Can you make a BIBLICAL argument for and against abortion?

[BULLDOG]

Please don't troll. Thanks in advance.

No. Fool. However, I and tens of millions of others like me can make a human argument against it. Wanna hear it? That argument? It's fucking evil to murder the most innocent stage of human life. Do it enough, and there's no more humans. Duh. There's no debate. No justification. Period. But you already knew that, didn't ya?

Great Biblical argument you got there -- dumb ass.

 

[K9Buck]

Please don't troll. Thanks in advance.

No. Fool. However, I and tens of millions of others like me can make a human argument against it. Wanna hear it? That argument? It's fucking evil to murder the most innocent stage of human life. Do it enough, and there's no more humans. Duh. There's no debate. No justification. Period. But you already knew that, didn't ya?

I take it a scholarly discussion isn't happening with you.

 

[zaangalewa]

Can you make a BIBLICAL argument for and against abortion?
Please don't troll. Thanks in advance.

"Thou shalt not kill" [a human being].

 

[Blackrook]

The first person to recognize the presence of Jesus Christ (who was a fetus at the time) was St. John the Baptist (who was a fetus at the time).

 

[K9Buck]

https://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-abortioninthebible.html

 

[K9Buck]

A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).

From the link posted above:

When understood as a reference to miscarriage, Exodus 21:22-25 is sometimes used as evidence that the unborn is subhuman. But a proper understanding of the passage shows reference is not to a miscarriage, but to a premature birth, and that the “injury” referred to, which is to be compensated for like all other injuries, applies to the child as well as to his mother. This means that, “far from justifying permissive abortion, in fact grants the unborn child a status in the eyes of the law equal to the mother's.” [5]

 

[BULLDOG]

A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).

From the link posted above:

When understood as a reference to miscarriage, Exodus 21:22-25 is sometimes used as evidence that the unborn is subhuman. But a proper understanding of the passage shows reference is not to a miscarriage, but to a premature birth, and that the “injury” referred to, which is to be compensated for like all other injuries, applies to the child as well as to his mother. This means that, “far from justifying permissive abortion, in fact grants the unborn child a status in the eyes of the law equal to the mother's.” [5]

What rights are granted to the fetus in Numbers where instructions are given for that priest administered abortion for a wife who is accused of fooling around. Better yet, where was abortion specifically denied in the bible? Plenty of denial of sea food, and cotton polyester blend clothing, but nothing about abortion. Why?

 

[K9Buck]

A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).

From the link posted above:

When understood as a reference to miscarriage, Exodus 21:22-25 is sometimes used as evidence that the unborn is subhuman. But a proper understanding of the passage shows reference is not to a miscarriage, but to a premature birth, and that the “injury” referred to, which is to be compensated for like all other injuries, applies to the child as well as to his mother. This means that, “far from justifying permissive abortion, in fact grants the unborn child a status in the eyes of the law equal to the mother's.” [5]

What rights are granted to the fetus in Numbers where instructions are given for that priest administered abortion for a wife who is accused of fooling around. Better yet, where was abortion specifically denied in the bible? Plenty of denial of sea food, and cotton polyester blend clothing, but nothing about abortion. Why?

I don't know why abortion is not specifically mentioned. I think one can surmise that abortion is immoral based on the commandments of thou shall not kill and be fruitful and multiply.

 

[onefour1]

The below video goes over the life of a baby within his/her mother from the sperm cell to the time he/she comes out of the mother.



Watching this video, can anyone really conclude that the unborn child has no life at any step while in the mother's womb?

The argument the Bible holds against abortion is: Exodus 20: 13

13 Thou shalt not kill.

If there is life in the unborn child, then the taking of that life is murder with few exceptions..

 

[BULLDOG]

A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).

From the link posted above:

When understood as a reference to miscarriage, Exodus 21:22-25 is sometimes used as evidence that the unborn is subhuman. But a proper understanding of the passage shows reference is not to a miscarriage, but to a premature birth, and that the “injury” referred to, which is to be compensated for like all other injuries, applies to the child as well as to his mother. This means that, “far from justifying permissive abortion, in fact grants the unborn child a status in the eyes of the law equal to the mother's.” [5]

What rights are granted to the fetus in Numbers where instructions are given for that priest administered abortion for a wife who is accused of fooling around. Better yet, where was abortion specifically denied in the bible? Plenty of denial of sea food, and cotton polyester blend clothing, but nothing about abortion. Why?

