[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse" "Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD" "Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy" Woodworking and Construction Hacks "CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination" "NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law" "Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing" Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn. After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending. Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar” "Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny" "Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is" Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner. Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally "It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive' (Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl "Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race" He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom! "Kamala’s Inane Talking Points" "The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics" Easy Drywall Patch Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind" Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’ Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer? hurricanes and heat waves are Worse 'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA. Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence. Status: Not Logged In; Sign In Bible Study See other Bible Study Articles Title: What does God command regarding the baby about to be aborted? Source: ChristianPatriot.com URL Source: [None] Published: Feb 7, 2015 Author: Pastor Bob Celeste for ACP Post Date: 2015-02-07 16:29:11 by BobCeleste Keywords: None Views: 55255 Comments: 95 What does God command regarding the baby about to be aborted? Does God command us to stand around and do nothing or does He command us to rescue the baby by what ever means we need to use? You decide: Deliver those who are drawn toward death, And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter. If you say, "Surely we did not know this," Does not He who weighs the hearts consider it? He who keeps your soul, does He not know it? And will He not render to each man according to his deeds? Proverbs 24:11&12. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 65. #8. To: BobCeleste, Stoner, redleghunter, Vicomte13, kenh, wmfights (#0) BobCeleste Abortion is not mentioned in the Old or New Testament so he does not command anything for us to do. And vengeance will be for the Lord. Pericles  posted on  2015-02-08   19:37:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #9. To: Pericles (#8) Abortion isn't mentioned as such, but it doesn't need to be. From Genesis forward, lives in Scripture are dated from conception. Read carefully: Adam begot Cain. Not "Eve gave birth to Cain". Lives are measured from the FATHER'S begetting. That only occurs as the result of intercourse at the beginning of the pregnancy. The FATHER begets when his seed joins with the woman's seed to create a new person. As Scripture progresses, we come to the commandment in the Torah that if men fight and strike a pregnant woman such that they cause the baby to suddenly be born, if there's no harm the one who struck has to pay the husband for striking his wife, but if there IS harm, then life for life, etc. Note well, the distinction is not simply about the mother being struck, the subject is the baby being born prematurely. If two men fighting and one strikes a pregnant woman in his rage (remember, SHE'S not fighting, he is fighting another man) if the baby is born prematurely and dies, the man who struck her is to be put to death. Likewise if she dies in childbirth. Inducing a premature birth is not what we would call "abortion", but it carries the death penalty in the Torah if the baby is killed, and it carries wound for wound body damage if the baby is crippled. And then we have several moments in the Old Testament in which God speaks of knowing the man in the womb. And of course, Jesus comes to be when he is begotten by the Holy Spirit, not when he is born. One baby in his mother's womb leapt with joy at the presence of Jesus in his mother's womb. Babies in the womb are PEOPLE in the Scripture, And that means that there's no SPECIAL law for them, Kill a baby in the womb, and you have committed a murder, no different than if you lie in wait and stab a man. Abortion isn't separately mentioned because it's just murder, same as any other murder. Murder is extensively mentioned in Scripture, and Jesus said that murderers are thrown into the lake of fire at judgment. Abortion is murder, tout court. Nothing more to say. So much so, that the Bible doesn't elaborate. Doesn't NEED to. Vicomte13  posted on  2015-02-08   20:03:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #10. To: Vicomte13 (#9) Abortion isn't mentioned as such, but it doesn't need to be. Then how can Protestants be against it, Sola Scriptura and all that? Pericles  posted on  2015-02-08   20:05:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #17. To: Pericles, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, liberator (#10) Then how can Protestants be against it, Sola Scriptura and all that? Read Vic's post again. He, uncharacteristically, succinctly just told you why. Life begins at begetting that is conception throughout the OT. Terminating, murdering defenseless life was also forbidden throughout scriptures. No shedding of blood. That is murder. It's there. Read his post again. He wasn't speaking Greek. redleghunter  posted on  2015-02-08   22:14:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #23. