who has read the bible without any hidden agenda of without bias knows that God repeatedly expresses his reluctance in executing anyone.

Nonsense. Many have read the Bible without any hidden agenda or bias and in so doing lost their faith. In fact, biased readers are precisely those who continue to hold onto their faith after reading of the atrocities God performed and demanded from his chosen people.

To butcher is to take life indiscriminately or excessively. Does the Bible tell us that God does so? No, it tells us that those removed from the scene in that way were crass violators of the moral law. Of course, their children's death is the issue. Was God showing hatred toward their children-or merely postponing their relocation to a better environment under his kingdom via the resurrection?

So, when God kills sinners he's delivering divine justice, but when innocents are killed alongside (i.e. children of sinners) he is merely postponing their relocation to Heaven (or wherever)?

Whether it is killing or postponing relocation, life is nevertheless taken. Is it indiscriminate? Damn straight it is. God tells Moses to confront Pharoah. God hardens Pharoah's heart. Then God kills Egypt's first born as punishment for Pharoah's heart being hard! Am I missing the context?

If indeed God were not slow to anger and merciful, as you say-then you would not be here brazenly taunting him.

Unless, of course, He is merely a fictional character. We are talking about the God portrayed in the Bible. The God portrayed in the Bible is usually quick to anger and frequently merciless. The unbiased reader is the one who starts questioning the existence of this character. If a God exists, perhaps He is the God of the Bible, but then he is certainly not all good. If an all good God exists, then he is certainly not the God of the Bible.

Murder is the unjustified taking of human life. God's taking of human life is always justified.

Like when He drowned all those little babies and children in the Great Flood?

Robert Oz.

 

[Radrook]

Nonsense.

Not at all.

Many have read the Bible without any hidden agenda or bias and in so doing lost their faith. In fact, biased readers are precisely those who continue to hold onto their faith after reading of the atrocities God performed and demanded from his chosen people.

That's a matter of opinion.

btw
I would bet my bottom dollar that the atrocities demanded of its citizens from certain countries doesn't disturb them in one bit and that they still salute their flags with tearful eye. 'Twas a matter of necessity! Or 'Twas done for the greater good of the many! would be the response if questioned.

So, when God kills sinners he's delivering divine justice, but when innocents are killed alongside (i.e. children of sinners) he is merely postponing their relocation to Heaven (or wherever)?

As I previously pointed out and you completely choose to ignore-there are no innocent humans deserving life since we are all sinners. That hew is willing to grant such ones a life in paradise is an expression of his undeserved kindness. Perhaps that he temporarily terminated their life among those devil worshippers is an act of kindness as well since their practices involved child sacrifice bestiality, child abuse via incest etcetera.

Whether it is killing or postponing relocation, life is nevertheless taken. Is it indiscriminate? Damn straight it is.

Not at all.

God tells Moses to confront Pharaoh. God hardens Pharoah's heart. Then God kills Egypt's first born as punishment for Pharoah's heart being hard! Am I missing the context?

You are missing the context because to you context is limited to the page you are reading and anything beyond that is conveniently out of context. In short, you are writing your own entire Bible based on selected texts. The hardening of the heart is fully explainable but that would deviate the discussion so I suggest you google for an explanation.

Unless, of course, He is merely a fictional character. We are talking about the God portrayed in the Bible.

That's for you to decide for yourself.

The God portrayed in the Bible is usually quick to anger and frequently merciless.

Some people deserve no mercy. Weren't your armies merciless when dealing with Hitler? As for quick-tempered. ignoring the scriptures I provided and choosing to continue to tag God that way only serves to show that you have a hidden agenda.

The unbiased reader is the one who starts questioning the existence of this character. If a God exists, perhaps He is the God of the Bible, but then he is certainly not all good. If an all good God exists, then he is certainly not the God of the Bible.

Jesus, whose God was the biblical God disagrees with you:

Mark 10:18
So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.

Like when He drowned all those little babies and children in the Great Flood?

Robert Oz.

Like when you crisped all those little human children in Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki and I don't see you even blinking an eyelash over it? Since you seem to be unfamiliar with he details of the flood account while feeling qualified to delve on its contents let me elucidate you by informing you that the population involved is not described as being totally human. Now I'm assuming you didn't know this little relevant fact. However, if you did and are still defending that genetically contaminated population as worthy of living next to normal humans, then, it becomes a matter of your ethical principles versus God's. And if that is so-then I choose God's.

Isaiah 55:9
“ For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts.

 

[Achán hiNidráne]

Originally Posted by Radrook
Murder is the unjustified taking of human life. God's taking of human life is always justified.

Why?