I don't know why abortion is not specifically mentioned. I think one can surmise that abortion is immoral based on the commandments of thou shall not kill and be fruitful and multiply.

So what do you say about prisoner executions? Wouldn't that throw Thou Shall Not Kill out the window? Selectively following of the rules?

 

[The Professor]

Many people disagree on what the Bible says. Even Christians have conflicting interpretations of various portions of Scripture including those passages which purportedly deal with abortion. I will begin by quoting those verses most often used by those who oppose abortion:

“For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book” (Psalms 139:13-16, NIV).

Those who oppose abortion claim the above verses prove God was aware of the child within the womb and was protective of its life. Those who support abortion say these verses are silent regarding abortion. The man speaking these words (supposedly, King David) was speaking only about his own personal experience. One interesting thought: if “all the days ordained for me were written in your book” applies to everyone within the womb, it must be true that death by abortion was somehow preordained.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5, NIV).

This is the same argument made in Psalms 139:13-16, NIV. However, abortion supporters argue that the speaker of these words, Jeremiah, was clearly talking only of his personal life experiences and does not address the issue of abortion. Jeremiah is only saying that God is omniscient and knew everything about his life even before he was conceived.

“If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe” (Exodus 21:22-25).

Abortion opponents say these words show killing a fetus warrants the death penalty. However, abortion advocates argue that the verses are commonly interpreted to address harm done to the wife not the fetus since the death of the fetus is assumed by the miscarriage. If the wife is unharmed, the offender will merely pay a fine; however if the woman is harmed, the same harm shall fall upon the offender. If the woman dies, the offender must also die. It is interesting that when abortion proponents use the same verse to show the fetus is not a person since the death of the fetus resulted in a mere fine, abortion opponents argue that the death referred to was accidental and has nothing to do with elective abortion.

Now I will offer some verses that many abortion advocates say support their position. Of course, these who oppose abortion will have their own interpretations of these verses.

“A man may have a hundred children and live many years; yet no matter how long he lives, if he cannot enjoy his prosperity and does not receive proper burial, I say that a stillborn child is better off than he. It comes without meaning, it departs in darkness, and in darkness its name is shrouded. Though it never saw the sun or knew anything, it has more rest than does that man— even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity” (Ecclesiastes 6:3-6, NIV).

To some, these verses mean it is better for a man to have been born dead (or aborted) than to live an unfulfilled life. Others contend that the verses mean that it is better for such a man not to be conceived, thereby avoiding a discussion about the fetus. They also claim that the words simply show that a life not properly lived is wasted; the comparison to a stillborn child is merely illustrative and does not condone the taking the life of the unborn. Besides, they argue whether or not a man has lived a good life can only be determined after his life is over, not while he is in the womb.

I will offer one more example. A woman who is accused of adultery is forced to drink bitter water (holy water mixed with dust from the tabernacle floor). If she has been unfaithful, she is cursed and her child is miscarried (aborted). I have elected to quote from the NIV because the language is much clearer than the KJV.

“He [the priest] shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[e] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 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. If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children” (Numbers 5:24-28, NIV, highlights and explanatory insertion my own).

Abortion opponents would argue that this has nothing to do with elective abortion. The strangest thing about this test for a woman's fidelity is that it also has nothing to do with the identity of the child's father. The child is aborted even if her husband is the father. It appears that the abortion has one purpose and that is to assuage the jealousy of the husband; in other words, it is better to kill the fetus rather than having the husband think the child may not be his. I cannot explain this although I have given it much thought.

CONCLUSION: There are Christians who believe the Bible condemns abortion, but there are others, including other Christians, who believe it does not. Both sides quote the Scriptures to support their position. If you think that your interpretation of the scriptures is correct, fine. Just remember that others think just as strongly that their interpretation is right. Fight nice.

As for me, I have studied the Bible for over 60 years and have yet to find a single Biblical verse that specifically and unambiguously either supports or condemns abortion. The only such reference appears in the extra-Biblical Book of Barnabas:

“Thou shalt not destroy thy conceptions before they are brought forth; nor kill them after they are born” (XIV: 11).

The Lost Books of the Bible: The General Epistle of Barnabas

There's no debate on what that verse means; however, there is nothing within the pages of the Bible that addresses the issue so directly and so clearly.