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, liberator (#17) (Edited) The Old Testament says nothing of t he kind. the only place I know from the ancient world where abortion was expressly prohibited was the pagan Greek Hippocratic Oath. Abortion was probably not mentioned in the Old Testament because the Hebrews were primitive goat herders who had no ability to induce medical abortions so it never occurred to them is best I can gather. This is the original version of the Hippocratic Oath: HIPPOCRATIC OATH: CLASSICAL VERSION I swear by Apollo Physician and Asclepius and Hygieia and Panaceia and all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will fulfill according to my ability and judgment this oath and this covenant: To hold him who has taught me this art as equal to my parents and to live my life in partnership with him, and if he is in need of money to give him a share of mine, and to regard his offspring as equal to my brothers in male lineage and to teach them this art—if they desire to learn it—without fee and covenant; to give a share of precepts and oral instruction and all the other learning to my sons and to the sons of him who has instructed me and to pupils who have signed the covenant and have taken an oath according to the medical law, but no one else. I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice. I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art. I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work. Whatever houses I may visit, I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations with both female and male persons, be they free or slaves. What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about. If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot. —Translation from the Greek by Ludwig Edelstein. From The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation, and Interpretation, by Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1943. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/hippocratic-oath- today.html Pericles  posted on  2015-02-09   0:42:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #32. To: Pericles, Vicomte13, GarySpFc (#23) Abortion was probably not mentioned in the Old Testament because the Hebrews were primitive goat herders who had no ability to induce medical abortions so it never occurred to them is best I can gather. You missed the points the other gentlemen pinged already provided. The TaNaKh clearly shows that life begins at begetting. The biblical genealogies describe a father's begets as the start of life for the offspring. Exodus references given by Vic and Gary showed us the unborn child if killed in a struggle required the same blood for blood punishment...execution. redleghunter  posted on  2015-02-09   9:04:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #34. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13, GarySpFc (#32) Exodus references given by Vic and Gary showed us the unborn child if killed in a struggle required the same blood for blood punishment...execution. No, it required a fine only and under specific circumstances would that fine apply - the woman somehow got in the middle of the fight. Pericles  posted on  2015-02-09   9:26:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #42. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, Vicomte13, liberator, BobCeleste (#34) No, it required a fine only and under specific circumstances would that fine apply - the woman somehow got in the middle of the fight. Not so. Someone pinged here worked on Bible translations about 20 years ago specifically on the Exodus 21 verses in question. One of the theologians who worked on the project had this to say: The Misuse of Exodus 21:22-25 by Pro-Choice Advocates by John Piper Sometimes Exodus 21:22-25 is used by pro-choice advocates to show that the Bible does not regard the unborn as persons just as worthy of protection as an adult. Some translations do in fact make this a plausible opinion. But I want to try to show that the opposite is the case. The text really supports the worth and rights of the unborn. This passage of Scripture is part of a list of laws about fighting and quarreling. It pictures a situation in which two men are fighting and the wife of one of them intervenes to make peace. She is struck, and the blow results in a miscarriage or pre-mature birth. Pro-choice reasoning assumes that a miscarriage occurs. But this is not likely. The RSV is one translation that supports the pro-choice conclusion. It says, When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. The RSV assumes that a "miscarriage" happens, and the fetus is born dead. This implies that the loss of the unborn is no "harm," because it says, "If there is a miscarriage and yet no harm follows . . ." It is possible for the blow to cause a miscarriage and yet not count as "harm" which would have to be recompensed life for life, eye for eye, etc. This translation seems to put the unborn in the category of a non-person with little value. The fine which must be paid may be for the loss of the child. Money suffices. Whereas if "harm follows" (to the woman!) then more than money must be given. In that case it is life for life, etc. But is this the right translation? The NIV does not assume that a miscarriage happened. The NIV translates the text like this: If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life . . . What the NIV implies is that the child is born alive and that the penalty of life for life, eye for eye, etc. applies to the child as well as the mother. If injury comes to the child or the mother there will not just be a fine but life for life, eye for eye, etc. I agree with this translation. Here is my own literal rendering from the original Hebrew: And when men fight and strike a pregnant woman ('ishah harah) and her children (yeladeyha) go forth (weyatse'u), and there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the husband of the woman may put upon him; and he shall give by the judges. But if there is injury, you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. The key phrase is "and the children go forth." The RSV (and NASB!) translates this as a miscarriage. The NIV translates it as a premature live birth. In the former case the unborn is not treated with the same rights as the mother, because the miscarriage is not counted as serious loss to be recompensed life for life. In the latter case the unborn is treated the same as the mother because the child is included in the stipulation that if injury comes there shall be life for life. Which of these interpretations is correct? In favor of the NIV translation are the following arguments: 1. There is a Hebrew verb for miscarry or lose by abortion or be bereaved of the fruit of the womb, namely, shakal. It is used near by in Exodus 23:26, "None shall miscarry (meshakelah) or be barren in your land." But this word is NOT used here in Exodus 21:22-25. 