My 23-year-old daughter is pro-choice. We have been going back and forth on Facebook today because she says that the Bible tells us how to abort an unwanted fetus. She sent me a “summary” of the verses in the image above. I don’t know whose summary this is. I know she didn’t come up with it. Can someone please explain for me? Thank you and God bless!
I can’t read it. The Bible does not support abortion. At all. There is no verse that could even be taking to mean that. I THINK she is trying to make the good book say what she wants it to say, not what it actually says. I’ve read the Bible Genesis to Revelation twice, I am on my fifth read of the NT. I can say with confidence that there is nowhere in the Bible where abortion is supported.
I agree with you. I just want to give her the CORRECT translation. They are Exodus 21:22-25 and Numbers 5:11-31.
It might be an idea to put up the exact verses so we can read context, i am not sure what you have posted but it is not what is written
When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23 But if there is harm,d then you shall pay life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
What part of numbers specifically?
For the Book of Numbers, it has to do with a TERRIBLE translation of Numbers 5:27 in NIV translation.
Only one other English Translation (which is a rare one) has this horrible translation
The NIV (which is a very dynamic equivalence translation - which means the translator changes the words to what he/she THINKS the passage means) is one of only two translations that I know of that have really screwed up this translation by discussing a miscarrage.
If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. NIV - Numbers 5:27
However, no other respected English translation of the Bible says that
And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has acted unfaithfully against her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her body shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become an execration among her people. RSV-CE
Above, I provided a link that shows 5 translations. You can switch them around to compare and contrast against the NIV.
But it is the NIV that the pro-abortion uses to justify their argument. They ignore every other single translation and assume that the NIV is correct when it is paraphrasing that verse (incorrectly).
In regards to Exodus 21:22-25, the NABRE has a pretty good footnote here
Here is what is happening: two men are fighting and a pregnant women is a innocent bystander. But she accidently gets hit by the two men fighting and a miscarriage happens.
If the woman is otherwise OK (except for the miscarriage) then the two men will face punishment by paying whatever the husband (and father of miscarried child) deems as just punishment.
But if the wife is also severely hurt and/or killed, then the punishment is even more severe because not only did the baby die, but the wife died too (or was severely hurt).
Point is: this is not justifying abortion because the child is was NOT killed on purpose & the woman wasn’t hit on purpose. She was hit by accident.
When hit by accident, a woman doesn’t have to be hit that hard for a miscarriage to happen. But for a woman to break a bone or die, she would need to be hit pretty violently.
Nowhere in the Bible will we see Jews or Christians being told it’s OK to voluntarily kill their own child (born or preborn)
Thou shalt not kill - God.
We had this question recently alleging that the passage from Numbers was a how-to for DIY abortion.
However, the ingredients of the water don’t cause abortion at all.
So, pro-choice fail.
These are gross falsifications…
Its speaking of a natural aborted fetus - not an abortion as we know it today. Probably wasn’t even the word abortion back then as it is today. It means the body naturally aborting the fetus - how does it justify abortion in our age?
Today we call it a miscarriage.
Your daughter likely got these arguments from some twisted pro-abortion website.
With respect to the Exodus citation, it doesn’t support abortion or have anything to do with abortion, for the following reaaons:
- The pregnant woman is being harmed accidentally by two men fighting, not directly by someone either intending to hit her or grab her or do an abortion on her, but accidentally.
- The word “fetus” is not used anywhere in the Bible, nor was there a concept of a “fetus” being different from a child in the womb.
- The verse in question is in the middle of a section of Scripture dealing specifically with Personal Injury, not with Property, which is the next section.
- The NABRE actually has a useful footnote here (for a change) regarding the law of talion.
I suggest you read the whole section and tell your daughter she’s wrong and is twisting Scripture to support murder. It might not stop her from doing it but she needs to know she’s wrong.
I’ll address the other section if I have time later.
“If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. “But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
As you can see with the first verse, this verse does not support abortion. Rather, the verse imposes a penalty upon the person who through violence or negligence causes the injury or death of an unborn child. In the first sentence, it requires restitution if the action results in the premature birth (not abortion) of the child. In the second sentence it requires a severe penalty up to and including death of the offender should the unborn child be injured or killed as a result of the person’s actions. So no, this is not a verse that supports any facet of abortion.
The second verse involves a woman who is accused of infidelity. This passage speaks of the woman who claims that she is innocent taking an solemn oath that she has been faithful. In this passage the woman is made to drink holy water and take an oath. If she is true in her oath, there is no curse. However, if she is proven to be a liar, then the authorities leave it to God to curse her with infertility. At no point in this passage is the woman said to be pregnant, or is a punishment inflicted upon an unborn child. So again, this passage in no way encourages or condones abortion.
there is also the argument as seen by david and his first son that died if he went with god ie to heaven the pro choice says "we are saying the children by send them to heaven " for the protestans and for the catholic to “limbo” or heaven
Nobody uses that argument.
We have conflicting translations of Exodus 21:22-25 to choose from. The Jerusalem Bible is a Catholic Bible, but it represents a European viewpoint. It is not popular in United States Catholic Churches. For instance, one will not be able to purchase it in the Holy Hill book store here in Wisconsin. The meaning of Exodus 21:22-25 is clearly rendered in this translation to indicate that, if the woman’s unborn child dies, the perpetrators must pay a fine: whereas, if the woman dies, then the death penalty is to be enforced.
That clearly indicates the YHWH placed a much higher value on the life of the mother than He did on her unborn child. It must be noted that most other Bibles give alternate translations where this conclusion is not so evident. And it must also be noted that the Church was given authority over the Law and that the Church has exercised that authority in prohibiting abortion.
So go to the original language.
I don’t read the Greek, do you ? The learned translators of the various versions gave it their best shots. I suspect that some renderings may have been colored by the translators wish to present a certain meaning. I like the Jerusalem Bible for its clarity.
Being Pro-Choice she’s probably pro-Abortion? - which is murdering babes in the womb
The Old Testament Alone - is never the SOLO GOTO for questions such as that…
On this Catholic Forum - Catholicism’s Comprehensive Teachings - replete with many references …
** Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72
Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:
You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.
73 Jer 1:5; cf. Job 10:8-12; Ps 22:10-11.
74 Ps 139:15.
You would need Biblical Hebrew for the Old Testament.