 

[K9Buck]

A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).

From the link posted above:

When understood as a reference to miscarriage, Exodus 21:22-25 is sometimes used as evidence that the unborn is subhuman. But a proper understanding of the passage shows reference is not to a miscarriage, but to a premature birth, and that the “injury” referred to, which is to be compensated for like all other injuries, applies to the child as well as to his mother. This means that, “far from justifying permissive abortion, in fact grants the unborn child a status in the eyes of the law equal to the mother's.” [5]

What rights are granted to the fetus in Numbers where instructions are given for that priest administered abortion for a wife who is accused of fooling around. Better yet, where was abortion specifically denied in the bible? Plenty of denial of sea food, and cotton polyester blend clothing, but nothing about abortion. Why?

I don't know why abortion is not specifically mentioned. I think one can surmise that abortion is immoral based on the commandments of thou shall not kill and be fruitful and multiply.

So what do you say about prisoner executions? Wouldn't that throw Thou Shall Not Kill out the window? Selectively following of the rules?

Perhaps, although there may be biblical justification for executing those convicted of murder.

 

[BULLDOG]

A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).

From the link posted above:

When understood as a reference to miscarriage, Exodus 21:22-25 is sometimes used as evidence that the unborn is subhuman. But a proper understanding of the passage shows reference is not to a miscarriage, but to a premature birth, and that the “injury” referred to, which is to be compensated for like all other injuries, applies to the child as well as to his mother. This means that, “far from justifying permissive abortion, in fact grants the unborn child a status in the eyes of the law equal to the mother's.” [5]

What rights are granted to the fetus in Numbers where instructions are given for that priest administered abortion for a wife who is accused of fooling around. Better yet, where was abortion specifically denied in the bible? Plenty of denial of sea food, and cotton polyester blend clothing, but nothing about abortion. Why?

I don't know why abortion is not specifically mentioned. I think one can surmise that abortion is immoral based on the commandments of thou shall not kill and be fruitful and multiply.

So what do you say about prisoner executions? Wouldn't that throw Thou Shall Not Kill out the window? Selectively following of the rules?

Perhaps, although there may be biblical justification for executing those convicted of murder.

So thou shall not kill only applies when you think it should? How many of the other commandments are just suggestions?

 

[edthecynic]

Watching this video, can anyone really conclude that the unborn child has no life at any step while in the mother's womb?

The bible can:
Genesis 2:7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Job 33:4 The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.

 

[Chuz Life]

Please don't troll. Thanks in advance.

Just, Why?

 

[K9Buck]

So thou shall not kill only applies when you think it should? How many of the other commandments are just suggestions?

That's not what I said. I said there may be biblical justification for executing someone who is guilty of murder. I made a cursory search. The passage below seems to support the execution of some convicted of crimes.

Exodus 23:7
Chapter Parallel Compare
7 Have nothing to do with a false charge and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the guilty.

 

[zaangalewa]

A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).

From the link posted above:

When understood as a reference to miscarriage, Exodus 21:22-25 is sometimes used as evidence that the unborn is subhuman. But a proper understanding of the passage shows reference is not to a miscarriage, but to a premature birth, and that the “injury” referred to, which is to be compensated for like all other injuries, applies to the child as well as to his mother. This means that, “far from justifying permissive abortion, in fact grants the unborn child a status in the eyes of the law equal to the mother's.” [5]

What rights are granted to the fetus in Numbers where instructions are given for that priest administered abortion for a wife who is accused of fooling around. Better yet, where was abortion specifically denied in the bible? Plenty of denial of sea food, and cotton polyester blend clothing, but nothing about abortion. Why?

I don't know why abortion is not specifically mentioned. I think one can surmise that abortion is immoral based on the commandments of thou shall not kill and be fruitful and multiply.

So what do you say about prisoner executions? Wouldn't that throw Thou Shall Not Kill out the window? Selectively following of the rules?

Let me first say executions are always wrong. Nevertheless this is another problem. In former times it was in many places of the world not possible to imprison someone, who was a very dangerous criminal. That's why to execute such a person was often seen as a kind of extended selfdefence. And seldefence is sometimes able to justify the death of an aggressor by killing him.

But one problem of such forms of "preemptive selfdefence" was it always that someone had to become an executioner. And an exectution is somehow only a kind of legalized murder too. And today the risk a very dangerous criminal is able to escape is not very high any longer.