2. Rather the word for birth here is "go forth" (ytsa'). "And if her children go forth . . ." This verb never refers to a miscarriage or abortion. When it refers to a birth it refers to live children "going forth" or "coming out" from the womb. For example, Genesis 25:25, "And the first came out (wyetse') red, all of him like a hairy robe; and they called his name Esau." (See also v. 26 and Genesis 38:28-30.) So the word for miscarry is not used but a word is used that elsewhere does not mean miscarry but ordinary live birth. 3. There are words in the Old Testament that designate the embryo (golem, Psalm 139:16) or the untimely birth that dies (nephel, Job 3:16; Psalm 58:8; Isaiah 33:3). But these words are not used here. 4. Rather an ordinary word for children is used in Exodus 21:22 (yeladeyha). It regularly refers to children who are born and never to one miscarried. "Yeled only denotes a child, as a fully developed human being, and not the fruit of the womb before it has assumed a human form" (Keil and Delitzsch, Pentateuch, vol. 2, p. 135). 5. Verse 22 says, "[If] her children go forth and there is no injury . . ." It does not say, "[If] her children go forth and there is no further injury . . ." (NASB). The word "further" is NOT in the original text. The natural way to take this is to say that the child goes forth and there is no injury TO THE CHILD or to the mother. The writer could very easily have inserted the Hebrew lah to specify the woman ("If her children go forth and there is no injury to her . . ."). But it is left general. There is no reason to exclude the children. Likewise in verse 23 when it says, "But if there was injury . . ." it does not say "to the woman," as though the child were not in view. Again it is general and most naturally means, "If there was injury (to the child or to the mother)." Many scholars have come to this same conclusion. For example, in the last century before the present debate over abortion was in sway, Keil and Delitzsch (Pentateuch, vol. 2, pp. 134f.) say, If men strove and thrust against a woman with child, who had come near or between them for the purpose of making peace, so that her children come out (come into the world), and no injury was done either to the woman or the child that was born, a pecuniary compensation was to be paid, such as the husband of the woman laid upon him, and he was to give it by arbitrators. . . But if injury occur (to the mother or the child), thou shalt give soul for soul, eye for eye . . . George Bush {not the POTUS GB}(Notes on Exodus, vol. 2, p. 19) also writing in the last century said, If the consequence were only the premature birth of the child, the aggressor was obliged to give her husband a recompense in money, according to his demand; but in order that his demand might not be unreasonable, it was subject to the final decision of the judges. On the other hand, if either the woman or her child was any way hurt or maimed, the law of retaliation at once took effect The contextual evidence supports this conclusion best. There is no miscarriage in this text. The child is born pre-maturely and is protected with the same sanctions as the mother. If the child is injured there is to be recompense as with the injury of the mother. Therefore this text cannot be used by the pro-choice advocates to show that the Bible regards the unborn as less human or less worthy of protection than those who are born. http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/the-misuse-of- exodus-2122-25-by-pro-choice-advocates NB: this was written by Piper back in 1989. In 1995 the NASB update included the same Hebrew translation as the NIV stated in the article above. redleghunter  posted on  2015-02-09   10:34:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #44. To: redleghunter (#42) So the Sola Scriptura is not clear.... Pericles  posted on  2015-02-09   10:40:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #46. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator (#44) So the Sola Scriptura is not clear.... LOL, that was Sola Scriptura. Where did you think the church fathers gained their understanding on the prohibition of abortion? redleghunter  posted on  2015-02-09   10:43:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #54. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, liberator (#46) (Edited) Where did you think the church fathers gained their understanding on the prohibition of abortion? Abortion was already seen as a bad thing to be avoided per the Hypoccratic Oath to Apollo. In fact I use dthis to shut up a self professed "Pagan" woman in civics class in college who was arguing she was for abortion and not beholden to Christian values as a pagan. When I mentioned the Oath she looked dumbfounded. I think she replied that maybe it was created after the Christians took over and I told her nope - pretades Jesus by about 600 years and they probably never heard of the Jews of their God when it was created. She then mentioned something about a male dominated world back the and she sat down and refused to continue the conversation. Pericles  posted on  2015-02-09   11:32:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #65. To: Pericles, GarySpFc, liberator, BobCeleste, Vicomte13 (#54) Abortion was already seen as a bad thing to be avoided per the Hypoccratic Oath to Apollo. In fact I use dthis to shut up a self professed "Pagan" woman in civics class in college who was arguing she was for abortion and not beholden to Christian values as a pagan. So the church fathers, as in for example Irenaeus, 'knew' abortion was murder because of the testimony of the heathen pagans of their age, and not because of their exhaustive studies of TaNaKh and B'riyt HaHhadashah? redleghunter  posted on  2015-02-09   13:42:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   Replies to Comment # 65. #66. To: redleghunter (#65) So the church fathers, as in for example Irenaeus, 'knew' abortion was murder because of the testimony of the heathen pagans of their age, and not because of their exhaustive studies of TaNaKh and B'riyt HaHhadashah? St Paul said the Athenians worshiped God without knowing who he was. The Greek phiolosphy and logic and the Hebrew spiritualism came together in the New Testament and completed each other. Pericles  posted on  2015-02-09 14:17:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   End Trace Mode for Comment # 65. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com