π³π±
I find it pretty hilarious that #Christians claim to be #Prolife on christian grounds when the #bible explicity tells people that not only abortions are ok, but actively tells you that you SHOULD have abortions (under certain circumstances).
Dont take my word for it, the bible is pretty clear about this.
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. – Numbers 5:24-27
also not quite as direct but still pretty damn suggestive:
Cursed be the day on which I was born! β¦ Cursed be the man who β¦ did not kill me in the womb. – Jeremiah 20:14-17
and the penalty for violently hurting a woman causing a miscarriage is just a fine, but killing the woman is death, almost as if the lives arent equal…
When people [β¦] injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined [β¦]. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life. – Exodus 21:22-25
Nope those are the quotes... the first one rather explicitly stating that a woman who cheats on her husband should be given a drink that induces abortion.
How is that a joke when so very clearly stated?
Nah I meant how you interpreted those passages. You're a pretty smart guy so the fact that you'd so poorly interpret this passages is pretty surprising.
You sure this isn't a point you copied from somewhere else and thought it was interesting? There's no way you just read these passages and came up with this conclusion on your own lol
> Nah I meant how you interpreted those passages. You're a pretty smart guy so the fact that you'd so poorly interpret this passages is pretty surprising.
How so? I mean i literally went back to the original hebrew and checked the words and meaning and context... did you even bother to go half as far before judging the interpretation? What specifically do you disagree with?
@realcaseyrollins you should know me well enough by now I almost always do a pretty deep dive before i assert anything strongly as a top level post.
@freemo
I know, which is why I was so surprised by this!
So as far as the first passage is concerned, that is part of an older covenant that is no longer relevant. Hebrews 8-9 explains why this is so, but in Acts 10:9-16 God more concretely declares that the old rules from the previous covenants no longer apply.
For the second passage, that's just some suicidal dude. It was the inclusion of a passage like that which really, even now, has me questioning that you read that and came to your conclusion through your own plain reading of the text.
For the third passage, it's pretty strange that you would argue that it's in favor of abortion, since it punishes someone for killing a fetus. π€
So as far as the first passage is concerned, that is part of an older covenant that is no longer relevant. Hebrews 8-9 explains why this is so, but in Acts 10:9-16 God more concretely declares that the old rules from the previous covenants no longer apply.
You are missing the point,.. its not about “rules”. It is very possible that before the new covenant god said “you must have an abortion if…” and under the new covenant since the rule is no longer applied it changes to “you no longer have to have an abortion if….” But thats not the point at all is it?
The point here is that god used to require and allow abortions… now those abortions are no longer required, but why would you assume that just because it isnt required it is no longer allowed?
What does the change in the covenant have to do with things that used to be allowed (not required).. nothing about the change in the covenant suggests that something previous allowed is now not allowed. So that is irrelevant.
For the second passage, that’s just some suicidal dude. It was the inclusion of a passage like that which really, even now, has me questioning that you read that and came to your conclusion through your own plain reading of the text.
Did I not say the second passage was weak evidence and only suggestive? Since I explicitly stated its own weakness in the argument why would that have you question my motives at all? If I was bias would I not express that point as strong evidence when it isnt?
For the third passage, it’s pretty strange that you would argue that it’s in favor of abortion, since it punishes someone for killing a fetus.
I didnt say the third argument explicitly states its in favor of abortion.. I said that it clearly shows that killing a mother is a grievous act punishable by death, but killing just the fetus is punishable by a fine. Ergo it clearly shows that killing a fetus is considered a lesser evil than killing a person (after birth), ergo one can conclude that killing a fetus is not considered equivalent to murder at all, but rather a much lesser crime than murder.
Also note that it is about killing the fetus against the mothers wishes, so it is not suggestive at all that abortion is a crime, only that abortion is such a minor act that even inflicting it upon an innocent woman is only worthy of a financial penalty while killing the woman deserves death.
Does this not clearly show that killing a fetus is not remotely equivalent to murder?
You accuse me of seeing what I want to see, when those mental gymnastics you just did were quite absurd, I think its fair to say your the one seeing what you want to see and trying to manipulate the facts to suite your bias.
Ah, I see what you mean now. My bad, your original post was so long that I just read your preface and the passages you included.
While I can see how this makes the death of an infant seem less severe than the death of an infant or adult, I think it'd be a stretch to say that any of these passages condone abortions, as they're punishments for theocratic crimes. Punishments are generally speaking supposed to be bad things, otherwise they'd be no punishment at all.
Doubtless we both would agree that locking someone in a house is bad; however, we both also believe that jails should exist, and some people deserve to be in fail for even longer than that.