Background information:

ROME — Pope Francis has declared the death penalty wrong in all cases, a definitive change in church teaching that is likely to challenge Catholic politicians, judges and officials who have argued that their church was not entirely opposed to capital punishment.

Before, church doctrine accepted the death penalty if it was “the only practicable way” to defend lives, an opening that some Catholics took as license to support capital punishment in many cases.

But Francis said executions were unacceptable in all cases because they are “an attack” on human dignity, the Vatican announced on Thursday, adding that the church would work “with determination” to abolish capital punishment worldwide.

Francis made the change to the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, the book of doctrine that is taught to Catholic children worldwide and studied by adults in a church with 1.2 billion members. Abolishing the death penalty has long been one of his top priorities, along with saving the environment and caring for immigrants and refugees.

(Source: Pope Francis Declares Death Penalty Unacceptable in All Cases )

 

[BULLDOG]

So thou shall not kill only applies when you think it should? How many of the other commandments are just suggestions?

That's not what I said. I said there may be biblical justification for executing someone who is guilty of murder. I made a cursory search. The passage below seems to support the execution of some convicted of crimes.

Exodus 23:7
Chapter Parallel Compare
7 Have nothing to do with a false charge and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the guilty.

Don't lie and don't kill. I got that part.

 

[BULLDOG]

A pregnant woman who is injured and aborts the fetus warrants financial compensation only (to her husband), suggesting that the fetus is property, not a person (Exodus 21:22-25).

From the link posted above:

When understood as a reference to miscarriage, Exodus 21:22-25 is sometimes used as evidence that the unborn is subhuman. But a proper understanding of the passage shows reference is not to a miscarriage, but to a premature birth, and that the “injury” referred to, which is to be compensated for like all other injuries, applies to the child as well as to his mother. This means that, “far from justifying permissive abortion, in fact grants the unborn child a status in the eyes of the law equal to the mother's.” [5]

What rights are granted to the fetus in Numbers where instructions are given for that priest administered abortion for a wife who is accused of fooling around. Better yet, where was abortion specifically denied in the bible? Plenty of denial of sea food, and cotton polyester blend clothing, but nothing about abortion. Why?

I don't know why abortion is not specifically mentioned. I think one can surmise that abortion is immoral based on the commandments of thou shall not kill and be fruitful and multiply.

So what do you say about prisoner executions? Wouldn't that throw Thou Shall Not Kill out the window? Selectively following of the rules?

Let me first say executions are always wrong. Nevertheless this is another problem. In former times it was in many places of the world not possible to imprison someone, who was a very dangerous criminal. That's why to execute such a person was often seen as a kind of extended selfdefence. And seldefence is sometimes able to justify the death of an aggressor by killing him.

But one problem of such forms of "preemptive selfdefence" was it always that someone had to become an executioner. And an exectution is somehow only a kind of legalized murder too. And today the risk a very dangerous criminal is able to escape is not very high any longer.

Background information:

ROME — Pope Francis has declared the death penalty wrong in all cases, a definitive change in church teaching that is likely to challenge Catholic politicians, judges and officials who have argued that their church was not entirely opposed to capital punishment.

Before, church doctrine accepted the death penalty if it was “the only practicable way” to defend lives, an opening that some Catholics took as license to support capital punishment in many cases.

But Francis said executions were unacceptable in all cases because they are “an attack” on human dignity, the Vatican announced on Thursday, adding that the church would work “with determination” to abolish capital punishment worldwide.

Francis made the change to the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, the book of doctrine that is taught to Catholic children worldwide and studied by adults in a church with 1.2 billion members. Abolishing the death penalty has long been one of his top priorities, along with saving the environment and caring for immigrants and refugees.

(Source: Pope Francis Declares Death Penalty Unacceptable in All Cases )

My arguments here have only been based upon what I see in the bible as per the thread title.I believe some crimes are worthy of execution. My personal opposition to execution is that we often kill someone and later find they were innocent. That possibility is abhorrent and it's better to let the guilty live, confined to prison, than it is to execute an innocent person.

 

[zaangalewa]

Many people disagree on what the Bible says. Even Christians have conflicting interpretations of various portions of Scripture including those passages which purportedly deal with abortion. I will begin by quoting those verses most often used by those who oppose abortion:

“For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book” (Psalms 139:13-16, NIV).

Those who oppose abortion claim the above verses prove God was aware of the child within the womb and was protective of its life. Those who support abortion say these verses are silent regarding abortion. The man speaking these words (supposedly, King David) was speaking only about his own personal experience. One interesting thought: if “all the days ordained for me were written in your book” applies to everyone within the womb, it must be true that death by abortion was somehow preordained.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5, NIV).

This is the same argument made in Psalms 139:13-16, NIV. However, abortion supporters argue that the speaker of these words, Jeremiah, was clearly talking only of his personal life experiences and does not address the issue of abortion. Jeremiah is only saying that God is omniscient and knew everything about his life even before he was conceived.

“If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe” (Exodus 21:22-25).

Abortion opponents say these words show killing a fetus warrants the death penalty. However, abortion advocates argue that the verses are commonly interpreted to address harm done to the wife not the fetus since the death of the fetus is assumed by the miscarriage. If the wife is unharmed, the offender will merely pay a fine; however if the woman is harmed, the same harm shall fall upon the offender. If the woman dies, the offender must also die. It is interesting that when abortion proponents use the same verse to show the fetus is not a person since the death of the fetus resulted in a mere fine, abortion opponents argue that the death referred to was accidental and has nothing to do with elective abortion.

Now I will offer some verses that many abortion advocates say support their position. Of course, these who oppose abortion will have their own interpretations of these verses.

“A man may have a hundred children and live many years; yet no matter how long he lives, if he cannot enjoy his prosperity and does not receive proper burial, I say that a stillborn child is better off than he. It comes without meaning, it departs in darkness, and in darkness its name is shrouded. Though it never saw the sun or knew anything, it has more rest than does that man— even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity” (Ecclesiastes 6:3-6, NIV).

To some, these verses mean it is better for a man to have been born dead (or aborted) than to live an unfulfilled life. Others contend that the verses mean that it is better for such a man not to be conceived, thereby avoiding a discussion about the fetus. They also claim that the words simply show that a life not properly lived is wasted; the comparison to a stillborn child is merely illustrative and does not condone the taking the life of the unborn. Besides, they argue whether or not a man has lived a good life can only be determined after his life is over, not while he is in the womb.

I will offer one more example. A woman who is accused of adultery is forced to drink bitter water (holy water mixed with dust from the tabernacle floor). If she has been unfaithful, she is cursed and her child is miscarried (aborted). I have elected to quote from the NIV because the language is much clearer than the KJV.

“He [the priest] shall make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and this water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering will enter her. The priest is to take from her hands the grain offering for jealousy, wave it before the Lord and bring it to the altar. The priest is then to take a handful of the grain offering as a memorial[e] offering and burn it on the altar; after that, he is to have the woman drink the water. 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. If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children” (Numbers 5:24-28, NIV, highlights and explanatory insertion my own).

Abortion opponents would argue that this has nothing to do with elective abortion. The strangest thing about this test for a woman's fidelity is that it also has nothing to do with the identity of the child's father. The child is aborted even if her husband is the father. It appears that the abortion has one purpose and that is to assuage the jealousy of the husband; in other words, it is better to kill the fetus rather than having the husband think the child may not be his. I cannot explain this although I have given it much thought.

CONCLUSION: There are Christians who believe the Bible condemns abortion, but there are others, including other Christians, who believe it does not. Both sides quote the Scriptures to support their position. If you think that your interpretation of the scriptures is correct, fine. Just remember that others think just as strongly that their interpretation is right. Fight nice.

As for me, I have studied the Bible for over 60 years and have yet to find a single Biblical verse that specifically and unambiguously either supports or condemns abortion. The only such reference appears in the extra-Biblical Book of Barnabas:

“Thou shalt not destroy thy conceptions before they are brought forth; nor kill them after they are born” (XIV: 11).

The Lost Books of the Bible: The General Epistle of Barnabas

There's no debate on what that verse means; however, there is nothing within the pages of the Bible that addresses the issue so directly and so clearly.

What I see in your words is very simple: No one in this times of history saw in an unborn child not a human being too. Besides: Laws and justice are not the same. Not in this time of history - not in our time of history. Here in Germany some short time ago a man who had killed the unborn baby of a mother got 3 years for "illegal abortion". Do you really like to discuss with this mother whether it was illegal murder (15 years) or illegal abortion (3 years) what this dark minded man had done? Will bring such a discussion her baby back alive?