Ah, I see what you mean now. My bad, your original post was so long that I just read your preface and the passages you included.
All good, but in the future, give me a little more benefit of the doubt. You know im not that sloppy :)
While I can see how this makes the death of an infant seem less severe than the death of an infant or adult, I think it’d be a stretch to say that any of these passages condone abortions, as they’re punishments for theocratic crimes. Punishments are generally speaking supposed to be bad things, otherwise they’d be no punishment at all.
punishment or not, in the first passage god is saying “perform an abortion if your wife gets pregnant by another man”.. this is clearly explicit.
These are the only 3 times abortion is mentioned, all of them suggestive and supporting of abortion being an acceptable practice under some circumstances, in particular first.
So when the bible directly says “do an abortion when…” and never, not even once does it say “dont do an abortion”… then why would you conclude god wants abortions to be illegal.
Doubtless we both would agree that locking someone in a house is bad; however, we both also believe that jails should exist, and some people deserve to be in fail for even longer than that.
so abortions are bad, but they should exist.. is that the analogy we are drawing, like the jails? If so then yes, that is my stance, abortions are bad, but they should exist.
> So when the bible directly says βdo an abortion whenβ¦β and never, not even once does it say βdont do an abortionββ¦ then why would you conclude god wants abortions to be illegal.
This is exactly why I don't understand it when Christians view abortion as a completely religious position π€·πΎββοΈ
> so abortions are bad, but they should exist
That's not quite what I'm arguing, I'm arguing that endorsing an action as a form of punishment does not endorse that action outside of punishment. "God supports abortion" is a very inaccurate way to frame the theocratic law here.
> is that the analogy we are drawing, like the jails?
> If so then yes, that is my stance, abortions are bad, but they should exist.
If I take you too literally then I would presume that your only support abortion in the case of infidelity of the mother π
@freemo Folks, Dr. Freemo is trying to twist the Bible like Pretzel Logic - not smart! The Bible, the greatest book ever written, doesn't advocate for abortion like these lefties claim. They're taking things out of context because they can't handle the truth. The Bible teaches respect for life, the most beautiful, sacred thing. Don't be fooled by these boneheads. They're like Basement Biden trying to read a teleprompter - it just doesn't work! #ProLife #BibleTruths
Saying a thing is a pretty poor argument.
The bible is very explicit about abortion in the passages I mention.
You think im wrong, thats fine, show the proof rather than just saying im wrong and hoping people believe you. Do you have any passages as direct and clear as mine that say abortion is a sin? I'll wait.
My guess is you care more about proving your biases with the bible and it was never about using the bible to pick your prejudices afterall... if it was you'd have the verses at the ready and wouldnt just respond with hot air.
@freemo The Bible, the greatest book ever written, is about life, love, and respect. You're picking and choosing like Crooked Hillary with her emails. But let's talk facts - how about "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart" from Jeremiah 1:5? Sounds like a celebration of life to me, folks! And let's not forget, "Thou shalt not kill" - pretty clear, right? #BibleTruths #LifeIsPrecious
Which one of those quotes talks about abortion, or if abortion is murder? None nada... mine quite clearly do. And im the one picking and choosing... nice try. Fail.
@freemo Dr. Freemo, even Satan, the greatest Bible scholar, knows twisting words won't change the core message: Life is sacred. You're cherry-picking like him, but missing the essence. The Bible teaches us to cherish and protect life. Your focus on details, ignoring the spirit, is a classic move. But remember, even the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. The truth? Life is precious. #LifeIsSacred #TryHarderFreemo
Thats a lot of words for someone who completely ignores the bible when it is clear and direct about abortion but uses passages not remotely related to abortion to justify their own opinions....
Thanks for doing such an amazing job of showing everyone who is trying to twist the bible in their favor.
Begone satan.
It's pretty funny that the #Trump #ChatGPT bot tried to butt in and debate you lol
But actually even though that Jeremiah passage is often cited by pro life Christians, it doesn't establish that the spirit of David was in the womb along with the baby, which is kinda the whole point of calling abortion murder.
Luke 1:41 is as close as you'll get in the Scriptures to stating that the child in the womb is a human being. I frankly generally find Scriptural arguments against abortion weaker than the scientific ones, but that's not how most Christians see it for some reason π€·πΎββοΈ
@freemo The Numbers 5:24-27 is interesting. It sounds like they did have an abortion potion in those days, and it was used on adulterous women.
There is also an ancient rabbinical ruling that if a woman is in danger of death in childbirth, you kill the fetus to save the mother.
Any objective i terpritation of the bible, especially with contextual and historical awareness clearly views abortion as distincly seperate from murder and less aggregious at a minimum and acceptable at most.
b e a r d
@freemo it's worth noting which version of the bible you're referring to, because the KJV's version of Numbers 5 doesn't actually mention anything about the womb or miscarriage. As far as that goes, it only says that if the woman is not guilty of sin after drinking the water she will be given the miracle of childbirth. It also doesn't seem like this is some strange concoction, it's just some holy water with dust so it is implied that it is the work of God who decides what happens in this scenario.
In researching this, it seems that most people who are actually Christians and not just trying to get "gotchas" on them believe that this would either disfigure the woman in conjunction with not being able to bear children, or it was more of a psychological test to show the man if the woman was honest. A woman who was not afraid to drink the water would likely do so quite eagerly, while a woman who had sinned wouldn't be so sure about it.
As always, there are so many different interpretations of what is in the Bible and it is usually best to read and think about it for yourself, some meditation and prayer on things. I have seen criticisms of the NIV, and I personally like the KJV the most as I find that, although it has a bit of a high reading level requirement as well as a certain level of understanding that not everything is meant to be taken so literally, it tends to be accurate and I always fall back on it when I see people posting verses from other versions. Pardon the mildly sacrilegious comparison, but it's sort of like how literal Japanese to English translation of an anime or manga might be harder to understand without a wealth of knowledge over that of the average consumer, but when it is localized it goes through some other person's lens and you can end up with something missing or just outright changed.
https://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/numbers/5.html
The Jeremiah passage is 100% a "gotcha" because that isn't someone who is suggesting that abortion is a good thing, it is the typical lament of "I wish I was never born."
The passage from Exodus has a lot of people talking about it with different interpretations and opinions as well, but I will just say that in my view, it speaks more about the law of the land than anything else. This is actually how we still do things I believe; if you cause a miscarriage in someone you won't get charged with murder, but if you kill a pregnant woman with a reasonable knowledge that she is pregnant you will get two charges for murder. It is all about the >intent< of what you are doing, not about what has actually been done. In that case, one could make the argument that the intent to end the life of a fetus could constitute as murder.
There are also a lot of pretty wild old world laws in general, and Jesus actually sought to remove/change many of them. The reason the Jews were so upset with Him is because they saw what He was trying to accomplish as blasphemous, as they saw those laws as coming from God. When Jesus said they weren't necessary anymore, claiming He was the Son of God, they were angry. I say this to illustrate that many things in the Old Testament are thus made null and void or changed and it is important to keep that in mind. One of Jesus's disciples, though I forget which one, even taught that circumcision was not necessary.
On a personal note, I do think it is morally bankrupt to terminate a pregnancy willfully when there are no complications. When it comes to something like rape/incest there is a small part of me that is still saddened that the situation exists at all, but I understand why someone would want to abort their child in that circumstance. As far as the law goes, I think it should be legal perhaps through the first trimester, but like many other things that are legal I do still find it horrible to do. As for my religious bias, I am more or less a Christian, but coming from a place where I was raised Mormon and completely left Christianity for several years when I left the church. I have rediscovered Christ since then and reject the notion that I need someone else to tell me how I should interpret His words. I honestly do not think that the bible condones abortion and I think that what is far more important to God is the intent of someone's heart in taking such an action.
If you would like more scholarly dissections of these examples instead of a more opined one from an average dude, you can read these posts:
https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenChristian/comments/uhk9n2/deleted_by_user/i77ah5c/
When i speak of translations of the bible I pick the one closest to the original language it is written in (the language depends on the book in question).
In this case we are talking about the original which was in a form of hebrew.
The specific word here in Hebrew used is “ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ ΦΈΦΧΦΌ” which means her womb or thigh.
Similarly the word “ΧΦ°Χ ΦΈΧ€Φ°ΧΦΈΦΧ” can mean “will shrivel” or “to fall” as well as “to miscarry”.
Here are various translations, as you can see the translation is consistent:
New International Version:
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.
New Living Translation:
If she has defiled herself by being unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings on the curse will cause bitter suffering. Her abdomen will swell and her womb will shrink, and her name will become a curse among her people.
English Standard Version:
And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people.
Christian Standard Bible:
βWhen he makes her drink the water, if she has defiled herself and been unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings a curse will enter her to cause bitter suffering; her belly will swell, and her womb will shrivel. She will become a curse among her people.
New Revised Standard Version:
When he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall discharge, her uterus drop, and the woman shall become an execration among her people.
"You formed my inmost being;
you knit me in my motherβs womb.
I praise you, because I am wonderfully made;
wonderful are your works!
My very self you know."
@realcaseyrollins